Federal Register Vol. 83, No.176,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 176 (September 11, 2018)

Page Range45811-46065
FR Document

83_FR_176
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 45977 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
83 FR 45909 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 46005 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 45931 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Part 71 Federal Operating Permit Program (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 45926 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Part 70 State Operating Permit Program (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 45928 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Risk Management Program Requirements and Petitions To Modify the List of Regulated Substances Under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (CAA); EPA ICR Number 1656.16, OMB Control Number 2050-0114PDF
83 FR 45932 - J.J. Seifert Machine Shop Superfund Site, Sun City, Hillsborough County, Florida; Notice of SettlementPDF
83 FR 45887 - Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) ReviewsPDF
83 FR 45888 - Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative ReviewPDF
83 FR 45927 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Establishing No-Discharge Zones (NDZs) Under Clean Water Act Section 312 (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 45925 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Rebate Program; EPA ICR No. 2461.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0686 RenewalPDF
83 FR 45929 - Proposed Information Collection Requests; Comment Request: Microbial Rules Renewal Information Collection Request; Public Water System Supervision Program Renewal Information Collection Request; Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical and Radionuclides Rules Renewal Information Collection RequestPDF
83 FR 45844 - Spiromesifen; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
83 FR 45838 - 2-Propenoic Acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer With butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate; Tolerance ExemptionPDF
83 FR 45841 - Cloquintocet-mexyl; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
83 FR 45910 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 45910 - Privacy Act of 1974; Matching ProgramPDF
83 FR 45979 - Records Schedules; Availability and Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 45966 - Ponca Tribe of Nebraska Liquor Control OrdinancePDF
83 FR 45958 - Indian Gaming; Approval of Tribal-State Class III Gaming Compact Amendments in the State of OklahomaPDF
83 FR 45960 - Craig Tribal Association of Craig, Alaska's Alcohol Control OrdinancePDF
83 FR 45958 - Notice To Acquire Land Into Trust for the Tohono O'odham Nation of ArizonaPDF
83 FR 45877 - Notice of Public Meeting of the California Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 45879 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Missouri Advisory Committee To Discuss Civil Rights Topics in the StatePDF
83 FR 45878 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Oregon Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 45878 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Alabama Advisory Committee To Discuss Access to Voting in the StatePDF
83 FR 45877 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 46009 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition-Determinations: “Frans Hals Portraits: A Family Reunion” ExhibitionPDF
83 FR 46010 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition-Determinations: “Tudors to Windsors: British Royal Portraits From Holbein to Warhol” ExhibitionPDF
83 FR 46008 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition-Determinations: “Tomma Abts” ExhibitionPDF
83 FR 46009 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition-Determinations: “Günther Förg: A Fragile Beauty” ExhibitionPDF
83 FR 46009 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition-Determinations: “Enrico David: Gradations of Slow Release” ExhibitionPDF
83 FR 46011 - Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Aero-Flite, Inc.PDF
83 FR 46010 - Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Compass Airlines LLCPDF
83 FR 45849 - International Fisheries; Western and Central Pacific Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species; Closure of Purse Seine Fishery on the High Seas in 2018PDF
83 FR 45934 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 45955 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: 2019 American Housing SurveyPDF
83 FR 45954 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Public Housing Reform Act: Changes to Admission and Occupancy RequirementsPDF
83 FR 45957 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Assessment of Additional Resource Needs for Smoke-Free PolicyPDF
83 FR 45932 - Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking ActivitiesPDF
83 FR 45879 - Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone-Lufkin, Texas, Under Alternative Site FrameworkPDF
83 FR 45890 - Hydrofluorocarbon Blends From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2016-2017PDF
83 FR 45893 - Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Preliminary Determination of No Shipments, and Rescission, in Part; 2016-2017PDF
83 FR 45883 - Certain Steel Nails From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2016-2017PDF
83 FR 45924 - Ohio River Pipe Line LLC; Notice of Request for Temporary WaiverPDF
83 FR 45924 - Errata NoticePDF
83 FR 45922 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
83 FR 45922 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 45923 - KMC Thermo, LLC v. Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP; Notice of ComplaintPDF
83 FR 45923 - RTO Insider LLC v. New England Power Pool Participants Committee; Notice of ComplaintPDF
83 FR 45921 - Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Fish Hatchery Bureau; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and Motions To IntervenePDF
83 FR 45978 - Addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding With the Department of Energy (August 28, 1992); Oak Ridge, Tennessee PropertiesPDF
83 FR 45912 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
83 FR 45916 - Proposed Distribution of Residual Citronelle Settlement Agreement FundsPDF
83 FR 45919 - Secretarial Determination of a National Security Purpose for the Sale or Transfer of Enriched UraniumPDF
83 FR 45995 - Proposed Revisions to Standard Review Plan Section 13.4, Operational ProgramsPDF
83 FR 45992 - Proposed Revisions to Standard Review Plan Section 13.6, Physical SecurityPDF
83 FR 45875 - Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit; CA; Meeks Bay Restoration ProjectPDF
83 FR 45977 - Proposed Renewal of the Approval of Information Collection Requirements; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 45826 - Substantiation and Reporting Requirements for Cash and Noncash Charitable Contribution Deductions; CorrectionPDF
83 FR 46016 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Project CommitteePDF
83 FR 45980 - Dispositioning of Technical Specifications That Are Insufficient To Ensure Plant SafetyPDF
83 FR 45942 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry: Formal Meetings Between the Food and Drug Administration and Biosimilar Biological Product Sponsors or ApplicantsPDF
83 FR 45909 - Renewal of the Agricultural Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 45916 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; E-Complaint Form(FERPA) and PPRA E-Complaint FormPDF
83 FR 45933 - Information Collection; Government PropertyPDF
83 FR 45936 - Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 45934 - Joint Meeting of the Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 45946 - Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 45941 - Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 45944 - Postapproval Changes to Drug Substances; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 46010 - Notice of Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 45937 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Tobacco Products, User Fees, Requirements for the Submission of Data Needed To Calculate User Fees for Domestic Manufacturers and Importers of Tobacco ProductsPDF
83 FR 45940 - Determination That CEFZIL (Cefprozil) Tablets, 250 Milligrams and 500 Milligrams, and for Oral Suspension, 125 Milligrams/5 Milliliters and 250 Milligrams/5 Milliliters, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or EffectivenessPDF
83 FR 46026 - Submissions of Exclusion Requests and Objections to Submitted Requests for Steel and AluminumPDF
83 FR 45864 - Safety Zone; Spaceport Camden, Woodbine, GAPDF
83 FR 45976 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Contractor Eligibility and the Abandoned Mine Land Contractor Information FormPDF
83 FR 45882 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Procedures for Submitting Requests for Expedited Relief From Quantitative Limits-Existing Contract: Section 232 National Security Investigations of Steel ImportsPDF
83 FR 46023 - Agency Information Collection Activity: Department of Veteran Affairs Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) Clause 852.246-76 (Formerly 852.270-3)PDF
83 FR 45996 - Submission of Information Collections for OMB Review; Comment Request; Multiemployer Plan RegulationsPDF
83 FR 46011 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal: Comment Request; Renewal Without Change of Customer Identification Programs for Brokers or Dealers in Securities and Mutual FundsPDF
83 FR 46014 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal; Comment Request; Renewal Without Change of Anti-Money Laundering Programs for Precious Metals, Precious Stones, or JewelsPDF
83 FR 46013 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal; Comment Request; Renewal Without Change of the Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary InstrumentsPDF
83 FR 46015 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal: Comment Request; Renewal Without Change of Customer Identification Programs for Banks, Savings Associations, Credit Unions, Certain Non-Federally Regulated Banks, Futures Commission Merchants, and Introducing Brokers in CommoditiesPDF
83 FR 45860 - Extension of Comment Period for Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity FundsPDF
83 FR 45997 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Exchange's Schedule of Fees To Permit Certain Affiliated Market Participants To Aggregate Volume and Qualify for Various Pricing IncentivesPDF
83 FR 46001 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Move the P.M.-Settled Nasdaq-100 Index Options Expiring on the Third Friday of the Month to the NDX Index Options ClassPDF
83 FR 46005 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe CDS End-of-Day Price Discovery Policy (“Price Discovery Policy”)PDF
83 FR 46003 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Rules Governing the Trading of Complex Qualified Contingent Cross Orders and Complex Customer Cross OrdersPDF
83 FR 45932 - Marine Transport Logistics, Inc. v. CMA-CGM (America), LLC; Notice of Filing of Complaint and AssignmentPDF
83 FR 46000 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change Relating to ICC's Risk Management Model Description Document and ICC's Risk Management FrameworkPDF
83 FR 46020 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project CommitteePDF
83 FR 46022 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project CommitteePDF
83 FR 46021 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint CommitteePDF
83 FR 46022 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Communications Project CommitteePDF
83 FR 46019 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notices and Correspondence Project CommitteePDF
83 FR 46019 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8994PDF
83 FR 46019 - Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects CommitteePDF
83 FR 46022 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
83 FR 46020 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 5498-ESAPDF
83 FR 46021 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
83 FR 46018 - Proposed Allowance of Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment; Transitional Guidance Under Sections 162(f) and 6050X With Respect to Certain Fines, Penalties, and Other AmountsPDF
83 FR 46016 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 5495PDF
83 FR 46017 - Proposed Allowance of Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment; Information Reporting for Certain Life Insurance Contract TransactionsPDF
83 FR 45880 - National Defense Stockpile Market Impact Committee Request for Public Comments on the Potential Market Impact of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2020 Annual Materials PlanPDF
83 FR 45950 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 45949 - National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 45948 - National Institute on Drug Abuse Amended; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 45948 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 45948 - National Eye Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 45949 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 45947 - Prospective Grant of an Exclusive Patent License: Photoactivatable Liposomal Nanoparticle for the Delivery of an Immunotherapeutic or Immunotherapeutic-Enabling AgentPDF
83 FR 45827 - Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: New Source Review for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5PDF
83 FR 45994 - Sacramento Municipal Utility District; Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating StationPDF
83 FR 45993 - Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Plant License RenewalPDF
83 FR 45830 - Air Plan Approval; ID, Pinehurst PM10PDF
83 FR 45827 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CAPDF
83 FR 45836 - Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; Florida: Redesignation of the Hillsborough County Lead Nonattainment Area to AttainmentPDF
83 FR 45866 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 2019 Atlantic Shark Commercial Fishing YearPDF
83 FR 45877 - Notice of Public Meeting of the New Hampshire Advisory Committee; CorrectionPDF
83 FR 45897 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental To Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals Dolphin Relocation Project in Washington StatePDF
83 FR 45893 - Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Taiwan: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017PDF
83 FR 45851 - Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Motors, Notice of Request for Direct Final RulePDF
83 FR 45883 - 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2018PDF
83 FR 45811 - Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG Tay 620-15 EnginesPDF
83 FR 45819 - Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lynchburg, VAPDF
83 FR 45863 - Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Hardinsburg, KYPDF
83 FR 45820 - Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Louisville, KYPDF
83 FR 45814 - Amendment of Class E Airspace; Bloomsburg, PAPDF
83 FR 45861 - Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Tyndall AFB, FLPDF
83 FR 45818 - Amendment of Class E Airspace; Williamsport, PAPDF
83 FR 45816 - Amendment of Class D Airspace; Olive Branch, MSPDF
83 FR 45815 - Amendment of Class D Airspace; Appleton, WIPDF
83 FR 45813 - Establishment of Class E Airspace; Chebeague Island, MEPDF
83 FR 45981 - Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards ConsiderationsPDF
83 FR 45824 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF
83 FR 45822 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous AmendmentsPDF

Issue

83 176 Tuesday, September 11, 2018 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Forest Service

Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 45934 2018-19709 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Alabama Advisory Committee, 45878-45879 2018-19721 California Advisory Committee, 45877-45878 2018-19724 Missouri Advisory Committee, 45879 2018-19723 Nevada State Advisory Committee, 45877 2018-19720 New Hampshire Advisory Committee, 45877 2018-19593 Oregon Advisory Committee, 45878 2018-19722 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA, 45827 2018-19597 PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Spaceport Camden, Woodbine, GA, 45864-45866 2018-19661 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission PROPOSED RULES Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds, 45860-45861 2018-19649 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 45909 2018-19832 Renewal of the Agricultural Advisory Committee, 45909-45910 2018-19673 Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency PROPOSED RULES Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds, 45860-45861 2018-19649 Defense Department Defense Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 45910 2018-19739 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Government Property, 45933 2018-19671 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: E-Complaint Form, 45916 2018-19672 Privacy Act; Matching Programs, 45910-45912 2018-19738 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 45912-45916 2018-19688 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

See

National Nuclear Security Administration

PROPOSED RULES Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Motors, 45851-45860 2018-19577 NOTICES Proposed Distribution of Residual Citronelle Settlement Agreement Funds, 45916-45919 2018-19687
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Florida: Redesignation of the Hillsborough County Lead Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 45836-45838 2018-19596 Idaho; Pinehurst PM10 Redesignation, Limited Maintenance Plan; West Silver Valley 2012 Annual PM2.5 Emission Inventory, 45830-45835 2018-19600 North Carolina; New Source Review for Fine Particulate Matter PM2.5, 45827-45830 2018-19603 Pesticide Tolerances: Cloquintocet-mexyl, 45841-45844 2018-19757 Spiromesifen, 45844-45849 2018-19760 Tolerance Exemptions: 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate, 45838-45841 2018-19758 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 45929-45931 2018-19761 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Diesel Emissions Reduction Act Rebate Program, 45925-45926 2018-19762 Establishing No-Discharge Zones under Clean Water Act Section 312, 45927-45928 2018-19763 Federal Operating Permit Program (Renewal), 45931-45932 2018-19786 Part 70 State Operating Permit Program, 45926-45927 2018-19771 Risk Management Program Requirements and Petitions to Modify the List of Regulated Substances under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act, 45928-45929 2018-19770 CERCLA Settlements: J.J. Seifert Machine Shop Superfund Site, Sun City, Hillsborough County, FL, 45932 2018-19768 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd and Co KG Tay 620-15 Engines, 45811-45813 2018-19565 Class D Airspace; Amendments: Austin, TX, 45815-45816 2018-19478 Olive Branch, MS, 45816-45817 2018-19486 Class D and E Airspace; Amendments: Louisville, KY, 45820-45821 2018-19490 Class E Airspace; Amendments: Bloomsburg, PA, 45814-45815 2018-19489 Lynchburg, VA, 45819-45820 2018-19493 Williamsport, PA, 45818-45819 2018-19487 Class E Airspace; Establishments: Chebeague Island, ME, 45813-45814 2018-19476 Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures, 45822-45826 2018-18879 2018-18881 PROPOSED RULES Amendment of Class D Airspace and Establishment of Class E Airspace: Tyndall AFB, Florida, 45861-45863 2018-19488 Class E Airspace; Establishments: Hardinsburg, KY, 45863-45864 2018-19492 NOTICES Petitions for Exemptions; Summaries: Aero-Flite, Inc, 46011 2018-19712 Compass Airlines LLC, 46010-46011 2018-19711 Federal Contract Federal Contract Compliance Programs Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 45977-45978 2018-19680 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation PROPOSED RULES Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds, 45860-45861 2018-19649 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Flood Hazard Determinations; Changes, 45950-45954 2018-19616 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Errata, 45924 2018-19696 Combined Filings, 45922-45923 2018-19694 2018-19695 Complaints: KMC Thermo, LLC v. Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP, 45923 2018-19693 RTO Insider LLC v. New England Power Pool Participants Committee, 45923-45924 2018-19692 Determinations of Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facilities: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Fish Hatchery Bureau, 45921 2018-19691 Requests for Waivers: Ohio River Pipe Line LLC, 45924-45925 2018-19697 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Filings of Complaints and Assignments: Marine Transport Logistics, Inc. v. CMA-CGM (America), LLC, 45932 2018-19638 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System PROPOSED RULES Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds, 45860-45861 2018-19649 NOTICES Proposals to Engage in or to Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities, 45932-45933 2018-19702 Financial Crimes Financial Crimes Enforcement Network NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Anti-Money Laundering Programs for Precious Metals, Precious Stones, or Jewels, 46014-46015 2018-19655 Customer Identification Programs for Banks, Savings Associations, Credit Unions, Certain Non-Federally Regulated Banks, Futures Commission Merchants, and Introducing Brokers In Commodities, 46015-46016 2018-19653 Customer Identification Programs for Brokers or Dealers in Securities and Mutual Funds, 46011-46013 2018-19656 Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments, 46013-46014 2018-19654 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Formal Meetings between the Food and Drug Administration and Biosimilar Biological Product Sponsors or Applicants, 45942-45944 2018-19674 Tobacco Products, User Fees, Requirements for the Submission of Data Needed to Calculate User Fees for Domestic Manufacturers and Importers of Tobacco Products, 45937-45940 2018-19664 Drug Products Not Withdrawn from Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness: CEFZIL (Cefprozil) Tablets, 250 Milligrams and 500 Milligrams, and for Oral Suspension, 125 Milligrams/5 Milliliters and 250 Milligrams/5 Milliliters, 45940-45941 2018-19663 Guidance: Postapproval Changes to Drug Substances, 45944-45945 2018-19666 Meetings: Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee, 45941-45942, 45946-45947 2018-19667 2018-19668 Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee, 45936-45937 2018-19670 Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee, Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee; Joint Meeting, 45934-45936 2018-19669 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Proposed Foreign-Trade Zones: Lufkin, TX, 45879-45880 2018-19701 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit; CA; Meeks Bay Restoration Project, 45875-45876 2018-19682 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Government Property, 45933 2018-19671 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: 2019 American Housing Survey, 45955-45957 2018-19707 Assessment of Additional Resource Needs for Smoke-Free Policy, 45957 2018-19705 Public Housing Reform Act: Changes to Admission and Occupancy Requirements, 45954-45955 2018-19706 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Indian Gaming: Approval of Tribal-State Class III Gaming Compact Amendments in the State of Oklahoma, 45958 2018-19732 Land Acquisitions: Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona, 45958-45960 2018-19730 Liquor Control Ordinances: Craig Tribal Association of Craig, AK, 45960-45966 2018-19731 Ponca Tribe of Nebraska, 45966-45976 2018-19733 Industry Industry and Security Bureau RULES Revisions to Requirements for Submissions of Exclusion Requests and Objections to Submitted Requests for Steel and Aluminum, 46026-46065 2018-19662 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Procedures for Submitting Requests for Expedited Relief from Quantitative Limits—Existing Contract: Section 232 National Security Investigations of Steel Imports, 45882-45883 2018-19659 National Defense Stockpile Market Impact Committee; Potential Market Impact of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2020 Annual Materials Plan, 45880-45882 2018-19617 Interior Interior Department See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service RULES Substantiation and Reporting Requirements for Cash and Noncash Charitable Contribution Deductions: Correction, 45826-45827 2018-19679 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 46016-46017, 46019, 46020-46023 2018-19620 2018-19622 2018-19623 2018-19624 2018-19625 2018-19628 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Certain Life Insurance Contract Transactions, 46017-46018 2018-19619 Transitional Guidance under Sections 162(f) and 6050X with Respect to Certain Fines, Penalties, and Other Amounts, 46018 2018-19621 Meetings: Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint Committee, 46021 2018-19633 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Notices and Correspondence Project Committee, 46019 2018-19629 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Special Projects Committee, 46019-46020 2018-19626 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee, 46020 2018-19635 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project Committee, 46022 2018-19634 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Communications Project Committee, 46022 2018-19631 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Project Committee, 46016 2018-19678 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) from the People's Republic of China, 45883 2018-19568 Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Taiwan, 45893 2018-19586 Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China, 45893-45897 2018-19699 Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China, 45883-45887 2018-19698 Hydrofluorocarbon Blends from the People's Republic of China, 45890-45893 2018-19700 Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Reviews, 45887-45888 2018-19766 Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 45888-45890 2018-19764 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 45977 2018-19861 Labor Department Labor Department See

Federal Contract Compliance Programs Office

See

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Government Property, 45933 2018-19671 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Records Schedules, 45979-45980 2018-19734 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 45949 2018-19605 National Eye Institute, 45948 2018-19606 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 45948 2018-19607 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 45949-45950 2018-19609 National Institute on Drug Abuse, 45948 2018-19608 Prospective Grant of an Exclusive Patent License: Photoactivatable Liposomal Nanoparticle for the Delivery of an Immunotherapeutic or Immunotherapeutic-Enabling Agent, 45947-45948 2018-19604 Energy National Nuclear National Nuclear Security Administration NOTICES Secretarial Determination of a National Security Purpose for the Sale or Transfer of Enriched Uranium, 45919-45920 2018-19686 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES International Fisheries: Western and Central Pacific Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species; Closure of Purse Seine Fishery on the High Seas in 2018, 45849-45850 2018-19710 PROPOSED RULES Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: 2019 Atlantic Shark Commercial Fishing Year, 45866-45874 2018-19594 NOTICES Takes of Marine Mammals: Incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals Dolphin Relocation Project in Washington State, 45897-45909 2018-19592 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Facility Operating and Combined Licenses: Applications and Amendments Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations; Biweekly Notice, 45981-45992 2018-19419 Guidance: Dispositioning of Technical Specifications that are Insufficient to Ensure Plant Safety, 45980-45981 2018-19677 License Termination: Sacramento Municipal Utility District; Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station, 45994-45995 2018-19602 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal, 45993-45994 2018-19601 Standard Review Plan Section 13.4, Operational Programs, 45995-45996 2018-19685 Standard Review Plan Section 13.6, Physical Security, 45992-45993 2018-19684 Occupational Safety Health Adm Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Energy (August 28, 1992); Oak Ridge, Tennessee Properties, 45978-45979 2018-19689 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Multiemployer Plan Regulations, 45996-45997 2018-19657 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission PROPOSED RULES Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds, 45860-45861 2018-19649 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 46005 2018-19791 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BOX Options Exchange LLC, 46003-46005 2018-19639 ICE Clear Credit LLC, 46000 2018-19637 ICE Clear Europe Limited, 46005-46008 2018-19640 Nasdaq ISE, LLC, 45997-46000 2018-19642 Nasdaq PHLX LLC, 46001-46003 2018-19641 State Department State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Enrico David: Gradations of Slow Release Exhibition, 46009 2018-19715 Frans Hals Portraits: A Family Reunion Exhibition, 46009 2018-19719 Gunther Forg: A Fragile Beauty Exhibition, 46009-46010 2018-19716 Tomma Abts Exhibition, 46008-46009 2018-19717 Tudors to Windsors: British Royal Portraits from Holbein to Warhol Exhibition, 46010 2018-19718 Surface Mining Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Contractor Eligibility and the Abandoned Mine Land Contractor Information Form, 45976-45977 2018-19660 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Meetings: Rail Energy Transportation Advisory Committee, 46010 2018-19665 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

See

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

See

Internal Revenue Service

Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Acquisition Regulation Clause, 46023-46024 2018-19658 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Commerce Department, Industry and Security Bureau, 46026-46065 2018-19662 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.

83 176 Tuesday, September 11, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0235; Product Identifier 2018-NE-08-AD; Amendment 39-19367; AD 2018-17-13] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG Tay 620-15 Engines AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (RRD) Tay 620-15 turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by reports of low-pressure compressor (LPC) fan blade retention lug failures. This AD requires reviewing the engine maintenance records and replacing the LPC fan blade with a part eligible for installation if the dry-film lubricant (DFL) treatment limit is exceeded. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective October 16, 2018.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, Dahlewitz, 15827 Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany; phone: +49 (0) 33-7086-1883; fax: +49 (0) 33-7086-3276. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Standards Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7759. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0235.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0235; or in person at the Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara Caufield, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7146; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain RRD Tay 620-15 turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2018 (83 FR 18758). The NPRM was prompted by reports of LPC fan blade retention lug failures. The NPRM proposed to require reviewing the engine maintenance records and replacing the LPC fan blade with a part eligible for installation if the DFL treatment limit is exceeded. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA AD 2018-0013, dated January 17, 2018 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to address the unsafe condition on these products. The MCAI states:

Fractures of low pressure compressor (LPC) fan blade retention lugs were reported on engines subjected to a high number of Dry Film Lubrication (DFL) treatments. Subsequent investigation determined that, as a consequence, the retention lugs of the affected LPC (fan) blades had been exposed to excessive high stress cycles.

This condition, if not detected or corrected, could lead to failure of LPC fan blade retention lug(s), high vibration, reduced thrust, or in-flight shut down, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

To address this potential unsafe condition, Rolls Royce Deutschland (RRD) issued Alert Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) TAY-72-A1834 (hereafter referred to as `the NMSB') to provide identification and replacement instructions.

For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires determination of number of DFL treatments applied to the LPC fan blades and, based on that determination, replacement. This [EASA] AD also introduces a maximum allowable number of DFL treatments applicable to the LPC fan blades.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0235.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed except for minor editorial changes.

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

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed RRD ALERT NMSB TAY-72-A1834, dated November 17, 2017. The Alert NMSB describes procedures for reviewing the maintenance records and replacing the LPC fan blade with a serviceable part. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Other Related Service Information

We reviewed RRD NMSB TAY-70-1050, Revision 9, dated July 14, 2010. The NMSB defines a basic engine life management program suitable for RRD Tay engines in aircraft that are engaged in non-airline operations.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 25 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Record search to establish number of LPC blade DFL applications 1.5 work-hours × $85 per hour = $127.50 $0 $127.50 $3,187.50 Lost life for a LPC blade set and replacement of blades 4.0 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 16,550 16,890 422,250
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to engines, propellers, and associated appliances to the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2018-17-13 Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG: Amendment 39-19367; Docket No. FAA-2018-0235; Product Identifier 2018-NE-08-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 16, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (RRD) Tay 620-15 turbofan engines with low-pressure compressor (LPC) fan blades, having part numbers (P/Ns) JR30649, JR31702, JR31983, JR33863, or JR33864, installed.

    (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine Compressor Section.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of LPC fan blade retention lug failures. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the LPC fan blade retention lug. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in loss of engine thrust control and reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Required Actions

    (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, determine the number of dry-film lubricant (DFL) treatments that were applied to the LPC fan blade by reviewing the maintenance records or using an alternative method in steps C or N, as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instruction, paragraph 3, of RRD ALERT Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) TAY-72-A1834, dated November 17, 2017.

    (2) Depending on the results of the records review, do the following, as applicable:

    (i) If the number of DFL treatments is fewer than 13, mark the LPC fan blade dovetail root with a suffix code during the next scheduled LPC fan blade removal using steps H or R, as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instruction, paragraph 3, of RRD ALERT NMSB TAY-72-A1834, dated November 17, 2017.

    (ii) If the number of DFL treatments is 13 or more, replace the affected LPC fan blade with a part eligible for installation within 500 flight hours after effective date of this AD.

    (h) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install an affected LPC fan blade on any engine unless it has been determined that the LPC fan blade has had fewer than 13 DFL treatments and has been marked in accordance with the instructions of RRD ALERT NMSB TAY-72-A1834, dated November 17, 2017.

    (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

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

    (j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Barbara Caufield, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7146; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (2) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2018-0013, dated January 17, 2018, for more information. You may examine the EASA AD in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0235.

    (k) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG ALERT Non-Modification Service Bulletin TAY-72-A1834, dated November 17, 2017.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG, Eschenweg 11, Dahlewitz, 15827 Blankenfelde-Mahlow, Germany; phone: +49 (0) 33-7086-1883; fax: +49 (0) 33-7086-3276.

    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Engine & Propeller Standards Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7759.

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

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 29, 2018. Karen M. Grant, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19565 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0475; Airspace Docket No. 18-ANE-4] RIN 2120-AA66 Establishment of Class E Airspace; Chebeague Island, ME AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Chebeague Island Heliport, Chebeague Island, ME, to accommodate new area navigation (RNAV) global positioning system (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures serving the heliport. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this heliport.

    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 on line 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 Ave., College Park, GA 30337; telephone (404) 305-6364.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 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 proposed 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 at Chebeague Island Heliport, Chebeague Island, ME, to support IFR operations in standard instrument approach procedures at this heliport.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 29064, June 22, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0475 to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Chebeague Island Heliport, Chebeague Island, ME. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 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 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 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6-mile radius of Chebeague Island Heliport, Chebeague Island, ME, providing the controlled airspace required to support the new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures. These changes are necessary for continued safety and management of IFR operations at Chebeague Island Heliport.

    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. 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 5-6.5a. 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 FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ANE ME E5 Chebeague Island, ME [New] Chebeague Island Heliport, ME (Lat. 43°43′45″ N, long. 70°07′37″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6-mile radius of Chebeague Island Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 29, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19476 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2017-1043; Airspace Docket No. 17-AEA-18] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class E Airspace; Bloomsburg, PA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Bloomsburg Municipal Airport, Bloomsburg, PA, due to the decommissioning of the Milton VHF omni-directional range tactical air navigation aid (VORTAC). Airspace reconfiguration is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport. This action also updates the geographic coordinates of 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 Ave., College Park, GA 30337; telephone (404) 305-6364.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends Class E airspace at Bloomsburg Municipal Airport, Bloomsburg, PA, to support IFR operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register for Docket No. FAA-2017-1043 (83 FR 29066, June 22, 2018) proposing to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface within an 11.8-mile radius at Bloomsburg Municipal Airport, Bloomsburg, PA. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, 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 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 E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface within an 11.8-mile radius (increased from a 6.3-mile radius) of Bloomsburg Municipal Airport, Bloomsburg, PA, due to the decommissioning of the Milton VORTAC, and cancellation of the VOR approach. These changes enhance the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.

    The geographic coordinates of the airport also are adjusted to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    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 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO AL E5 Bloomsburg, PA [Amended] Bloomsburg Municipal Airport, PA (Lat. 40°59′52″ N, long. 76°26′07″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an 11.8-mile radius of Bloomsburg Municipal Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 29, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19489 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0006; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-1] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D Airspace; Appleton, WI AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action modifies Class D airspace at Appleton International Airport (formerly Outagamie County Airport), Appleton, WI. This action is required due to the decommissioning of the GAMIE locator outer marker (LOM) and collocated outer marker (OM) which provided navigation guidance to the airport. This action enhances the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport. Also, the airport name and geographic coordinates are adjusted to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. Additionally, this action replaces the outdated term “Airport/Facility Directory” with the term “Chart Supplement” in the legal description, and removes the city associated with the airport name in the airspace designation.

    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:

    Walter Tweedy, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5900.

    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 will amend Class D airspace, at Appleton International Airport, Appleton, WI, to support instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (83 FR 11445; March 15, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0006 to modify Class D airspace at Appleton International Airport, Appleton, WI. 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 airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

    The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class D airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,400 feet MSL within a 4.2-mile radius (decreased from a 4.4-mile radius) of Appleton International Airport (formerly Outagamie County Airport), Appleton, WI. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of the GAMIE LOM/OM.

    This action also updates the airport name and geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    Additionally, this action makes an editorial change to the Class D airspace legal description replacing “Airport/Facility Directory” with the term “Chart Supplement”.

    Finally, an editorial change would be made removing the name of the city associated with the airport name in the airspace designation to comply with a recent change to FAA Order 7400.2L, Procedures for Handling Airspace Actions, dated October 12, 2017.

    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. AGL WI D Appleton, WI [Amended] Appleton International Airport, WI (Lat. 44°15′29″ N, long 88°31′09″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,400 feet MSL within a 4.2-mile radius of Appleton International Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 31, 2018. Anthony Schneider, Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19478 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0810; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-16] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D Airspace; Olive Branch, MS AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule, technical amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class D airspace for Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS, by adding the Memphis Class B exclusionary language back into the legal description. The exclusionary language was inadvertently omitted from the final rule published July 30, 2018, amending Class D and Class E airspace at this airport.

    DATES:

    Effective 0901 UTC, September 11, 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 amends Class D airspace at Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS, to support IFR operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (83 FR 36402; July 30, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2017-0866 amending Class D airspace, removing Class E airspace, and establishing Class E airspace at Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS.

    Subsequent to publication, the FAA discovered the Memphis Class B airspace exclusionary language was omitted from the Class D legal description of the airport. This rule adds the Class B exclusionary language back into the legal description.

    Class D airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, of FAA Order 7400.11B dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class D 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 action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by adding to the Class D legal description for Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS, the following text that reads “excluding that airspace within the Memphis Class B airspace area.”

    Accordingly, action is take herein to add this exclusion of Memphis Class B airspace to the legal description in the interest of flight safety. Therefore, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

    To avoid confusion on the part of pilots flying in the vicinity of Olive Branch Airport, Olive Branch, MS, the FAA finds good cause, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), for making this rule effective in less than 30 days in order to promote the safe and efficient handling of air traffic in the area.

    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 MS D Olive Branch, MS [Amended] Olive Branch Airport, MS (Lat. 34°58′44″ N, long. 89°47′13″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,900 feet within a 4.1-mile radius of Olive Branch Airport, excluding that airspace within the Memphis Class B airspace area. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific days and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective days and times will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 28, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19486 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0322; Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-12] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class E Airspace; Williamsport, PA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of Picture Rocks non-directional radio beacon (NDB), and cancellation of the NDB approaches. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport. This action also recognizes the name change to Williamsport Hospital Medical Center Heliport (formerly Williamsport Hospital). The title of this rule is changed to only show that we are amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface with this rule. The Class D and remaining Class E airspace areas have been amended in a separate rulemaking.

    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 amends Class E airspace at Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA, and Williamsport Hospital Medical Center Heliport, to support standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations in the area.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (83 FR 25967, June 5, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0322 to amend Class D airspace, Class E surface airspace, Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Williamsport Regional Airport, Williamsport, PA.

    Subsequent to publication, the FAA found that the name of Williamsport Hospital has changed to Williamsport Hospital Medical Center Heliport, and is corrected in this rule.

    Also, we are not retaining the proposal as stated, and only going forward with amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Williamsport Regional Airport. The previous amendments proposed in the NPRM have been executed in a final rule published August 3, 2018 (83 FR 38016).

    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005, 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 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) amends part 71 by amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Williamsport Regional Airport to within a 12.6-mile radius of the airport due to the decommissioning of the Picture Rocks NDB, and cancellation of the NDB approach. The Williamsport Regional Airport ILS localizer is removed as it is no longer needed to define the boundary. Also, the name of Williamsport Hospital is changed to Williamsport Hospital Medical Center Heliport.

    We have removed the amendments that were made for Williamsport Regional Airport noted in Class D airspace, Class E surface airspace, and Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, as they were addressed in a separate rulemaking (FR 83 38016).

    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. 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 5-6.5a. 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, and effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AEA PA E5 Williamsport, PA [Amended] Williamsport Regional Airport, PA (Lat. 41°14′30″ N, long. 76°55′19″ W) Williamsport Hospital Medical Center Heliport, Point In Space Coordinates (Lat. 41°14′51″ N, long. 77°00′55″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 12.6-mile radius of Williamsport Regional Airport, and that airspace within a 6-mile radius of the point in space (lat. 41°14′51″ N, long. 77°00′55″ W) serving Williamsport Hospital Medical Center Heliport.

    Is Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 28, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19487 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0727; Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-15] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lynchburg, VA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends the legal description of the Class E airspace at Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field Airport, Lynchburg, VA. The NOTAM part-time status is removed from the Class E airspace area designated as an extension to a Class D surface area. This action does not affect the boundaries or operating requirements of the airspace.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John Fornito, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia 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 U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it makes a clerical correction removing the NOTAM part-time status from the Class E airspace area designated as an extension at Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field, Lynchburg, VA.

    History

    The FAA Aeronautical Information Services branch found the Class E airspace area designated as an extension to a Class D surface area at Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field Airport, Lynchburg, VA, was incorrectly identified as part time. This action also changes the airport name to Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6004 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 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 action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by removing the NOTAM part-time status from the Class E airspace area designated as an extension to a Class D airspace at Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field Airport, Lynchburg, VA. The airport name also is changed from Lynchburg Regional-Preston Glenn Field to Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field.

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

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to Class D or E Surface Area. AEA VA E4 Lynchburg, VA [Amended] Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field, VA (Lat. 37°19′31″ N, long. 79°12′04″ W) Lynchburg VORTAC (Lat. 37°15′16″ N, long. 79°14′11″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.7 miles each side of the Lynchburg VORTAC 020° and 200° radials extending from the 4.5-mile radius of Lynchburg Regional Airport-Preston Glenn Field to 1 mile south of the VORTAC and within 1.8 miles each side of the Lynchburg VORTAC 022° radial extending from the 4.5-mile radius of the airport to 11.3 miles northeast of the VORTAC.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 28, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19493 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0825; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-17] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Louisville, KY AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule, technical amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class D airspace and Class E surface airspace for Bowman Field Airport, Louisville, KY, by adding the Louisville International Airport Class C exclusionary language into the legal description. The exclusionary language was inadvertently omitted from the final rule published November 1, 2017. This action also makes a minor editorial change to the Louisville, KY, airspace designation and airport name.

    DATES:

    Effective 0901 UTC, September 11, 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 amends Class D and Class E airspace at Bowman Field Airport, Louisville, KY, to support IFR operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (82 FR 50506; November 1, 2017) for Docket No. FAA-2016-9499 amending Class D airspace, and Class E surface airspace at Bowman Field Airport, Louisville, KY.

    Subsequent to publication, the FAA discovered the Louisville Standiford Field Class C airspace exclusionary language was omitted from the Class D legal description of the airport. This rule adds the Class C exclusionary language into the legal descriptions, noting the airport name change to Louisville International Airport.

    An editorial change is made that removes the airport name from the Louisville, KY, airspace designation, and the city from the airport name.

    Class D airspace and Class E surface airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, and 6002 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 amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by adding to the Class D and Class E surface area legal descriptions for Bowman Field Airport, Louisville, KY, the following text that reads “excluding that portion within the Louisville International Airport Class C airspace area, and excluding that portion south of the 081° bearing from Louisville International Airport, and also excluding that portion north of the Louisville International Airport Class C airspace area and west of a line drawn from lat. 38°11′28″ N long. 85°42′01″ W direct thru the point where the 030° bearing from Louisville International Airport intersects the 5-mile radius from Louisville International Airport to the point of intersection with the 3.9-mile radius from Bowman Field Airport.” This action makes an editorial change to the Louisville, KY, airspace designation by removing the airport name of Bowman Field. This action also removes the city name (Louisville) from the airport name of Bowman Field Airport, to comply with FAA Order 7400.2L, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.

    Accordingly, action is take herein to add this exclusion of Louisville International Airport Class C airspace to the legal description for Bowman Field Airport, Louisville, KY, in the interest of flight safety. Therefore, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

    To avoid confusion on the part of pilots flying in the area of Bowman Field Airport, Louisville, KY, the FAA finds good cause, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), for making this rule effective in less than 30 days in order to promote the safe and efficient handling of air traffic in the area.

    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 KY D Louisville, KY [Amended] Bowman Field Airport, KY (Lat. 38°13′41″ N, long. 85°39′49″ W) Louisville International Airport, KY (Lat. 38°10′27″ N, long. 85°44′11″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to but not including 2,200 feet MSL within a 3.9-mile radius of Bowman Field Airport, excluding that portion within the Louisville International Airport Class C airspace area, and excluding that portion south of the 081° bearing from Louisville International Airport, and also excluding that portion north of the Louisville International Airport Class C airspace area and west of a line drawn from lat. 38°11′28″ N, long. 85°42′01″ W. direct thru the point where the 030° bearing from Louisville International Airport intersects the 5-mile radius from Louisville International Airport to the point of intersection with the 3.9-mile radius from Bowman Field Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance 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 KY E2 Louisville, KY [Amended] Bowman Field Airport, KY (Lat. 38°13′41″ N, long. 85°39′49″ W) Louisville International Airport, KY (Lat. 38°10′27″ N, long. 85°44′11″ W) E-104

    Within a 3.9-mile radius of Bowman Field Airport, excluding that portion within the Louisville International Airport Field Class C airspace area, and excluding that portion south of the 081° bearing from Louisville International Airport, and also excluding that portion north of the Louisville International Airport Class C airspace area and west of a line drawn from lat. 38°11′28″ N, long. 85°42′01″ W direct thru the point where the 030° bearing from Louisville International Airport intersects the 5-mile radius from Louisville International Airport to the point of intersection with the 3.9-mile radius from Bowman Field Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 29, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19490 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31211; Amdt. No. 3815] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective September 11, 2018. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

    For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169, or

    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK, 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) Telephone: (405) 954-4164.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.

    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

    Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

    The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.

    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

    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. 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. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 24, 2018. Rick Domingo, Executive Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

    PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

    2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: Effective 11 October 2018 Litchfield, IL, Litchfield Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3A Winamac, IN, Arens Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A Beloit, KS, Moritz Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1 Beloit, KS, Moritz Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-A Beloit, KS, Moritz Memorial, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1A Beloit, KS, Moritz Memorial, VOR RWY 17, Amdt 5 Topeka, KS, Philip Billard Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2B Topeka, KS, Philip Billard Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1B Harbor Springs, MI, Harbor Springs, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 St. Ignace, MI, Mackinac County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Orig-B Raleigh/Durham, NC, Raleigh-Durham Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 5R, Amdt 29A Raleigh/Durham, NC, Raleigh-Durham Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 23L, Amdt 9A Oklahoma City, OK, Sundance, VOR RWY 18, Amdt 1F Johnstown, PA, John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria Co, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4A Lampasas, TX, Lampasas, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig-A Sulphur Springs, TX, Sulphur Springs Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig-B Hayward, WI, Sawyer County, ILS OR LOC RWY 21, Orig-A Effective 8 November 2018 Brevig Mission, AK, Brevig Mission, BREVIG TWO, Graphic DP Brevig Mission, AK, Brevig Mission, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A Kodiak, AK, Kodiak, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Amdt 3 Bay Minette, AL, Bay Minette Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 1B Oneonta, AL, Robbins Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig-C Oneonta, AL, Robbins Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-A Oneonta, AL, Robbins Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-B Nogales, AZ, Nogales Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 San Diego, CA, Montgomery—Gibbs Executive, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4A San Francisco, CA, San Francisco Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19L, Amdt 3A Tracy, CA, Tracy Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Amdt 1B Canon City, CO, Fremont County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 Georgetown, DE, Delaware Coastal, VOR RWY 4, Orig Boca Raton, FL, Boca Raton, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 23, Amdt 1C Atlanta, GA, Newnan Coweta County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Amdt 1A Atlanta, GA, Newnan Coweta County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 2A Atlanta, GA, Newnan Coweta County, VOR-A, Amdt 8A Milledgeville, GA, Baldwin County Rgnl, NDB RWY 28, Amdt 4A Milledgeville, GA, Baldwin County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 2A Milledgeville, GA, Baldwin County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 2A Milledgeville, GA, Baldwin County Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1A Honolulu, HI, Daniel K Inouye Intl, HONOLULU TWO, Graphic DP Honolulu, HI, Daniel K Inouye Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 8B Chicago/West Chicago, IL, DuPage, RNAV (GPS) RWY 20R, Amdt 1F Chicago/West Chicago, IL, DuPage, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1B Indianapolis, IN, Hendricks County-Gordon Graham Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1C Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 5, Amdt 23C Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, LOC BC RWY 23, Amdt 19D Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, RADAR 1, Amdt 5B Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig-E Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-D Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1D Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-D Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, VOR RWY 5, Amdt 18 Terre Haute, IN, Terre Haute Rgnl, VOR RWY 23, Amdt 21 Kingman, KS, Kingman Airport—Clyde Cessna Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1 Kingman, KS, Kingman Airport—Clyde Cessna Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1 Lyons, KS, Lyons-Rice County Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-A Lyons, KS, Lyons-Rice County Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-A Lyons, KS, Lyons-Rice County Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A Lyons, KS, Lyons-Rice County Muni, VOR-A, Amdt 4B Campbellsville, KY, Taylor County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A Somerset, KY, Lake Cumberland Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig Somerset, KY, Lake Cumberland Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 2 Somerset, KY, Lake Cumberland Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 5, Amdt 3A, CANCELED Somerset, KY, Lake Cumberland Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 5, Amdt 1A, CANCELED De Ridder, LA, Beauregard Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5 Belfast, ME, Belfast Muni, NDB RWY 15, Amdt 4, CANCELED Presque Isle, ME, Northern Maine Rgnl Arpt at Presque IS, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5 Charlevoix, MI, Charlevoix Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-B Fremont, MI, Fremont Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 1C Fremont, MI, Fremont Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 1D Fremont, MI, Fremont Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A Ironwood, MI, Gogebic-Iron County, ILS OR LOC RWY 27, Amdt 3B Ironwood, MI, Gogebic-Iron County, VOR RWY 9, Amdt 13A Ludington, MI, Mason County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Orig-D Ludington, MI, Mason County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig-A Traverse City, MI, Cherry Capital, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 3 Princeton, MN, Princeton Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Orig-C Princeton, MN, Princeton Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Orig-B Cabool, MO, Cabool Memorial, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 Lamar, MO, Lamar Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-B Holly Springs, MS, Holly Springs-Marshall County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-A Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, LOC BC RWY 22, Amdt 8B Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 3C Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Orig-B Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 6 Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Orig-A Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, VOR RWY 4, Amdt 16B Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, VOR RWY 22, Amdt 7B Fayetteville, NC, Fayetteville Rgnl/Grannis Field, VOR RWY 28, Amdt 8B Louisburg, NC, Triangle North Executive, VOR-A, Amdt 2D Mount Airy, NC, Mount Airy/Surry County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 Raleigh/Durham, NC, Raleigh-Durham Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 5R, Amdt 3A Casselton, ND, Casselton Robert Miller Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1A Hettinger, ND, Hettinger Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 Stanley, ND, Stanley Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 1 Williston, ND, Sloulin Fld Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 29, Amdt 4B Scottsbluff, NE, Western Nebraska Rgnl/William B Heilig Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 30, Amdt 11 Manville, NJ, Central Jersey Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 2 Battle Mountain, NV, Battle Mountain, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1 Battle Mountain, NV, Battle Mountain, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig Battle Mountain, NV, Battle Mountain, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 Battle Mountain, NV, Battle Mountain, VOR RWY 4, Amdt 7 Penn Yan, NY, Penn Yan, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5 Stormville, NY, Stormville, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig, CANCELED Stormville, NY, Stormville, VOR OR GPS-A, Amdt 4A, CANCELED Dayton, OH, Greene County-Lewis A. Jackson Rgnl, VOR RWY 7, Orig-A, CANCELED Dayton, OH, Greene County-Lewis A. Jackson Rgnl, VOR RWY 25, Orig-A, CANCELED Boise City, OK, Boise City, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig-A Hobart, OK, Hobart Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1A Barnwell, SC, Barnwell Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 2A Summerville, SC, Summerville, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Amdt 1A Cleveland, TN, Cleveland Rgnl Jetport, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 2 Cleveland, TN, Cleveland Rgnl Jetport, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 2 Cleveland, TN, Cleveland Rgnl Jetport, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 Winchester, TN, Winchester Muni, NDB RWY 18, Amdt 6B, CANCELED Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas-Fort Worth Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 31R, ILS RWY 31R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 31R (SA CAT II), Amdt 15 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas-Fort Worth Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 31R, Amdt 3 Dallas, TX, Dallas Executive, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 8 Robstown, TX, Nueces County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1A Manti, UT, Manti-Ephraim, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig-A Salt Lake City, UT, Salt Lake City Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 16R, ILS RWY 16R SA CAT I, ILS RWY 16R CAT II, ILS RWY 16R CAT III, Amdt 3E Salt Lake City, UT, Salt Lake City Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 34L, ILS RWY 34L SA CAT I, ILS RWY 34L CAT II, ILS RWY 34L CAT III, Amdt 3D Beloit, WI, Beloit, VOR-A, Amdt 5C Eagle River, WI, Eagle River Union, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-B Fort Atkinson, WI, Fort Atkinson Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 1 Fort Atkinson, WI, Fort Atkinson Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 1 La Pointe, WI, Major Gilbert Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig-B La Pointe, WI, Major Gilbert Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-C Minocqua-Woodruff, WI, Lakeland/Noble F. Lee Memorial Field, LOC RWY 36, Amdt 1A, CANCELED Rock Springs, WY, Southwest Wyoming Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27, Amdt 2A Rock Springs, WY, Southwest Wyoming Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-B Rock Springs, WY, Southwest Wyoming Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 1C Rock Springs, WY, Southwest Wyoming Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 6A Rock Springs, WY, Southwest Wyoming Rgnl, VOR RWY 9, Amdt 3A RESCINDED: On August 17, 2018 (83 FR 40971), the FAA published an Amendment in Docket No. 31206, Amdt No. 3811, to Part 97 of the Federal Aviation Regulations under section 97.33. The following entries for Idabel, OK, effective September 13, 2018, are hereby rescinded in their entirety: Idabel, OK, Mc Curtain County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 1 Idabel, OK, Mc Curtain County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 1
    [FR Doc. 2018-18879 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 97 [Docket No. 31208; Amdt. No. 3813] Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective September 11, 2018. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.

    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:

    For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;

    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169, or

    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) Telephone: (405) 954-4164.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.

    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

    Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section.

    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.

    The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.

    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.

    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

    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. 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. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 10, 2018. Rick Domingo, Executive Director, Flight Standards Service. Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

    PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

    2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows: Effective 13 September 2018 Berryville, AR, Carroll County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1 Berryville, AR, Carroll County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 1 Mountain Home, AR, Baxter County, ILS OR LOC RWY 5, Amdt 1 Mountain Home, AR, Baxter County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 Mountain Home, AR, Baxter County, VOR-A, Amdt 10A, CANCELED Casa Grande, AZ, Casa Grande Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 5, Amdt 7 Casa Grande, AZ, Casa Grande Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 1 Casa Grande, AZ, Casa Grande Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig Fort Huachuca Sierra Vista, AZ, Sierra Vista Muni-Libby AAF, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 El Monte, CA, San Gabriel Valley, NDB OR GPS-C, Amdt 1A, CANCELED El Monte, CA, San Gabriel Valley, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 7 El Monte, CA, San Gabriel Valley, VOR-A, Orig El Monte, CA, San Gabriel Valley, VOR OR GPS-A, Amdt 7A, CANCELED Palm Springs, CA, Jacqueline Cochran Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1 San Francisco, CA, San Francisco Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 28R, ILS RWY 28R (SA CAT I), ILS RWY 28R (CAT II), ILS RWY 28R (CAT III), Amdt 15 San Francisco, CA, San Francisco Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28L, Amdt 7 San Francisco, CA, San Francisco Intl, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 28R, Amdt 7 San Francisco, CA, San Francisco Intl, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 28R, Amdt 5 South Lake Tahoe, CA, Lake Tahoe, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 8 Ellijay, GA, Gilmer County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig Ellijay, GA, Gilmer County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig Ellijay, GA, Gilmer County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 1, Amdt 1 Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 1 Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1 Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 1 Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 1 Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, VOR/DME RWY 1, Amdt 9, CANCELED Rome, GA, Richard B Russell Regional—J H Towers Field, VOR/DME RWY 19, Amdt 9, CANCELED Albia, IA, Albia Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4 Oelwein, IA, Oelwein Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig-A Oelwein, IA, Oelwein Muni, VOR OR GPS-A, Amdt 3B, CANCELED Sibley, IA, Sibley Muni, NDB OR GPS RWY 35, Amdt 1B, CANCELED Sibley, IA, Sibley Muni, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 12, Amdt 10 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, LOC BC RWY 30, Amdt 12 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Amdt 1 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Amdt 1 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Amdt 1 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, VOR RWY 6, Amdt 3B Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, VOR RWY 12, Amdt 10B Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, VOR RWY 18, Amdt 9 Waterloo, IA, Waterloo Rgnl, VOR RWY 24, Amdt 16C Waverly, IA, Waverly Muni, VOR-A, Amdt 4 Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) PRM Y RWY 28L (CLOSE PARALLEL), Orig-A Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 28L, Orig-A Chicago, IL, Chicago O'Hare Intl, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 28L, Orig-C Harrisburg, IL, Harrisburg-Raleigh, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 2A Evansville, IN, Evansville Rgnl, RADAR-1, Amdt 7A Evansville, IN, Evansville Rgnl, VOR RWY 4, Amdt 7A South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 9R, Amdt 10 South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 27L, ILS RWY 27L SA CAT I, ILS RWY 27L SA CAT II, Amdt 36 South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9L, Amdt 1 South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1B South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27L, Orig-B South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27R, Amdt 1 South Bend, IN, South Bend Intl, VOR RWY 18, Amdt 7E Kingman, KS, Kingman Airport—Clyde Cessna Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1 Kingman, KS, Kingman Airport—Clyde Cessna Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1 Indian Head, MD, Maryland, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 1B Cheboygan, MI, Cheboygan County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3A New Hudson, MI, Oakland Southwest, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2A Starkville, MS, George M Bryan, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2B Newark, NJ, Newark Liberty Intl, GLS RWY 4L, Amdt 1 Newark, NJ, Newark Liberty Intl, GLS RWY 4R, Amdt 1 Newark, NJ, Newark Liberty Intl, GLS RWY 22R, Amdt 1 Trenton, NJ, Trenton Mercer, ILS OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 10D Trenton, NJ, Trenton Mercer, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig-C Belen, NM, Belen Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig-A Belen, NM, Belen Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1B Belen, NM, Belen Rgnl, VOR-A, Amdt 1B New York, NY, LaGuardia, LOC RWY 31, Amdt 3C New York, NY, LaGuardia, VOR-H, Amdt 3C New York, NY, Stewart Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 1D New York, NY, Stewart Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 1C Wellsville, NY, Wellsville Muni Arpt, Tarantine Fld, LOC/DME RWY 28, Amdt 4, CANCELED Wellsville, NY, Wellsville Muni Arpt, Tarantine Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 1 Wellsville, NY, Wellsville Muni Arpt, Tarantine Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 1 Dayton, OH, Dayton-Wright Brothers, NDB-A, Amdt 3 Piqua, OH, Piqua Airport—Hartzell Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Orig-D Piqua, OH, Piqua Airport—Hartzell Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig-C Piqua, OH, Piqua Airport—Hartzell Field, VOR RWY 26, Amdt 6D Piqua, OH, Piqua Airport—Hartzell Field, VOR-A, Amdt 13C Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 16L, Amdt 2A Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 16R, ILS RWY 16R SA CAT I, ILS RWY 16R CAT II, ILS RWY 16R CAT III, Amdt 38A Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16L, Amdt 4 Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16R, Amdt 3 Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34L, Amdt 4 Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34R, Amdt 4 Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 7B Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, VOR-A, Amdt 7B Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, VOR OR TACAN RWY 16R, Amdt 5C Eugene, OR, Mahlon Sweet Field, VOR OR TACAN RWY 34L, Amdt 6 Hermiston, OR, Hermiston Muni, RNAV (GPS)-B, Amdt 1 Hermiston, OR, Hermiston Muni, VOR-A, Amdt 4 Columbia, SC, Jim Hamilton L B Owens, GPS RWY 31, Orig-B, CANCELED Columbia, SC, Jim Hamilton L B Owens, LOC RWY 31, Amdt 2 Columbia, SC, Jim Hamilton L B Owens, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig Columbia, SC, Jim Hamilton L B Owens, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig Pine Ridge, SD, Pine Ridge, RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Orig Pine Ridge, SD, Pine Ridge, RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Orig-C Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas-Fort Worth Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 13R, Amdt 3 Odessa, TX, Odessa-Schlemeyer Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3A Antigo, WI, Langlade County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 1 Stevens Point, WI, Stevens Point Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig-B
    [FR Doc. 2018-18881 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [TD 9836] RIN 1545-BH62 Substantiation and Reporting Requirements for Cash and Noncash Charitable Contribution Deductions; Correction AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Correcting amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    This document contains corrections to final regulations (TD 9836) that were published in the Federal Register on Monday, July 30, 2018. The final regulations provide guidance concerning substantiation and reporting requirements for cash and noncash charitable contributions.

    DATES:

    This correction is effective September 11, 2018 and applicable July 30, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charles Gorham at (202) 317-5091 (not a toll-free number).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The final regulations (TD 9836) that are the subject of this correction are under section 170 of the Internal Revenue Code.

    Need for Correction

    As published July 30, 2018 (83 FR 36417), the final regulations (TD 9836) contain an error that needs to be corrected.

    List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Correction of Publication

    Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 2. Section 1.170A-1 is amended by revising the third sentence of paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 1.170A-1 Charitable, etc., contributions and gifts; allowance of deduction.

    (a) * * * For rules relating to record keeping and return requirements in support of deductions for charitable contributions (whether by an itemizing or nonitemizing taxpayer), see §§ 1.170A-13 (generally applicable to contributions on or before July 30, 2018), 1.170A-14, 1.170A-15, 1.170A-16, 1.170A-17, and 1.170A-18. * * *

    Martin V. Franks, Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).
    [FR Doc. 2018-19679 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0850] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA 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 Tower Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the community to participate in the Sacramento Century Challenge bicycle race. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. through 10 a.m. on October 6, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0850, 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 Carl T. Hausner, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone 510-437-3516, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The California Department of Transportation has requested a temporary change to the operation of the Tower Drawbridge, mile 59.0, over Sacramento River, at Sacramento, CA. The drawbridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw operates as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a). Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational.

    The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. on October 6, 2018, to allow the community to participate in the Sacramento Century Challenge bicycle race. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised. Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will 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 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 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: September 5, 2018. Carl T. Hausner, District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19597 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0501; FRL-9983-43-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: New Source Review for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving changes to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) through the Division of Air Quality, to EPA through a letter dated October 17, 2017. This SIP submittal modifies North Carolina's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations and includes the adoption of specific federal provisions needed to meet the New Source Review (NSR) permitting program requirements for the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). In addition, North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal addresses portions of the PSD requirements for the infrastructure SIPs for the following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5; 2006 24-hour PM2.5; 2008 lead; 2008 8-hour ozone; 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2); 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2); and 2012 Annual PM2.5. As a result of this approval of North Carolina's modified PSD regulations, EPA is also approving North Carolina's submittal with respect to the related PSD infrastructure SIP requirements for these NAAQS. In addition, these approvals remove EPA's obligation to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to meet the relevant Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requirements.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0501. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joel Huey of the Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Huey can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9104 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    In an action published on June 21, 2018 (83 FR 28789), EPA proposed to approve changes to the North Carolina SIP, submitted by the NC DEQ to EPA through a letter dated October 17, 2017.1 The details of North Carolina's submittal and the rationale for EPA's actions are explained in the proposal notice and briefly summarized below. EPA did not receive any adverse comments on the proposed action.

    1 EPA notes that the Agency may not have received this submittal on the date of the State's letter.

    EPA is approving two actions with regard to North Carolina's SIP submittal updating the State's PSD regulations found at 15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D .0530. First, EPA is approving North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal with regard to changes to the State's regulation at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 because EPA has determined that the State's changes fully meet the requirements of EPA's rulemaking, “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC),” Final Rule, 75 FR 64864 (October 20, 2010) (hereafter referred to as the “2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule”). Second, as a result of the approval of North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal for these PSD requirements, EPA is approving this submittal for portions of the infrastructure SIP PSD elements for the following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5; 2006 24-hour PM2.5; 2008 lead; 2008 8-hour ozone; 2010 SO2; 2010 NO2; and 2012 Annual PM2.5.2 3

    2 North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal requested approval of the PSD infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. On April 16, 2018, the State submitted a letter to EPA clarifying that the same submittal is intended to satisfy the PSD elements of the State's infrastructure SIP submittals for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as well.

    3 The background for various NAAQS is provided in EPA's proposed and final rulemaking entitled “Air Plan Approval and Disapproval; North Carolina: New Source Review for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5).” See 81 FR 28797 (May 10, 2016) and 81 FR 63107 (September 14, 2016).

    A. Requirements of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule for PSD SIP Programs

    North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal adopts changes in the State's PSD permitting program at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 by incorporating by reference EPA's PSD regulations as of July 1, 2014. This incorporation by reference includes the federally-required provisions of EPA's 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule needed to implement the PSD PM2.5 program in North Carolina. Adopting the federal rule as of July 1, 2014, has the effect of adding to the North Carolina SIP the required definitions of “major source baseline date,” “minor source baseline date,” and “baseline area” that were lacking in the State's previous PM2.5 submittals. This incorporation by reference as of July 1, 2014, also captures EPA's October 25, 2012 (77 FR 65107), amendment to the definition of “regulated NSR pollutant” concerning condensable particulate matter. North Carolina's incorporation by reference of EPA's PSD regulations as of July 1, 2014, is not only consistent with the current federal rule, but it also will not interfere with North Carolina's efforts to prevent significant deterioration of air quality and to attain and maintain compliance with the PM2.5 NAAQS.

    B. Requirements for Infrastructure SIPs

    Because North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal addresses certain NSR/PSD requirements, it thereby meets the related infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and 110(a)(2)(J). As finalized, North Carolina's SIP includes a complete PSD program that addresses all structural PSD requirements due under the CAA and EPA regulations. Therefore, because EPA is approving North Carolina's SIP revisions for the PSD program, it is also approving the October 17, 2017, submittal for the PSD infrastructure SIP requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2008 lead NAAQS, 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and 1997, 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.4

    4 EPA has already approved or will consider in separate actions all other elements from North Carolina infrastructure SIP submissions related to the 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 NAAQS, and 1997, 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.

    II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of North Carolina's regulations 15A NCAC 02D .0530, entitled “Prevention of Significant Deterioration,” which modify the NSR permitting regulations, effective September 1, 2017. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the person identified in the “For Further Information Contact” section of this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.5

    5See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    III. Final Actions

    EPA is approving changes to the North Carolina SIP, provided by the NC DEQ, to EPA through a letter dated October 17, 2017. Specifically, EPA is approving changes to North Carolina's NSR permitting regulations codified at 15A 02D .0530—Prevention of Significant Deterioration, which relate to the requirements to comply with EPA's 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule. EPA also notes that North Carolina's incorporation by reference of EPA's PSD regulations as of July 1, 2014, includes EPA's amendment to the definition of “regulated NSR pollutant” concerning condensable PM promulgated on October 25, 2012. EPA is approving the version of 15A NCAC 02D .0530 (PSD) that became effective in the State on September 1, 2017, which will be incorporated into North Carolina's SIP. As a result of this approval, EPA is also approving portions of the PSD elements of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submittals (i.e., CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J)) for the 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5, 2006 24-hour PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This final action removes EPA's obligation under section 110(c) to promulgate a FIP to address the PM2.5 increments requirements of EPA's 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule PSD and the related PSD elements for the above listed infrastructure SIPs.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Onis “Trey” Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart II—North Carolina 2. Section 52.1770(c) Table 1 is amended under Subchapter 2D, Section .0500 by revising the entry for “Sect .0530” to read as follows:
    § 52.1770 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    Table 1—EPA Approved North Carolina Regulations State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanation Subchapter 2D Air Pollution Control Requirements *         *         *         *         *         *         * Section .0500 Emission Control Standards *         *         *         *         *         *         * Sect .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration 9/1/2017 9/11/2018, [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    3. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by adding entries for “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 1997 Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS”, “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 2006 Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS”, “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS”, “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS”, “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS”, “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS”, and “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1770 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions Provision State effective date EPA approval date Federal Register citation Explanation *         *         *         *         *         *         * 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 1997 Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS 4/1/2008 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 2006 Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS 9/21/2009 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS 6/15/2012 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 11/2/2012 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS 8/23/2013 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS 3/18/2014 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 12/4/2015 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of publication in Federal Register] Approved the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) and 110(a)(2)(J).
    [FR Doc. 2018-19603 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0582; FRL-9983-53—Region 10] Air Plan Approval; ID, Pinehurst PM10 Redesignation, Limited Maintenance Plan; West Silver Valley 2012 Annual PM2.5 Emission Inventory AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The EPA is approving the redesignation request and limited maintenance plan for the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standard developed for the City of Pinehurst PM10 Nonattainment Area and the Pinehurst PM10 Expansion Nonattainment Area. This redesignation will change the status of both areas from nonattainment to attainment. The limited maintenance plan for these contiguous nonattainment areas addresses maintenance of the PM10 standard for a ten-year period beyond redesignation. Related to this action, the EPA is taking final agency action on the September 15, 2013, high wind exceptional event at the Pinehurst monitoring station. Additionally, the EPA is finalizing approval of the emissions inventory for the West Silver Valley 2012 annual PM2.5 nonattainment area.

    DATES:

    This action is effective on October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0582. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Justin Spenillo at (206) 553-6125, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

    Table of Contents I. Background Information II. Response to Comments III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review I. Background Information

    On May 11, 2018, the EPA proposed to approve the redesignation request and limited maintenance plan (LMP) submitted by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) on September 29, 2017, for the City of Pinehurst PM10 Nonattainment Area and the Pinehurst PM10 Expansion Nonattainment Area, collectively referred to as the Pinehurst PM10 Nonattainment Area (Pinehurst PM10 NAA).

    Related to this action, the EPA is taking final agency action on the EPA's concurrence with the IDEQ's request for exclusion of data measured on September 15, 2013, as a high wind exceptional event at the Pinehurst monitoring station, as set forth in the March 2, 2017 letter to the IDEQ, included in the docket. The Clean Air Act (CAA) allows for the exclusion of air quality monitoring data from design value calculations when there are exceedances caused by events, such as wildfires or high wind events, that meet the criteria for an exceptional event identified in the EPA's implementing regulations, the Exceptional Events Rule at 40 CFR 50.1, 50.14 and 51.930. In 2013, emissions from a high wind event entrained dust and impacted PM10 concentrations recorded at the Pinehurst monitor. The EPA evaluated the IDEQ's exceptional event demonstration for the flagged values of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS for September 15, 2013, at the monitor in Pinehurst, Idaho, with respect to the requirements of the EPA's Exceptional Events Rule and determined that IDEQ met the rule requirements.

    Separately, the EPA also proposed approval of the base year emissions inventory for the West Silver Valley (WSV) PM2.5 Nonattainment Area (NAA). Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires a state with an area designated as nonattainment to submit a “comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant” for the NAA. The IDEQ developed a 2013 base year emissions inventory for the WSV annual PM2.5 NAA. The base year emissions inventory includes data from 2013 and 2014 and in large part was extracted from the 2014 periodic emissions inventory which is used to populate the EPA's National Emissions Inventory. The 2013 base year inventory is one of the three years used to designate the area as nonattainment. This base year inventory presents direct PM2.5 emissions (condensable and filterable) and emissions of all PM2.5 precursors (NOX, VOCs, NH3, and SO2) to meet the emissions inventory requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1). The EPA has reviewed the results, procedures, and methodologies for the WSV Annual PM2.5 NAA base year emissions inventory. The EPA determined that the 2013 base year emissions inventory for the WSV annual PM2.5 NAA met the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1).

    An explanation of the CAA requirements, a detailed analysis of the submittal, and the EPA's reasons for proposing approval were provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking (83 FR 21976), and will not be restated here. The public comment period for this proposed rule ended on June 11, 2018. The EPA received adverse comments on the proposal.

    II. Response to Comments

    The Idaho Conservation League (ICL) submitted adverse comments on our proposed approval of the Pinehurst PM10 NAA redesignation request and LMP. Within this section, we have summarized the adverse comments and provided our responses. A full copy of comments received is available in the docket for this final action.

    Comment—Permanent and Enforceable Emissions Reductions

    Summary—The ICL comment letter asserts the “EPA must reject Idaho DEQ's request for redesignation of the Pinehurst NAA” because the state has not met the redesignation requirements in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). The ICL cites the EPA's September 4, 1992, guidance, which, among other things, addresses emissions reductions based on permanent and enforceable measures (Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, entitled “Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment” (Calcagni Memo)). The ICL comment letter provides examples of nonattainment areas redesignated for PM10 and ozone in Ohio, Colorado, and Idaho, which use local rules, laws, and ordinances to provide for permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. The comment letter states that the IDEQ and City of Pinehurst were aware of the need for permanent and enforceable measures, citing discussion notes taken during a 2016 advisory committee session for the West Silver Valley PM2.5 NAA, an overlapping area designated nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The ICL comment letter concludes that the control measures and associated emissions reductions are not permanent nor enforceable.

    Response—We disagree with the commenter. Measures to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS were submitted by IDEQ on April 14, 1992, and approved into the SIP on August 25, 1994 (59 FR 43745). In the August 25, 1994 action, the EPA evaluated the IDEQ's submittal with respect to the CAA section 172 requirements, including the Reasonably Available Control Measures and their enforceability. The EPA approved the control measures into the SIP at 40 CFR part 52, subpart N as meeting CAA requirements and making them, along with the attainment plan itself, federally enforceable (59 FR 43745). Once approved, the state is subject to CAA section 179(a)(4), which provides that a state can be subject to federal sanctions for not implementing any requirement of an approved plan or part of an approved plan, unless the deficiency is corrected within 18 months.

    Reviewing the specific plan measures, the IDEQ has implemented woodstove replacements and home weatherization since the early 1990s in the Pinehurst PM10 NAA. As identified in Table 9 of the IDEQ submittal, the woodstove changeout program resulted in 76 uncertified woodstoves being replaced by 1994, with an additional 87 between 1995 and 2014 and 40 more between 2015 and 2017. These measures have been implemented through a variety of programs and agencies. Changeouts of uncertified woodstoves were completed through a combined Federal assistance grant and state and local loan program. This combined program was administered by the Northern Idaho Community Action Agency. The home weatherization program was run through the Idaho Economic Opportunity Office with loan and grant funding supplied by the Idaho Department of Water Resources, Farmers Home Administration, Washington Water Power, and North Idaho Community Action Agency. In terms of emissions reductions, when comparing the emissions inventories from residential wood combustion from 1988 to 2013, they dropped 80.25 lb/day (27.45%) during the winter season when particulate matter emissions are often the highest (Table 8 of the IDEQ submittal). These reductions are permanent in that both the woodstove replacement and the reduced energy needs from improved home energy efficiency via weatherization generally last and extend throughout the life of the home.1 Any subsequent home modification would likely improve, if not maintain, emissions reductions, and benefits are expected to be net positive given that emissions of EPA-certified stoves are estimated to be on average three to four times lower than uncertified stoves.2 The remaining measures, including the public awareness campaign focused on clean burning practices and the voluntary woodsmoke curtailment programs are all helpful in supporting the reduction of woodsmoke emissions in the area.

    1See Department of Energy Weatherization Program, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/06/f52/EERE_WAP_Fact%20Sheet-v2.pdf.

    2See EPA Burnwise Program, https://www.epa.gov/burnwise/burn-wise-energy-efficiency.

    Additionally, the EPA recently awarded IDEQ a 2015 Targeted Airshed Grant for the West Silver Valley PM2.5 NAA. As a condition of the grant agreement with the EPA, the IDEQ committed to replace 183 uncertified wood heating devices and provide the associated emissions reductions. Each homeowner receiving a changeout must sign a certification document to ensure that they will remove an uncertified wood heating device from their home and agree to have two follow-up home inspections on the new certified device, commit to proper wood burning practices, and commit to not replacing the device with another solid fuel burning device. All removed stoves are rendered permanently and irreversibly inoperable and are properly disposed. We believe the grant terms and conditions and the homeowner certifications provide additional enforceability for purposes of maintaining the PM10 standard in the area.

    While not specifically taken credit for in the original attainment plan nor the LMP, road dust control has played an important part in the area. It is the second largest source of pollution according to the emissions inventory, and the area has taken measures to reduce emissions through paving roads, maintenance of roads, and adjusting street sweeping to reduce particulate matter. With respect to permanence of road controls, once paved their associated emissions will be reduced and road maintenance will ensure lasting emissions reductions. We received clarification from the IDEQ that since 2016, the majority of roads (over 10 miles in a city roughly 1 square mile) in the Pinehurst area have been rebuilt or sealed.

    We have reviewed monitoring data for the area with respect to the permanence of the emissions reductions. In Table 2 of the IDEQ submittal, monitoring data is provided from 1986 through 2015. From 1986 through 1993, the Pinehurst PM10 NAA was regularly recording values above 100 µg/m3, and exceeded the 3-year expected exceedances design value of 1.0. From 1994 through 2015, Table 2 shows that the area has consistently met the 24-hour PM10 standard, and the EPA has reviewed and confirmed the data. As noted in the submittal, the area came into attainment in the same timeframe as the IDEQ's completion of the first batch of woodstove changeouts (76 by 1994). The area has continued to meet the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS design value since 1994, and it has also shown a continued decrease in maximum annual 24-hr PM10 concentrations. Additionally, the EPA has determined that the Pinehurst PM10 NAA meets the 5-year average design value for LMP qualification as identified in the proposal.

    Since the proposal, the IDEQ has submitted and the EPA has reviewed and concurred on the IDEQ's demonstration that elevated PM10 concentrations on three days in September 2017 were attributable to wildfire exceptional events and qualify for exclusion under EPA's Exceptional Events Rule. The August 24, 2018 concurrence letter to the IDEQ is included in the docket. With the exceptional event days excluded, the area continues to meet the LMP average design value for the most recent 5-year period, through 2017. The EPA intends to propose final agency action on these 2017 exceptional events in a forthcoming action.

    Based on the IDEQ PM10 LMP submission and the EPA's review of air quality monitoring data, it is reasonable to conclude that the measures to reduce PM10 in the Pinehurst PM10 NAA have contributed to permanent emissions reductions. Emissions reductions in the area have been maintained since 1994, and enforceable control measures remain in place as approved into the SIP. We therefore conclude that the area has met its obligations with regard to permanent and enforceable measures to maintain the 24-hour PM10 standard and that no further action is required.

    Comment—Annual PM10 NAAQS

    Summary—The ICL requests that the EPA explain why the LMP and the EPA's subsequent analysis only evaluated the 24-hour PM10 LMP design value and not the annual PM10 LMP design value. The commenter asserts that both are required.

    Response—On August 9, 2001, the EPA issued guidance on streamlined maintenance plan provisions for certain moderate PM10 nonattainment areas seeking redesignation to attainment (Memorandum from Lydia Wegman, Director, Air Quality Standards and Strategies Division, entitled “Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Areas” (LMP Option Memo)). Section IV of the LMP Option Memo discusses LMP qualification and qualifying design values specifically. It states that “[t]he area should be attaining the NAAQS and the average PM10 design value for the area, based on the most recent 5 years of air quality data at all monitors in the area, should be at or below 40 μg/m3 for the annual PM10 NAAQS and 98 μg/m3 for the 24-hr PM10 NAAQS with no violations at any monitor in the nonattainment area.”

    To qualify for the LMP option, the area must meet the design value test with respect to the standard for which the area was designated nonattainment.3 The Pinehurst PM10 NAA was designated nonattainment for the 24-hr PM10 NAAQS and therefore the appropriate statistical test is with respect to the 98 µg/m3 5-year average design value. The EPA has confirmed that the area meets the 5-year average design value of 98 µg/m3. We believe that the IDEQ has met the requirements of the LMP with regards to the 24-hr PM10 standard and the IDEQ does not need to address the annual PM10 standard.

    3See LMP Option Memo.

    Comment—Federal Clean Air Deregulation

    Summary—The ICL states that they are concerned about recent actions and statements by federal agencies that may affect vehicle emissions reductions in the future, and how that may affect the Pinehurst PM10 NAA ability to attain and its permanence. The ICL comment letter specifically points to the IDEQ's reference to Tier 3 vehicle standards and the EPA's proposal to reduce Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The comment then requests that the EPA “identify any and all of its models and analyses that may be impacted by current and proposed deregulation of vehicle emissions. Furthermore, we request that any vehicle emission model or emission factor for PM10 be revised such that the models and factors are not based on any federal emission regulation currently under judicial or administrative review.”

    Response—We do not agree with the commenter's assertion regarding the impact of current or proposed changes to motor vehicle emissions standards on the proposed action, because the Pinehurst PM10 NAA does not rely on motor vehicle emissions reductions for attainment or its continued maintenance of the NAAQS. Additionally, there are no proposed changes to Tier 3 vehicle standards and proposed CAFE standards have minimal effect on criteria pollutants, their focus instead being on greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

    When reviewing the submitted Pinehurst PM10 2013 Emissions Inventory in Table 7 of the IDEQ's submittal, the primary source of PM10 is residential wood combustion at 17.75 tons per year (TPY), which is 44.5% of the PM10 emissions in the area. Road dust, paved and unpaved, is the next largest contributor at a cumulative 8.91 TPY, or 22.3% of emissions. Cumulatively, residential wood combustion and road dust make up 66.8% of the emissions inventory. During winter days when particulate matter levels are often higher, residential wood combustion is 212.05 lb/day, which is 82.17% of the PM10 emissions in the area (Table 8). Paved road dust (unpaved is no longer part of the emissions inventory), is the next largest contributor at a 25.38 lb/day, or 9.83% of emissions. Residential wood combustion currently makes up the majority of the emissions inventory. Motor vehicle emissions by comparison make up a very small portion of the emissions inventory at 1.84 TPY(annual) and 11.09 lb/day(winter), or less than 5% of both the annual and winter emissions inventories. This is expected as motor vehicle emissions do not contribute large quantities of PM10.

    As described in section 3.4 Control Measures and section 3.2.2 Emissions Inventory Results and Adequacy Determination, the Pinehurst PM10 LMP focuses primarily on the reduction of PM10 emissions from residential woodsmoke and from road dust from paved and unpaved roads. The Pinehurst PM10 LMP itself does not take credit for emissions reductions from motor vehicle emissions reductions nor does it rely on it for continued attainment of the PM10 NAAQS.

    As mentioned in the proposal, the Pinehurst area has met the PM10 3-year design value of expected exceedance of 1.0 or less since 1994. Additionally, the Pinehurst area has only recorded one value (in 2010) above 98 µg/m3 since 1999 that was not the result of an exceptional event. The area has demonstrated, and EPA has confirmed, that the 3-yr and 5-yr design values qualify for the LMP option. Additionally, the area has demonstrated that it meets the LMP motor vehicle regional analysis, which assesses increases in emissions based on the area's growth rate as applied to paved road dust emissions, unpaved road dust emissions, and mobile source emissions. It is this last category where the ICL comment questions if any changes in federal emissions requirements would affect the area's ability to attain. As explained above, motor vehicle emissions in the Pinehurst NAA are not expected to affect the areas ability to continue to attain as they are less than 5% and were not taken credit for in the attainment plan, nor the redesignation request and LMP.

    While we do not believe that any changes to motor vehicle emissions are relevant to the area's ability to attain, we did a basic evaluation to determine if the area would continue to meet the LMP motor vehicle regional analysis. The only portion of the calculation that would change would be the on-road mobile source. Currently, that value is calculated using the formula in the LMP Option Memo: DV mobile * VMT paved, where the DV mobile provides a 3.6509 μg/m3 contribution to the design value and VMT paved is the 0.0166 percent growth rate (3.6509 * 0.0166 = 0.06 μg/m3 contribution). Given that the growth rate in Pinehurst is very small, any potential changes to the emissions standards would have a small effect on the design value. Taking a conservative assumption and doubling the DV mobile from 3.6509 μg/m3 to 7.3018 μg/m3, and applying the 0.0166 growth rate would only increase the mobile contribution from 0.06 µg/m3 contribution to 0.12 µg/m3 contribution and the Pinehurst area would still be able meet the motor vehicle regional analysis test. Given the small contribution of motor vehicle emissions and low growth rate in the Pinehurst area, we believe the Pinehurst PM10 NAA LMP is sufficient and no further action is required.

    The ICL's request that the EPA identify and revise all of its models, analyses, and emissions factors that may be impacted by current or proposed changes to vehicle emissions standards is outside of the scope of this action.

    Comment—Emission Factors

    Summary—The ICL requested that the EPA confirm that all woodstoves replaced were “Phase II,” and to require that the IDEQ revise calculations in the case that any of the replacements were not Phase II. The ICL asserts that the IDEQ used incorrect emissions factors based on a comparison of AP-42 emissions factors to those used by IDEQ in the Pinehurst PM10 LMP, and requests an explanation for this or revision, whichever is more appropriate.

    Response—We disagree that the IDEQ used incorrect emissions factors and do not believe that any further calculations are needed. In 1988, the EPA finalized the residential wood heaters new source performance standards (NSPS) that required performance standards for woodstoves. These performance standards were released in two phases; Phase I went into effect immediately in 1988, and Phase II went into effect in 1990. The Phase II performance standards required that catalytic stoves have an emission rate of 4.1g/hr or less and non-catalytic stoves have an emissions rate of 7.5 g/hr or less. All stoves that have been replaced in Pinehurst occurred after Phase II standards were in place. Additionally, we have received confirmation from IDEQ that these changeouts were completed and that they were Phase II EPA certified stoves.

    With regard to the ICL's request for explanation of the emissions factors used, we reviewed the emissions factors (EFs) for residential wood combustion that IDEQ used and found them consistent with the EPA EFs and methodology used in the 2014 National Emissions Inventory. The IDEQ used EFs derived from EPA's Residential Wood Combustion Emissions Estimation Tool version 3.1 (October 2016) that are more up to date than the EFs in AP-42, which were last updated in 1996 for this source category. We have included in the docket the documentation for v3.1 and 3.2 of the Residential Wood Combustion Emissions Estimation Tool, which has the emissions factors used and the references for those EFs. Both versions of the tool use the same EFs.

    In response to the comment, we have confirmed with the IDEQ that the changeouts were with phase II or better EPA certified stoves. We have also confirmed that the IDEQ emissions inventory assumptions and calculations are correct and that the appropriate EFs were used.

    Comment—Contingency Plan

    Summary—The ICL requested that the EPA further explain how the IDEQ's Contingency Plan is compliant with section 175A of the CAA. The comment provides a summary with references to CAA section 175A, the Calcagni Memo that provides guidance for maintenance plans, and the LMP Option Memo that provides guidance for LMPs.

    Response—While the commenter correctly identifies that CAA section 175A provides the statutory requirements for maintenance plan requirements, and that the LMP Option Memo provides guidance for contingency provisions under the LMP option, the ICL's contention that contingency provisions 4 must be fully adopted and take effect within one year and without further legislative action is incorrect. These requirements do not appear in the CAA section 175A requirements nor the LMP Option Memo, and are contradicted by the Calcagni Memo, EPA's long-standing interpretation of redesignation and maintenance plan requirements. There, it states, “For the purposes of section 175A, a State is not required to have fully adopted contingency measures that will take effect without further action by the State in order for the maintenance plan to be approved.” Calcagni Memo at 12; see also Greenbaum v. EPA, 370 F.3d 527, 541 (6th Cir. 2004) (upholding this portion of the Calcagni Memo).

    4 The IDEQ submittal and ICL comment letter use the terminology “contingency measures,” when referring to the CAA section 175A “contingency provisions” requirements. “Contingency measures” are associated with attainment planning and have different requirements.

    CAA section 175A(d) and EPA's interpretation of that provision as set out in the Calcagni Memo and the LMP Option Memo provide the standards by which the EPA must evaluate contingency plans. Section 175A(d) states that “[e]ach plan revision submitted under this section shall contain such contingency provisions as the Administrator deems necessary to assure that the State will promptly correct any violation of the standard which occurs after the redesignation of the area as an attainment area. Such provisions shall include a requirement that the State will implement all measures with respect to the control of the air pollutant concerned which were contained in the State implementation plan for the area before redesignation of the area as an attainment area.” The Calcagni Memo and the LMP Option memo further elaborate that “Section 175A of the Act states that a maintenance plan must include contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS which may occur after redesignation of the area to attainment. These contingency measures do not have to be fully adopted at the time of redesignation. However, the contingency plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and the State should ensure that the contingency measures are adopted as soon as possible once they are triggered by a specific event. The contingency plan should identify the measures to be adopted, and provide a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation of the measures if they are required. Normally, the implementation of contingency measures is triggered by a violation of the NAAQS but the State may wish to establish other triggers to prevent a violation of the NAAQS, such as an exceedance of the NAAQS.”

    The EPA has determined that the IDEQ's contingency plan meets the requirements of Section 175A(d) and the EPA's guidance memos. Section 3.5 of the IDEQ's submittal confirms that all measures relied upon for attainment, including woodstove changeouts, voluntary curtailment program, home weatherization, and public awareness campaign continue to be in place and will be strengthened if the PM10 standard is exceeded. If the Pinehurst area exceeds the standard, Section 3.5.1 identifies the Annual Network Plan monitoring data as the triggering mechanism for contingency provisions. A violation cited in the Annual Network Plan would trigger a schedule and process for IDEQ to examine the data, assess the source of the problem, and identify which contingency provision to adopt and implement. The submitted plan lists potential provisions focused on control of woodsmoke and road dust, the two primary sources of PM10 in the nonattainment area. The submitted contingency provisions meet the CAA section 175A requirement to continue implementing measures relied upon for attainment. There is an automatic process on a set schedule by which the Pinehurst area's design value is evaluated annually (i.e., the Annual Network Plan submittal-review-approval), and a violation would trigger the state to be required to evaluate, identify, adopt, and implement contingency provisions best suited towards bringing the area back into attainment. Therefore, the EPA is finalizing approval of the IDEQ's plan as meeting the requirements of section 175A.

    III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving the Pinehurst PM10 NAA LMP submitted by the IDEQ and concurrently redesignating the area to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. Related to this action, the EPA is taking final agency action on the September 15, 2013, high wind exceptional event at the Pinehurst monitoring station. Additionally, the EPA is approving the West Silver Valley annual PM2.5 base year emissions inventory as meeting CAA section 172(c)(3) requirements.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: August 30, 2018. Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart N—Idaho 2. In § 52.670, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an entry at the end of the table for “Pinehurst PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan” to read as follows:
    § 52.670 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved Idaho Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures Name of SIP
  • provision
  • Applicable geographic or
  • nonattainment area
  • State
  • submittal
  • date
  • EPA approval date Comments
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Pinehurst PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan Shoshone County; Pinehurst Expansion Area and City of Pinehurst 9/29/2017 9/11/2018,
  • [Insert Federal Register citation]
  • PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    4. In § 81.313, the table entitled “Idaho-PM-10” is amended by revising the entry for “Eastern Washington-Northern Idaho Interstate AQCR 62 (Idaho portion):” to read as follows:
    § 81.313 Idaho. Idaho PM-10 Designated area Designation Date Type Classification Date Type *         *         *         *         *         *         * Eastern Washington-Northern Idaho Interstate AQCR 62 (Idaho portion): Shoshone County: Pinehurst Expansion Area Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48 North, Range 2 East; Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48, North, Range 2 East; Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48 North, Range 2 East; Southwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48 North, Range 2 East; Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter, Section 48 North, Range 2 East, Boise Base (known as “Pinehurst expansion area”) October 11, 2018 Attainment City of Pinehurst October 11, 2018 Attainment *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2018-19600 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0182; FRL-9983-44-Region 4] Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; Florida: Redesignation of the Hillsborough County Lead Nonattainment Area to Attainment AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    On March 26, 2018, the State of Florida, through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate the Hillsborough County lead Nonattainment Area (“Hillsborough Area” or “Area”) to attainment for the 2008 lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to approve an accompanying State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for the Area. The Hillsborough Area is comprised of a 1.5 kilometer (km) radius in Tampa, Florida, surrounding the Envirofocus Technologies, LLC facility (Envirofocus). EPA is taking final action to determine that the Hillsborough Area is attaining the 2008 lead NAAQS; to approve the SIP revision containing the State's maintenance plan for maintaining attainment of the 2008 lead standard and to incorporate the maintenance plan into the SIP; and to redesignate the Hillsborough Area to attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0182. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andres Febres, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Febres can be reached by phone at (404) 562-8966 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA promulgated a revised primary and secondary lead NAAQS of 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 lead NAAQS are met when the maximum arithmetic 3-month mean concentration for a 3-year period, as determined in accordance with appendix R of 40 CFR part 50, is less than or equal to 0.15 µg/m3. See 40 CFR 50.16. Ambient air quality monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness requirement.

    EPA designated the Hillsborough Area as a nonattainment area for the 2008 lead NAAQS on November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), effective December 31, 2010, using 2007-2009 ambient air quality data. On March 26, 2018, Florida submitted a request for EPA to redesignate the Hillsborough Area to attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS and submitted an associated SIP revision containing a maintenance plan for the Area. In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), published June 19, 2018 (83 FR 28402), EPA proposed to determine that the Hillsborough Area is attaining the 2008 lead NAAQS, based on complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient monitoring data for the 2014-2016 time period and continues to attain based on complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient monitoring data for the 2015-2017 time period; proposed to approve the SIP revision containing the State's maintenance plan for maintaining attainment of the 2008 lead standard; and proposed to redesignate the Hillsborough Area to attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS.1 The details of Florida's SIP revision and redesignation request, as well as the rationale for EPA's actions, are further explained in the NPRM. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before July 19, 2018. EPA did not receive any adverse comments on the proposed actions.

    1 As mentioned in the NPRM, at the time of Florida's redesignation request, 2014-2016 data was the most recent quality-assured, complete, and certified data. When EPA took preliminary action to approve, 2015-2017 quality-assured, complete, and certified data was available, which continued to show that the Area is attaining the standard. In addition, preliminary 2018 data also indicates that the Area continues to attain the standard.

    II. What are the effects of these actions?

    Approval of Florida's redesignation request changes the legal designation of the portion of Hillsborough County, Florida, that is designated as nonattainment, found at 40 CFR 81.310, from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. Approval of Florida's associated SIP revision also incorporates a plan into the SIP for maintaining the 2008 lead NAAQS in the Hillsborough Area through 2029.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is taking three separate but related final actions regarding Florida's March 26, 2018, redesignation request and associated SIP revision for the Hillsborough Area.

    First, EPA is determining that the Area attained the 2008 lead NAAQS based on complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient monitoring data for the 2014-2016 period and that the Area continues to attain the standard based on complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient monitoring data for the 2015-2017 period.

    Second, EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the Area and incorporating it into the Florida SIP. As described in the NPRM, the maintenance plan demonstrates that the Area will continue to maintain the 2008 lead NAAQS through 2029.

    Third, EPA is approving Florida's request for redesignation of the Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. This final rule approves the redesignation request for the Hillsborough Area and changes the official designation of the portion of Hillsborough County, Florida, bounded by a 1.5 km radius centered at UTM coordinates 364104 meters East, 3093830 meters North, Zone 17, which surrounds Envirofocus, as found at 40 CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, these actions merely approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For this reason, these actions:

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

    • Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals and redesignations are exempted under Executive Order 12866;

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

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

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

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

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

    • Are not significant regulatory actions subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

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

    • Will not have disproportionate human health or environmental effects under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 13, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

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

    40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Onis “Trey” Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

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

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

    Subpart K—Florida 2. Section 52.520(e), is amended by adding an entry for “2008 Lead NAAQS Maintenance Plan for the Hillsborough Area” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.520 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved Florida Non-Regulatory Provisions Provision State effective date EPA approval date Federal Register notice Explanation *         *         *         *         *         *         * 2008 Lead NAAQS Maintenance Plan for the Hillsborough Area 3/26/2018 9/11/2018 [Insert Federal Register citation].
    PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    4. In § 81.310, the table entitled “Florida—2008 Lead NAAQS” is amended under “Tampa, FL” by revising the entry for “Hillsborough County (part)” to read as follows:
    § 81.310 Florida. Florida—2008 Lead NAAQS Designated area Designation for the 2008 NAAQS a Date 1 Type Tampa, FL: Hillsborough County (part) Area is located within a 1.5 km radius centered at UTM coordinates 364104 meters E, 3093830 meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the EnviroFocus Technologies facility 9/11/2018 Attainment. *         *         *         *         *         *         * a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 December 31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19596 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0263; FRL-9982-72] 2-Propenoic Acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer With butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate; Tolerance Exemption AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate; when used as an inert ingredient in a pesticide chemical formulation. Spring Trading Company on behalf of BASF Corporation submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate on food or feed commodities.

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 11, 2018. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 13, 2018, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0263, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

    C. Can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0263 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before November 13, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0263, by one of the following methods.

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

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

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

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

    II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of June 14, 2018 (83 FR 27743) (FRL-9978-41), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the receipt of a pesticide petition (PP IN-11151) filed by Spring Trading Company on behalf of BASF Corporation, 100 Park Avenue, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.960 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate; CAS Reg. No. 58499-26-6. That document included a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner and solicited comments on the petitioner's request. The Agency did not receive any comments.

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

    III. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings

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

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. In the case of certain chemical substances that are defined as polymers, the Agency has established a set of criteria to identify categories of polymers expected to present minimal or no risk. The definition of a polymer is given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and the exclusion criteria for identifying these low-risk polymers are described in 40 CFR 723.250(d). 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate conforms to the definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR 723.250(b) and meets the following criteria that are used to identify low-risk polymers.

    1. The polymer is not a cationic polymer nor is it reasonably anticipated to become a cationic polymer in a natural aquatic environment.

    2. The polymer does contain as an integral part of its composition at least two of the atomic elements carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon, and sulfur.

    3. The polymer does not contain as an integral part of its composition, except as impurities, any element other than those listed in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(2)(ii).

    4. The polymer is neither designed nor can it be reasonably anticipated to substantially degrade, decompose, or depolymerize.

    5. The polymer is manufactured or imported from monomers and/or reactants that are already included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory or manufactured under an applicable TSCA section 5 exemption.

    6. The polymer is not a water absorbing polymer with a number average molecular weight (MW) greater than or equal to 10,000 daltons.

    7. The polymer does not contain certain perfluoroalkyl moieties consisting of a CF3- or longer chain length as listed in 40 CFR 723.250(d)(6).

    Additionally, the polymer also meets as required the following exemption criteria specified in 40 CFR 723.250(e).

    8. The polymer's number average MW of 3,600 is greater than 1,000 and less than 10,000 daltons. The polymer contains less than 10% oligomeric material below MW 500 and less than 25% oligomeric material below MW 1,000, and the polymer does not contain any reactive functional groups.

    Thus, 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate meets the criteria for a polymer to be considered low risk under 40 CFR 723.250. Based on its conformance to the criteria in this unit, no mammalian toxicity is anticipated from dietary, inhalation, or dermal exposure to 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate.

    IV. Aggregate Exposures

    For the purposes of assessing potential exposure under this exemption, EPA considered that 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate could be present in all raw and processed agricultural commodities and drinking water, and that non-occupational non-dietary exposure was possible. The number average MW of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate is 3,600 daltons. Generally, a polymer of this size would be poorly absorbed through the intact gastrointestinal tract or through intact human skin. Since 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate conform to the criteria that identify a low-risk polymer, there are no concerns for risks associated with any potential exposure scenarios that are reasonably foreseeable. The Agency has determined that a tolerance is not necessary to protect the public health.

    V. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of Toxicity

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

    EPA has not found 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

    VI. Additional Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base unless EPA concludes that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Due to the expected low toxicity of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate, EPA has not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the same reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.

    VII. Determination of Safety

    Based on the conformance to the criteria used to identify a low-risk polymer, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate.

    VIII. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

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

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.

    The Codex has not established a MRL for 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate.

    IX. Conclusion

    Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting residues of 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe.

    X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    XI. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Michael Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.960, alphabetically add the following polymer “2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate, minimum number average molecular weight (in amu), 3,600” to the table to read as follows:
    §  180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance. Polymer CAS No. *         *         *         *         *         *         * 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-oxiranylmethyl ester, polymer with butyl 2-propenoate, ethenylbenzene and 2-ethylhexyl 2-propenoate, minimum number average molecular weight (in amu), 3,600 58499-26-6 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2018-19758 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0591; FRL-9980-90] Cloquintocet-mexyl; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the inert ingredient cloquintocet-mexyl (CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2) in or on teff commodities when used in formulations with the active ingredients florasulam and fluroxypyr 1-methylhelptyl ester. The Interregional Research Project Number 4 requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 11, 2018. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 13, 2018 and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0591, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0591 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before November 13, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0591, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

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

    II. Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of March 21, 2018 (83 FR 12311) (FRL-9974-76), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-11030) by the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.560 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid, [(5-chloro-8-quinolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester) (CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinlinoxyacetic acid), for use as an inert ingredient (safener) in combination with the active ingredients florasulam, fluroxypyr 1-methylhelptyl ester and pyroxsulam in or on teff, forage at 0.2 ppm; teff, grain at 0.1 ppm; teff, hay at 0.5 ppm; and teff, straw at 0.1 ppm parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), the petitioner, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no relevant comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    Based upon the fact that tolerances for cloquintocet-mexyl when used with the active ingredient pyroxsulam have previously been established under 40 CFR 180.560, the Agency's evaluation of the subject tolerance petition is limited to the use of cloquintocet-mexyl with the active ingredients florasulam and fluroxypyr 1-methylhelptyl ester on teff only.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid, [(5-chloro-8-quinolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid) in or on teff forage, grain, hay and straw, consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2).

    In the Federal Register of August 2, 2016 (81 FR 50630) (FRL-9947-78), EPA established tolerances for residues of cloquintocet-mexyl and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid) when used in pesticide formulations containing the active ingredient halauxifen-methyl, in or on barley grain, barley hay, barley straw, and wheat forage, wheat grain, wheat hay, and wheat straw. EPA is relying upon the risk assessments that supported the findings made in the August 2, 2016, Federal Register document in support of this action. The toxicity profile of cloquintocet-mexyl has not changed, and the previous risk assessments that supported the establishment of those tolerances remain valid.

    The Agency evaluated the request to establish tolerances in or on teff forage, grain, hay, and straw. Teff is prepared like other whole grains, such as rice and barley, and may also be used to make flour in a manner similar to wheat and other cereal grains. In considering likely residue levels on teff, EPA concludes that because of the similarity in application rates for pesticides containing cloquintocet-mexyl between teff and wheat, the likely decline in residue levels as teff moves through commerce, and the similarities to other small grains in terms of morphology, taxonomy and cultural practices, residue levels of cloquintocet-mexyl on teff will be similar to residue levels on wheat. The lack of teff consumption data being reported in the available food consumption data indicates a very low overall consumption of teff in the United States. When teff is consumed in the U.S., it is typically consumed in place of wheat. Using these assumptions regarding likely residue levels and consumption, EPA concludes that aggregate exposure and risk estimates resulting from cloquintocet-mexyl residues in/on teff would not be substantially different than those presented in the most recent human health risk assessment and published in the August 2, 2016 final rule. As those risk estimates were not of concern to the Agency, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to cloquintocet-mexyl residues. For a detailed discussion of the aggregate risk assessments and determination of safety for these tolerances, please refer to the August 2, 2016, Federal Register document and its supporting documents, available at http://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0843. Further information about EPA's determination that an updated risk assessment was not necessary may be found in the document, “Cloquintocet-mexyl-Human Health Risk Assessment of Tolerances without a U.S. Registration for Use on Teff” in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0299.

    For specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by cloquintocet-mexyl as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies, the reader is referred to the final rule published in the Federal Register of December 16, 2005 (70 FR 74679) (FRL-7753-4); Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0234.

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology, chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HPLC-UV for cloquintocet-mexyl and its acid metabolite, are available to enforce the tolerance expression.

    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected]

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.

    The Codex has not established a MRL for cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid, [(5-chloro-8-quiniolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinlinoxyacetic acid) on teff.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid, [(5-chloro-8-quiniolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinlinoxyacetic acid), for use as an inert ingredient (safener) when used in formulations with the active ingredients florasulam and fluroxypyr 1-methylhelptyl ester in or on teff, forage at 0.2 ppm; teff, grain at 0.1 ppm; teff, hay at 0.5 ppm; and teff, straw at 0.1 ppm.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Michael L. Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.560, revise the introductory text of paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 180.560 Cloquintocet-mexyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the inert ingredient cloquintocet-mexyl, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the following table when used as a safener in pesticide formulations containing the active ingredients clodinafop-propargyl (wheat only), dicamba (wheat only), flucarbazone-sodium (wheat only), halauxifen-methyl (wheat or barley), pinoxaden (wheat or barley), pyroxsulam (wheat or teff), florasulam (teff), or fluroxypyr 1-methylheptyl ester (teff). Compliance with the tolerance levels specified is to be determined by measuring the combined residues of cloquintocet-mexyl, (acetic acid [(5-chloro-8-quinolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester; CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid), expressed as cloquintocet-mexyl, in or on the following commodities:

    [FR Doc. 2018-19757 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0505; FRL-9982-21] Spiromesifen; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of spiromesifen in or on coffee. Bayer CropScience requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 11, 2018. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 13, 2018, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0505, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    Potentially affected entities may include:

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0505 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before November 13, 2018. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0505, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

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

    II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of February 27, 2018 (83 FR 8408) (FRL-9972-17), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 7E8584) by Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of spiromesifen; 2-oxo-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-4-yl 3,3-dimethylbutanoate, and its enol metabolite (4-hydroxy-3-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-1-oxaspiro[4.4]non-3-en-2-one calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of spiromesifen in or on the raw agricultural commodities: Coffee bean, green at 0.20 parts per million (ppm); coffee, instant at 0.20 ppm; and coffee bean, roasted at 0.20 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.

    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has modified the commodities for which tolerances are being established. The reason for these changes is explained in Unit IV.D.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

    A. Toxicological Profile

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

    Following oral administration of spiromesifen, the target organs included the thyroid gland for rats and dogs (increased thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), increased thyroxine binding capacity, decreased triiodothyronine (T3) and thyroxine (T4) levels, colloidal alteration, and thyroid follicular cell hypertrophy), the liver for rats and dogs (increased alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase (ALT), and decreased cholesterol and triglycerides), the spleen for rats (atrophy, decreased spleen cell count, and increased macrophages), and the adrenal gland for mice (discoloration, decrease in fine vesiculation, and the presence of cytoplasmic eosinophilia in zona fasciculata cells). For rats, additional effects included reduced body weights and clinical signs (piloerection, reduced motility, spastic gait, and increased reactivity when touched).

    There were no adverse effects in rats following dermal exposure up to the limit dose (1,000 milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day)). Decreased spleen weights were also observed for rats in a 5-day inhalation toxicity study, along with gross pathological findings in the lung (dark red areas or foci) and clinical signs (e.g., tremors, clonic-tonic convulsions, reduced activity, bradypnea, etc.).

    While the clinical signs observed in rats following oral and inhalation exposures could indicate neurotoxicity, there was no evidence of neurotoxicity in the rest of the toxicological database, including the acute neurotoxicity study up to the limit dose (2,000 milligrams/kilograms (mg/kg)) and the subchronic neurotoxicity study; however, the doses tested in the subchronic neurotoxicity study were lower than the doses causing clinical signs in the 90-day dietary study in rats. There was no evidence of immunotoxicity in an antibody plaque-cell forming assay.

    There was no evidence of increased pre- or post-natal susceptibility. In the developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, maternal effects were observed in the absence of fetal effects. In the rat two-generation reproductive toxicity study, the reported parental effects, consisting of decreased spleen weights (relative and absolute) and a decreasing number of ovarian follicles, occurred at a dose level that also caused pup body weight decrements during lactation.

    Spiromesifen is classified as “Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans” based on the absence of treatment-related tumors in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies. There was no concern for mutagenicity or genotoxicity.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by spiromesifen as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the document titled, “Spiromesifen. Human Health Risk Assessment in Support of Proposed Tolerance for Residues of in/on Imported Coffee” in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0505.

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to determine the dose at which the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified. Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to calculate a safe exposure level—generally referred to as a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for spiromesifen used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

    Table 1—Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Spiromesifen for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment Exposure/scenario Point of departure and uncertainty/safety factors RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
  • assessment
  • Study and toxicological effects
    Acute dietary (All populations) No appropriate toxicological effect attributable to a single dose was observed. Therefore, a dose and endpoint were not identified for this risk assessment. Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL = 2.2 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • Chronic RfD = 0.022 mg/kg/day
  • cPAD = 0.022 mg/kg/day
  • Two-Generation Reproduction Study—Rats
  • Parental LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg bw/day based on significantly decreased spleen weight (absolute and relative in parental females and F1 males) and significantly decreased growing ovarian follicles in females.
  • Oral short-term (1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term (1-6 months) NOAEL = 2.2 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • LOC for MOE = 100 Two-Generation Reproduction Study—Rats
  • Parental LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg bw/day based on significantly decreased spleen weight (absolute and relative in parental females and F1 males) and significantly decreased growing ovarian follicles in females.
  • Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term (1-6 months) Inhalation study NOAEC = 0.0794 mg/L/day
  • UFA = 3x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • LOC for MOE = 30 5-Day Inhalation Toxicity Study—RatsLOAEC = 0.5143 mg/L/day based on clinical signs (tremors, clonic-tonic convulsions, reduced activity, bradypnea, labored breathing, vocalization, avoidance reaction, giddiness, piloerection, limp, emaciation, cyanosis, squatted posture, apathy and salivation), gross pathology (dark red areas or foci in the lungs and bloated stomachs and pale livers), and decreased spleen weights.
    Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: “Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans” based on the absence of treatment-related tumors in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). NOAEC = non-observed adverse-effect concentration. LOAEC = lowest-observed adverse-effect concentration.
    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to spiromesifen, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing spiromesifen tolerances in 40 CFR 180.607. EPA assessed dietary exposures from spiromesifen in food as follows:

    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for spiromesifen; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA; 2003-2008). As to residue levels in food, the chronic (food and water) analysis assumed 100 percent crop treated (PCT) and tolerance-level residues or tolerance-level residues adjusted to account for the residue of concern.

    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that spiromesifen does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.

    iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for spiromesifen. Tolerance level residues or tolerance-level residues adjusted to account for the residue of concern and 100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for spiromesifen in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of spiromesifen. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.

    Based on the Provisional Cranberry model and Pesticide Water Calculator—Groundwater (PWC-GW) model, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of spiromesifen for chronic exposures are estimated to be 188 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 116 ppb for ground water.

    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For the chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 188 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).

    Spiromesifen is currently registered for the following uses that could result in residential exposures: Ornamentals. EPA assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: Short-term inhalation exposure to residential handlers is expected. A dermal assessment (handler and post-application) was not conducted since no hazard was identified via the dermal route. Post-application inhalation exposures were not assessed due to the low vapor pressure and the expected dilution in outdoor sites. Post-application incidental oral exposure is considered unlikely since the use is restricted to ornamental plants (turf treatment is not permitted). Therefore, only short-term inhalation exposure to handlers was assessed. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.

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

    EPA has not found spiromesifen to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and spiromesifen does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that spiromesifen does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.

    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence of increased pre- or post-natal susceptibility. In the developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, maternal effects were observed in the absence of fetal effects. In the rat two-generation reproductive toxicity study, the reported parental effects, consisting of decreased spleen weights (relative and absolute) and a decreasing number of ovarian follicles, occurred at a dose level that also caused pup body weight decrements during lactation.

    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF were reduced to 1x. That decision is based on the following findings:

    i. The toxicity database for spiromesifen is complete.

    ii. There is no indication that spiromesifen is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to account for neurotoxicity.

    iii. There is no evidence that spiromesifen results in increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction study.

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to spiromesifen in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by spiromesifen.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.

    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, spiromesifen is not expected to pose an acute risk.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to spiromesifen from food and water will utilize 68% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of spiromesifen is not expected.

    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Spiromesifen is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with short-term residential exposures to spiromesifen.

    Because the level of concern (LOC) for inhalation (LOC for MOEs <30) and oral (LOC for MOEs <100) exposure differ, the aggregate assessment was calculated using the aggregate risk index (ARI) approach. The ARI was devised as a way to aggregate MOEs that have dissimilar uncertainty factors. The ARI is an extension of the MOE concept and as with the MOE, risk increases as the ARI decreases. An ARI that is greater than or equal to 1 is not of concern.

    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and residential exposures result in an aggregate ARI of 1.87. Because EPA's level of concern for spiromesifen is an ARI of 1 or below, this ARI is not of concern.

    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level).

    An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, spiromesifen is not registered for any use patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for spiromesifen.

    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies, spiromesifen is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.

    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to spiromesifen residues.

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.

    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected]

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.

    Codex has a MRL for residues of only spiromesifen in/on coffee beans of 0.05 ppm. Since the residue expression for the U.S. and Codex tolerances differ and since the maximum combined residues of spiromesifen and BSN 2060-enol in/on coffee green bean from the field trials was greater than 0.1 ppm, harmonization with the Codex expression/value is not possible. Note that BSN 2060-enol is included in the tolerance expression due to the demonstrated degradation of parent to BSN 2060-enol during storage.

    C. Response to Comments

    Three comments were submitted to the docket for this action. Two comments, one about “China's ongoing economic war against the United States” and another about air and water pollution in China relative to that of the United States, are not relevant to this action. The third comment stated in part that “the people drinking coffee should not have this toxic chemical as part of its drink.”

    The Agency recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops; however, the existing legal framework provided by section 408 of the FFDCA states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. This citizen's comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework nor have they provided any specific information or allegation that would support a finding that these tolerances are unsafe.

    D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The green coffee bean tolerance being established is identical to that proposed by the petitioner. EPA has determined that separate tolerances for the processed commodities of roasted coffee bean and instant coffee are unnecessary because the processing data indicates that combined residues of spiromesifen and BSN 2060-enol do not concentrate in roasted or instant coffee.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of spiromesifen, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on coffee, green bean at 0.20 ppm.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Michael Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.607, add alphabetically the commodity “coffee, green bean” and footnote 1 to the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
    § 180.607 Spiromesifen; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • *    *    *    *    * Coffee, green bean 1 0.20 *    *    *    *    * 1 This use has not been registered in the United States as of August 28, 2018.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19760 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 300 [Docket No. 180209155-8589-02] RIN 0648-XG458 International Fisheries; Western and Central Pacific Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species; Closure of Purse Seine Fishery on the High Seas in 2018 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; fishery closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the U.S. purse seine fishery on the high seas in the area of application of the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Convention) between the latitudes of 20° N and 20° S will close as a result of reaching the 2018 limit on purse seine fishing effort in that area. This action is necessary for the United States to implement provisions of a conservation and management measure adopted by the Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPFC or Commission) and to satisfy the obligations of the United States under the Convention, to which it is a Contracting Party.

    DATES:

    Effective 00:00 on September 18, 2018 coordinated universal time (UTC), until 24:00 on December 31, 2018 UTC.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rini Ghosh, NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office, 808-725-5033.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    U.S. purse seine fishing in the area of application of the Convention, or Convention Area, is managed, in part, under the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention Implementation Act (16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). Regulations implementing the Act are at 50 CFR part 300, subpart O. On behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, NMFS promulgates regulations under the Act as may be necessary to carry out the obligations of the United States under the Convention, including implementation of the decisions of the Commission.

    Pursuant to WCPFC Conservation and Management Measure 2017-01, NMFS issued regulations that established a limit of 1,370 fishing days that may be used by U.S. purse seine fishing vessels on the high seas between the latitudes of 20° N and 20° S in the Convention Area in calendar year 2018 (see final rule at 83 FR 33851, published July 18, 2018, codified at 50 CFR 300.223). A fishing day means any day in which a fishing vessel of the United States equipped with purse seine gear searches for fish, deploys a fish aggregating device (FAD), services a FAD, or sets a purse seine, with the exception of setting a purse seine solely for the purpose of testing or cleaning the gear and resulting in no catch (see definition at 50 CFR 300.211).

    Based on data submitted in logbooks and other available information, NMFS expects that the 2018 limit of 1,370 fishing days will be reached, and in accordance with the procedures established at 50 CFR 300.223(a), announces that the purse seine fishery on the high seas between the latitudes of 20° N and 20° S in the Convention Area will be closed starting at 00:00 on September 18, 2018 UTC, and will remain closed until 24:00 on December 31, 2018 UTC. Accordingly, it shall be prohibited for any fishing vessel of the United States equipped with purse seine gear to be used for fishing on the high seas between the latitudes of 20° N and 20° S in the Convention Area from 00:00 on September 18, 2018 UTC until 24:00 December 31, 2018 UTC, except that such vessels will not be prohibited from bunkering in that area during that period (50 CFR 300.223(a)). Fishing means using any vessel, vehicle, aircraft or hovercraft for any of the following activities, or attempting to do so: (1) Searching for, catching, taking, or harvesting fish; (2) engaging in any other activity which can reasonably be expected to result in the locating, catching, taking, or harvesting of fish for any purpose; (3) placing, searching for, or recovering fish aggregating devices or associated electronic equipment such as radio beacons; (4) engaging in any operations at sea directly in support of, or in preparation for, any of the activities previously described in elements (1) through (3) of this definition, including, but not limited to, bunkering; or (5) engaging in transshipment at sea, either unloading or loading fish (see definition at 50 CFR 300.211). As noted above, bunkering will not be prohibited in the closure area during the closure period. This rule does not prohibit lawful fishing with purse seine gear within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone within the Convention Area.

    Classification

    There is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and opportunity for public comment on this action. Compliance with the notice and comment requirement would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest, since NMFS would be unable to ensure that the 2018 limit on purse seine fishing effort on the high seas between the latitudes of 20° N and 20° S in the Convention Area is not exceeded. This action is based on the best available information on U.S. purse seine fishing effort in the limit area. The action is necessary for the United States to comply with its obligations under the Convention and is important for the conservation and management of bigeye tuna, yellowfin tuna, and skipjack tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean. For the same reasons, there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to establish an effective date less than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.

    This action is required by 50 CFR 300.223(a) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.

    Dated: September 6, 2018. Margo Schulze-Haugen, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19710 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 176 Tuesday, September 11, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 431 [EERE-2017-BT-STD-0048] Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Motors, Notice of Request for Direct Final Rule AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy (DOE).

    ACTION:

    Notice of joint stakeholder proposal for direct final rule, and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 14, 2018, the Department of Energy (DOE) received a petition submitted by a variety of entities (collectively, the Joint Stakeholders or the Petitioners) asking DOE to issue a direct final rule for energy conservation standards for dedicated-purpose pool pump (DPPP) motors. Through this notification, DOE seeks comment on whether to proceed with the proposal, as well as any data or information that could be used in DOE's determination whether to issue a direct final rule.

    DATES:

    Written comments and information are requested on or before October 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments, identified by “Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Proposal” and Docket number “EERE-2017-BT-STD-0048”, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number “EERE-2017-BT-STD-0048” in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, or comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available. The docket web page can be found https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2017-BT-STD-0048. The docket web page will contain simple instruction on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585, (202) 586-9870. Email: [email protected]

    Mary Greene, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, Email: [email protected]; (202) 586-1817

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As amended by the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015), the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA or, in context, the Act), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as codified), authorizes DOE to issue a direct final rule establishing an energy conservation standard for a product on receipt of a statement submitted jointly by interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of view (including representatives of manufacturers of covered products, States, and efficiency advocates) as determined by the Secretary of Energy (Secretary). That statement must contain recommendations with respect to an energy or water conservation standard that are in accordance with the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or 42 U.S.C. 6316, as applicable. In publishing the petition in its entirety for public comment, DOE is seeking views on whether to proceed with the petition as suggested by the Joint Stakeholders.1 DOE is also interested in the views of parties that were not part of the Joint Stakeholder group to aid in determining if the Joint Stakeholders constitute a group of interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of view.

    1 The Joint Stakeholders include: Association of Pool & Spa Professionals, Alliance to Save Energy, American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Arizona Public Service, California Energy Commission, California Investor Owned Utilities, Consumer Federation of America, Florida Consumer Action Network, Hayward Industries, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, Nidec Motor Corporation, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Regal Beloit Corporation, Speck Pumps, Texas ROSE (Ratepayers' Organization to Save Energy), Waterway Plastics, WEG, Zodiac Pool Systems.

    If DOE determines to issue the direct final rule for DPPPs, the agency must simultaneously publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) that proposes an identical energy conservation standard and provides for a public comment period of at least 110 days. 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4). Not later than 120 days after issuance of the direct final rule, if DOE receives one or more adverse comments or an alternative joint recommendation relating to the direct final rule, the Secretary must determine whether the comments or alternative recommendation may provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or other applicable law. If the Secretary makes such a determination, DOE must withdraw the direct final rule and proceed with the simultaneously published NOPR. DOE must publish in the Federal Register the reasons why the direct final rule was withdrawn.

    By seeking comment on whether to issue a direct final rule in accordance with the Joint Stakeholders' petition, DOE takes no position at this time regarding whether the submitted petition satisfies EPCA's requirement that such a statement must be submitted by interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of view and that the proposal must be in compliance with the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or 42 U.S.C. 6316, as applicable. Further, DOE takes no position at this time regarding the merits of the petition itself.

    DOE notes that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., provides among other things, that `[e]ach agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment or repeal of a rule.” (5 U.S.C. 553(e)). DOE requests comment on whether it should consider the petition from the Joint Stakeholders under this authority should it determine it cannot proceed with consideration of the proposal under the direct final rule authority. Again, while seeking comment on this issue, DOE takes no position at this time regarding the merits of the petition itself.

    Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by October 26, 2018 comments and information regarding this proposal.

    Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and contact information prior to submitting comments. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.

    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.

    Do not submit to http://www.regulations.gov information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section.

    DOE processes submissions made through http://www.regulations.gov before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that http://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.

    Submitting comments via hand delivery, or mail. Comments and documents via hand delivery or mail will also be posted to http://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments.

    Include contact information in your cover letter each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.

    Comments, data, and other information submitted electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not include any special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author.

    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time.

    Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

    Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat submitted information as confidential include (1) a description of the items, (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as confidential within the industry, (3) whether the information is generally known by or available from other sources, (4) whether the information has previously been made available to others without obligation concerning its confidentiality, (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from public disclosure, (6) when such information might lost its confidential character due to the passage of time, and (7) why disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.

    It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure).

    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of its process for considering rulemaking petitions. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the comment period. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE in determining how to proceed with a petition. Anyone who wishes to be added to DOE mailing list to receive future notifications and information about this petition should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at [email protected]

    Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notification of petition for rulemaking.

    Signed in Washington, DC on August 31, 2018. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Joint Statement of Joint Stakeholder Proposal for Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump Motors Docket No. EERE-2017-BT-STD-0048 August 14, 2018 Association of Pool & Spa Professionals Alliance to Save Energy American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy Appliance Standards Awareness Project Arizona Public Service California Energy Commission California Investor Owned Utilities Consumer Federation of America Florida Consumer Action Network Hayward Industries National Electrical Manufacturers Association Natural Resources Defense Council Nidec Motor Corporation Northwest Power and Conservation Council Pentair Water Pool and Spa Regal Beloit Corporation Speck Pumps Texas ROSE (Ratepayers' Organization to Save Energy) Waterway Plastics WEG Zodiac Pool Systems I. Introduction and Overview

    In January 2017, the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) established the first national energy-efficiency standards for dedicated-purpose pool pumps (“DPPPs”) through the adoption of a direct final rule (“DFR”). DOE confirmed the adoption of the standards and the effective date and compliance date in a notice published in May 2017. The compliance date of the new standards is July 19, 2021. The DPPP standards were negotiated by an Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (ASRAC) working group consisting of representatives of pool pump and motor manufacturers, state government, utilities, and efficiency advocates. For most in-ground pools, the standard levels reflect variable-speed technology. Pumps for small in-ground pools, pumps for above-ground pools, and pressure cleaner booster pumps can continue to be single-speed.

    For a small number of hours a day, pool pumps need to operate at a high speed to provide a high flow rate for mixing/cleaning, but most of the time they just need to circulate the pool water through the filtration system at a low flow rate. Variable-speed pumps can reduce energy use by about 70% relative to single-speed pumps by being able to operate at a lower speed for the hours during which the pump is circulating water for filtration. In addition to saving energy, operating the pump at a lower speed reduces noise levels, improves filtration effectiveness, and can extend the life of other pool equipment.

    The DPPP standards will provide very large savings for consumers. There are more than 8 million pools in the U.S.1 DOE estimated average life-cycle cost savings for owners of in-ground pools of $2,140 with a simple payback of less than 1 year.2 The average annual operating cost savings are about $550.3 However, the DPPP standards do not address replacement motors, which presents a significant loophole that seriously threatens both the consumer savings from the standards and the investments that manufacturers are making to comply with the standards. If the replacement motor loophole is not addressed, there will be a disruption in the market between regulated pump/motor combinations (DPPPs) and unregulated replacement motors. This would result in significant negative impacts for both consumers and domestic manufacturers.

    1http://www.apsp.org/Portals/0/2016%20Website%20Changes/2015%20Industry%20Stats/2015%20Industry%20Stats.pdf.

    2 82 Fed. Reg. 5652 (January 18, 2017). Results for standard-size self-priming pool filter pumps.

    3 82 Fed. Reg. 5715.

    The motor on a pool pump will often fail before the pump itself needs to be replaced, and motor-only replacements are common. Without a complementary standard for DPPP motors, when replacing a pool pump motor, consumers will continue to be sold inefficient, wasteful products. Today, even though variable-speed motors provide substantial savings to consumers as well as other benefits, significant market barriers prevent most consumers from realizing these benefits. When a motor on a pool pump fails, the consumer's priority must be to get the motor (or pump and motor) replaced as soon as possible in order to maintain sanitary and safe pool conditions. This means that when faced with a purchase decision, consumers have very little time to research their options. In many cases, service installers may install a replacement motor without providing any options to the consumer. Despite significant educational efforts on the part of pool pump manufacturers, service installers are often uninformed about variable-speed technology. In addition, the priority of service installers is generally to make a sale, not to provide the best option for the consumer. This is the case today even though service installers could make additional profit by selling variable-speed pumps and motors.

    The consequences of a lack of understanding of variable-speed technology will become particularly significant once the DPPP standards take effect in 2021. Most consumers do not understand that the substantial savings from a variable-speed pump come from the motor. Consumers will likely assume that replacing the motor on a variable-speed pump will have no effect on the performance of their pump. But in fact, if an existing variable-speed motor is replaced with a single-speed motor, the consumer will lose all the energy savings and other benefits (including the quieter operation) of their variable-speed pump. When looking to replace a pool pump motor, a consumer with a variable-speed pool pump that meets the DPPP standards may therefore unknowingly end up with a single-speed replacement motor that would immediately increase their electricity bills by hundreds of dollars each year and not provide the additional benefits of variable-speed technology.

    For manufacturers, a disruption in the market would lead to lower sales of regulated DPPPs and increased sales of unregulated, inefficient replacement motors. While most pool pumps are manufactured domestically, most of the motors for pool pumps are manufactured in China. Two of the major pool pump manufacturers have more than 1,400 pool equipment manufacturing jobs in North Carolina alone. Increased sales of inefficient, imported replacement motors would seriously undercut domestic manufacturers' investments in meeting the DPPP standards, putting American manufacturing jobs at risk.

    Furthermore, if DOE does not address the replacement motor loophole, individual states may step in with their own standards. Currently, there are multiple state standards for pool pumps and motors. State standards are significantly more burdensome for manufacturers than a single national standard because they may and do result in different requirements in different states and require manufacturers to set up specific distribution channels to ensure that they do not sell noncompliant products in those states. As of July 19, 2021, the current state standards for pool pumps will be replaced with a single national standard. But if DOE does not establish complementary standards for DPPP motors, manufacturers will continue to be faced with a patchwork of state standards. A single national standard for DPPP motors is strongly preferred to reduce burdens on manufacturers, ensure a level playing field across state lines, and ensure that all consumers are protected from inefficient, wasteful products, regardless of where they live.

    In comments on the 2017 DFR, multiple stakeholders urged DOE to consider complementary standards for pool pump motors. In the confirmation of effective date and compliance date for the DFR, DOE stated: “DOE plans to hold a public meeting in the near future with the interested parties to gather data and information that could lead to the consideration of energy conservation standards for replacement pool pump motors.” 4 DOE subsequently held a public meeting on August 10, 2017, where DOE presented potential scope, definitions, and metrics for DPPP motors. DOE also noted in the presentation materials from the meeting that if DOE were to “receive a consensus agreement there could be deviations from the typical process to expedite” the rulemaking.5

    4 82 Fed. Reg. 24220 (May 26, 2017).

    5https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-STD-0048-0003. Slide 10.

    After the August 2017 public meeting, representatives from pool pump and motor manufacturers, state government, utilities, and efficiency advocates (the “Joint Stakeholders”) formed a technical working group to negotiate recommended standards for DPPP motors. Appendix A to this Joint Statement includes the Joint Stakeholders' recommendations.

    The Joint Stakeholders request that DOE adopt our recommendations with a DFR rule using the Department's authority over “electric motors” and to align the compliance date for DPPP motors with the DPPP compliance date of July 19, 2021. In order to protect consumers, ensure that the significant investments that domestic manufacturers are making to comply with the DPPP standards are not undercut, and avoid a continuation of state standards, there must be no delay in the July 19, 2021 DPPP compliance date.

    II. Identity of the Joint Stakeholders

    The Association of Pool & Spa Professionals (APSP) represents over 3100 company members. APSP is the world's oldest and largest association representing swimming pool, hot tub, and spa manufacturers, distributors, manufacturers' agents, designers, builders, installers, suppliers, retailers, and service professionals. Dedicated to the growth and development of its members' businesses and to promoting the enjoyment and safety of pools and spas, APSP offers a range of services, from professional development to advancing key legislation and regulation at the federal and local levels, to consumer outreach and public safety. APSP is the only industry organization recognized by the American National Standards Institute to develop and promote national standards for pools, hot tubs, and spas.

    The Alliance to Save Energy is a non-profit, bipartisan coalition of business, government, environmental, and consumer-interest leaders that advocates for enhanced U.S. energy productivity to achieve economic growth; a cleaner environment; and greater energy security, affordability, and reliability.

    The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) acts as a catalyst to advance energy efficiency policies, programs, technologies, investments, and behaviors. We believe that the United States can harness the full potential of energy efficiency to achieve greater economic prosperity, energy security, and environmental protection for all its people.

    The Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) is a coalition that includes representatives of efficiency, consumer and environmental groups, utility companies, state government agencies, and others. Working together, the ASAP coalition seeks to advance cost-effective efficiency standards at the national and state levels through technical and policy advocacy and through outreach and education.

    Arizona Public Service is Arizona's largest and longest-serving electric company, serving more than 1.2 million customers across the state.

    The California Energy Commission (CEC) is the primary energy policy and planning agency of the State of California. The CEC regularly participates in coalition efforts and federal efficiency rulemakings to seek more stringent energy conservation regulations from DOE that will apply to California's regulated appliances, where DOE's authority to adopt new efficiency standards preempts states from issuing their own without prior DOE approval or waiver. The CEC currently has efficiency standards for pool pump and motor combinations, and has proposed to establish efficiency standards for replacement pool pump motors should national standards not be forthcoming.

    The California Investor Owned Utilities (CA IOUs), consisting of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), and Southern California Edison (SCE), represent some of the largest utility companies in the Western United States, serving over 32 million customers. The CA IOUs have been involved with pool energy efficiency for over 15 years. During that time, the CA IOUs have developed and implemented various pool efficiency rebate programs, and in 2004, proposed and supported the adoption of the first in the nation appliance standards for pool pump motors in California. These standards included a test and list requirement for pool pumps to enable the reporting of Energy Factor, a metric developed by the CA IOUs that is now used by the ENERGY STAR program.

    The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is an association of more than 250 nonprofit consumer organizations that was established in 1968 to advance the consumer interest through research, advocacy, and education. For decades, CFA has advocated for cost-effective energy efficiency standards that benefit consumers through lower energy bills.

    The Florida Consumer Action Network (FCAN) is a non-profit that advocates on issues including energy efficiency, utilities, environment, health care, and insurance. FCAN is affiliated with the Consumer Federation of America and Fair Share. FCAN stands for an America where everyone gets their fair share, does their fair share, and pays their fair share; and where everyone plays by the same rules.

    Hayward Industries, Inc. is a leading global manufacturer of residential and commercial pool equipment and industrial flow control products. Headquartered in Elizabeth, New Jersey with over 1,500 US-based employees, Hayward designs, manufactures, distributes, and markets a complete line of residential pool equipment including pumps, filters, heaters, automatic cleaners, sanitizers, automation, and lights. Hayward is a strong advocate of energy saving products as witnessed by its growing portfolio of energy efficient equipment, including a broad range of ENERGY STAR® approved variable speed pumps.

    The National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) represents nearly 350 electrical equipment and medical imaging manufacturers that make safe, reliable, and efficient products and systems. Our combined industries account for 360,000 American jobs in more than 7,000 facilities covering every state. Our industry produces $106 billion shipments of electrical equipment and medical imaging technologies per year with $36 billion exports.

    The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is a national environmental advocacy organization with over 1.3 million members and online activists. NRDC has spent decades working to build and improve DOE's federal appliance standards programs because of the important energy, environmental, consumer, and reliability benefits of appliance efficiency standards. NRDC participated in the enactment of the first federal legislation establishing efficiency standards, and has been active in all significant rulemakings since then.

    Nidec Motor Corporation is a leading manufacturer of commercial, industrial, and appliance motors and controls. The NMC product line features a full line of high efficiency motors, large and small, which serve industrial, residential, and commercial markets in applications ranging from agriculture, water treatment, mining, oil and gas, and power generation to pool and spa motors, air conditioning condensers, rooftop cooling towers, and commercial refrigeration. It also makes motors, controls, and switches for automotive and commercial markets.

    The Northwest Power and Conservation Council is an interstate compact authorized by Congress in the Northwest Power Act of 1980 (P.L.96-501) to ensure that the region has an adequate, efficient, economical, and reliable power supply system. The members of the Council are appointed by the Governors of the four Northwest states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington.

    Pentair is a leading manufacturer of smart, sustainable water solutions for homes, business and industry around the world. Our industry leading and proven portfolio of solutions enables people, business and industry to access clean, safe water, reduce water consumption, and recover and reuse it. Whether it's improving, moving or helping people enjoy water, we help manage the world's most precious resource. A strategic business of Pentair, Pentair Aquatics Systems is based in Cary, N.C., and is one of the world's leading providers of premium pumps, filters, heaters, controls, cleaners, lighting systems, water features, and maintenance products for swimming pools and spas.

    Regal is a manufacturing company with over 5,770 employees in the USA. Regal is a leading manufacturer of electric motors, electrical motion controls, power generation and transmission products with sales of over $3.4B in 2017. Regal is a technology leader in high-efficiency products.

    Speck Pumps is a leading international manufacturer of high-quality pumps for commercial and industrial applications.

    Texas ROSE (Texas Ratepayers' Organization to Save Energy) is a non-profit organization dedicated to helping Texans' get affordable electricity and a healthy environment. We provide straightforward information to consumers and advocate for customer protections for consumers, energy efficiency programs, and customer education by providing information to the Public Utility Commission (PUC), Austin City Council and the Texas Legislature. Texas ROSE has been involved in helping to create utility programs to provide lower rates for low-income consumers and weatherization programs to permanently lower energy use and utility bills.

    Waterway Plastics is proud to design, engineer and manufacture pool and spa pumps, filters, white goods and accessories and other pool and spa products in Oxnard, CA, USA.

    WEG is a manufacturer of industrial and commercial components and systems solutions for customers across multiple markets around the world. WEG is 30,000 employees strong across 12 manufacturing locations and 28 commercial sites, holding the distinction of having largest manufacturing site in the world at its headquarters in Jarugua Du Sol, Brazil. This campus is 3.57M square feet and occupied by nearly 13,000 employees. WEG has over 3,000 employees in the US between the US Headquarters in Atlanta, an industrial motor manufacturing location in Minneapolis, a transformer manufacturer in Missouri, and the Global Center of Commercial Motors Excellence in Bluffton, IN. The US is served out of these locations, with manufactured product support out of Mexico and Brazil. Over half of the product produced in the US is applied into pumping applications, whether it be clean water or dirty, or even hydroelectric power generation. WEG has traditionally focused it sales from its genesis in 1942 up to around 1985 in the local Brazilian market, though through a combination of acquisition and organic development, export sales has increased by an amazing 36 times, with infrastructure and skills to continue a strong growth pattern well into the future.

    Zodiac Pool Systems, LLC is a global leader in swimming pool and spa products and services. Zodiac is recognized as a leading, global provider of premium, innovative pool and spa products, equipment and solutions for in-ground residential swimming pools and spas. Zodiac is committed to designing and producing energy efficient, earth-friendly pool products and systems.

    III. Development of the Recommendations

    The Joint Stakeholders' recommendations were developed during a series of meetings between December 2017 and June 2018 of a technical working group consisting of pool pump and motor manufacturers, state government, utilities, and efficiency advocates. The goal of the working group was to develop a set of consensus recommendations for standards for DPPP motors to align with the standards for DPPPs and to take effect concurrently with the DPPP standards on July 19, 2021.

    IV. The Joint Stakeholders' Proposal

    The Joint Stakeholders' proposal (included as Appendix A) includes recommendations for definitions, scope of coverage, prescriptive requirements, labeling, reporting, compliance date, and verification. Importantly, our proposal would not result in any change to the current DPPP standards and instead is complementary. There are also no new costs associated with our proposal because the analysis for the DPPP rulemaking already accounted for the costs of motor replacements.

    A. Definitions

    Our proposed definitions include a definition for “dedicated-purpose pool pump motor,” which covers any motor that is certified to UL 1004-10 6 and/or designed and/or marketed for use in DPPP applications. Our proposed definitions also define motors that meet the definition for “dedicated- purpose pool pump motor” but that would be exempt from the standards that we are proposing. These definitions for exempted motors were crafted such as to minimize the risk of any potential loopholes.

    6 Note: UL 1004-10 is in the process of being developed. We will provide an update to DOE once the UL standard has been published.

    B. Scope of Coverage

    DPPP motors are electric motors. Our proposed scope of coverage includes DPPP motors with total horsepower (THP) less than or equal to 5 THP. The 5 THP upper bound aligns with the upper bound for hydraulic horsepower (HHP) in the standards for DPPPs for self-priming and non-self-priming pool filter pumps. (5 THP is roughly equivalent to 2.5 HHP.) Our proposed scope of coverage would exempt six types of pool pump motors from our proposed standards: polyphase motors capable of operating without a drive (and distributed in commerce without a drive), waterfall pump motors, rigid electric spa pump motors, storable electric spa pump motors, integral cartridge-filter pool pump motors, and integral sand-filter pool pump motors. These exemptions align with the DPPP standards.7 The exemption for polyphase motors is designed to exclude three-phase motors that are intended for use in commercial applications (where there is three-phase power available), but to include three-phase motors that operate with a drive that converts single-phase power to three-phase power and are intended for use in residential applications.

    7 Note: Integral cartridge filter and integral sand filter pool pumps are subject to the DPPP standards, but they do not have to meet an energy performance requirement.

    Our proposed standards (described below) would apply to DPPP motors that are sold as replacements as well as motors that are part of DPPPs. All pool pump motors would thus be treated equally and subject to the same requirements. Importantly, our proposed scope of coverage includes DPPP motors in DPPPs regardless of whether the DPPP is manufactured domestically or imported. If motors in imported DPPPs were not covered, manufacturers that manufacture DPPPs domestically would be put at a disadvantage. Our proposed scope of coverage will thus provide a level playing field and protect U.S. manufacturing.

    C. Prescriptive Requirements

    Our proposal for standards for DPPP motors is a prescriptive approach. We believe that a prescriptive approach is the quickest and simplest way to address the replacement motor loophole. We originally considered a performance-based approach. However, a performance approach for DPPP motors would require an entirely new metric and test procedure, which would significantly delay implementation of our proposal, thereby increasing manufacturer burden. Our proposed prescriptive requirements align with the DPPP standards while avoiding the need for a test procedure rulemaking. Importantly, our prescriptive approach still gives manufacturers significant flexibility to provide a wide range of efficient motor options to consumers including different speed options and user interfaces.

    Our proposed standards include three prescriptive requirements that align with the DPPP standards. First, DPPP motors would be prohibited from operating with a capacitor start induction run (CSIR) or split phase (SP) configuration at maximum operating speed. This requirement aligns the motor types for DPPP motors with the DPPP standards. This requirement is also consistent with existing state standards in Arizona, California, Connecticut, and Washington. Prohibiting these inefficient motor configurations will help prevent low-quality foreign imports from undercutting U.S. manufacturers and ensure that consumers are not stuck with very inefficient motors that would increase their electricity bills.

    Second, DPPP motors with THP greater than or equal to 1.15 THP would be required to meet the definition of “variable-speed control dedicated-purpose pool pump motor,” which we have defined. The 1.15 THP threshold aligns with the 0.711 HHP threshold in the DPPP standards for self-priming pool filter pumps. (1.15 THP is roughly equivalent to 0.711 HHP.) Almost all motors used in non-self-priming pool filter pumps and pressure cleaner booster pumps have THPs less than 1.15 THP. Therefore, DPPP motors that must meet the definition of “variable-speed control dedicated-purpose pool pump motor” will almost exclusively be motors for self-priming pool filter pumps, aligning with the DPPP standards.

    Our proposed definition for “variable-speed control dedicated-purpose pool pump motor” would include motors that provide at least four speed options. Providing the choice of a variety of speeds would align with the DPPP standards, which, for most in-ground pumps, are based on the performance of pumps with variable-speed motors. At the same time, our proposed definition would provide manufacturers flexibility in developing new products. In particular, our proposed definition would allow manufacturers to introduce lower-cost motors that are not “true” variable-speed products, but that still provide very substantial energy savings and performance consistent with the DPPP standards. Our proposed definition for “variable-speed control dedicated-purpose pool pump motor” also includes specifications for how these motors must be distributed in commerce to ensure that they have the ability to operate at a variety of speeds in the field (e.g., be distributed with a variable speed drive), which align with the DPPP standards. Since variable-speed replacement motors may be sold without a drive (e.g., if the existing installed drive is still functioning), we have also provided the option for a variable-speed motor to be sold without a drive as long as it cannot operate without a drive. Our proposed definition for “variable-speed control dedicated-purpose pool pump motor” also includes specifications regarding high speed override capability and default settings to help ensure that motors meeting this definition deliver the expected savings for consumers.

    Finally, DPPP motors with freeze protection controls would be subject to the same requirements as DPPPs with freeze protection controls. These requirements are designed to ensure that motors with freeze protection controls do not end up running for more hours than are required to provide adequate freeze protection, resulting in significant wasted energy and unnecessary additional electricity costs for consumers.

    D. Labeling

    Our preference is for labeling requirements to be included as part of the rule for DPPP motors. Our proposed labeling requirements include the dedicated-purpose pool pump motor total horsepower and whether the motor is single-speed, two-speed, multi-speed, or variable-speed control. These labeling requirements would provide additional information to both consumers and installers and help standardize the use of total horsepower throughout the industry.

    E. Reporting

    We are proposing that reporting requirements for DPPP motors include, but not be limited to, information about the settings of the controls for motors with freeze protection controls. These reporting requirements align with the reporting requirements for DPPPs.

    F. Compliance Date

    The compliance date for DPPP motors must be July 19, 2021 to align with the compliance date for DPPPs. Aligning the compliance dates is essential in order to prevent a loophole for replacement motors and to avoid the need for manufacturers to convert their product lines twice, which would significantly increase their costs and, in turn, costs for consumers.

    Further, the compliance date for DPPPs must remain July 19, 2021. U.S. manufacturers of both pool pumps and motors are already making significant investments to comply with the DPPP standards. If enforcement of the DPPP standards were to be delayed beyond the current compliance date, the beneficiaries of such a delay would be foreign manufacturers who have not yet made investments in upgrading their technology and who would see an opportunity to sell inefficient pumps to the U.S. market. This outcome would inflict serious harm on domestic manufacturers by undercutting their investments, which would threaten American manufacturing jobs. Manufacturers would also face market confusion in the event that the standards continued to be enforced through state building codes, despite a federal delay on enforcement. Finally, a delay would seriously harm consumers who would continue to be sold inefficient, wasteful products, costing them hundreds of dollars in electricity bill savings each year.

    G. Verification of Total Horsepower

    We are proposing that for purposes of verifying THP, DOE should use the test procedure for DPPPs, which includes methods for determining dedicated-purpose pool pump motor total horsepower.

    V. Benefits of the Joint Stakeholder Proposal

    Our proposal for DPPP motors will provide significant benefits to consumers, manufacturers, and the electric grid. By closing the replacement motor loophole, consumers will be assured that when replacing the motor on a variable-speed pump, the new motor will continue to provide the $550 in average annual operating cost savings and the additional benefits of variable-speed technology. Pool pump manufacturers will be protected against a market shift to unregulated, foreign-made replacement motors, which would threaten American manufacturing jobs. Finally, because pool pumps often operate the most in the summer and during times of peak demand, protecting the significant electricity savings from the DPPP standards will also protect the corresponding reductions in peak demand, which bolster electric grid resilience. Reductions in peak demand also help lower electricity rates, which benefits all consumers. However, in order for these significant benefits to consumers, manufacturers, and the electric grid to be realized, the compliance date for DPPP motor standards must be July 19, 2021, and there must be no delay in the DPPP compliance date.

    VI. Electric Motors Authority

    DOE should adopt our proposal for standards for DPPP motors using the Department's authority over “electric motors.” “Electric motor” is defined as “a machine that converts electrical power into rotational mechanical power” (10 CFR 431.12). DPPP motors are electric motors, and electric motors are already covered equipment.

    VII. Use of a DFR

    DOE should adopt our proposal for standards for DPPP motors using a DFR. Importantly, a DFR will ensure that the compliance date for DPPP motors can be aligned with that for DPPPs. As described above, alignment of the compliance dates is essential in order to close the replacement motor loophole and to avoid manufacturers having to convert their product lines twice. Further, it is essential that the compliance dates for both DPPPs and DPPP motors be July 19, 2021 as any delay in the compliance date for DPPPs would have serious negative consequences for both consumers and domestic manufacturers.

    DOE has the authority to issue a DFR “on receipt of a statement that is submitted jointly by interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of view (including representatives of manufacturers of covered products, States, and efficiency advocates)” (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)). The signatories to this Joint Statement include all relevant stakeholders including manufacturers of both pool pumps and motors; a trade association that represents pool pump and pool pump motor manufacturers and installers; a trade association that represents motor manufacturers; states; consumer advocate organizations; efficiency and environmental organizations; and electric utilities.

    While we believe that all relevant stakeholders are represented by the signatories to this Joint Statement, to the extent that there is any concern regarding the ability for any other party to provide input on our recommended standards before they are issued as part of a DFR, DOE could publish our Joint Statement and provide a limited (e.g., 30-day) comment period.

    VIII. Executive Order Compliance

    Importantly, there are no new costs associated with our proposal. The analysis for the DPPP rulemaking already accounted for the costs of motor replacements for the portion of consumers that will replace the motor during the life of their pump. Specifically, the DPPP rulemaking assumed like-for-like motor replacements (e.g., that a variable-speed motor would be replaced with a new variable-speed motor). The assumption of like-for-like motor replacements does not reflect the real-world situation and the high likelihood of many variable-speed motors on compliant pumps being replaced not with variable-speed motors, but with inefficient single-speed motors. Nevertheless, because the costs of variable-speed replacement motors were already accounted for in the DPPP rulemaking, DOE would be double counting the costs if the Department were to include costs associated with motor replacements in a DPPP motors rulemaking.

    Since there are no costs associated with our proposal relative to the costs assumed in the DPPP rule, we believe that our proposal would not be subject to Executive Orders 12866 and 13771.

    IX. Conclusion

    The Joint Stakeholders strongly urge DOE to adopt our proposal for standards for DPPP motors contained in Appendix A in order to protect consumers and the investments being made by domestic manufacturers. We encourage DOE to act expeditiously in order to ensure alignment of the compliance date for DPPP motors with the compliance date for DPPPs (July 19, 2021).

    Sincerely, BILLING CODE 6450-01-P EP11SE18.001 EP11SE18.002 EP11SE18.003 BILLING CODE 6450-01-C APPENDIX A Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pump (DPPP) Motors Joint Stakeholder Proposal Definitions

    Capacitor-start, induction-run means a single-phase induction motor configuration with a main winding arranged for direct connection to a source of power and an auxiliary winding connected in series with a capacitor. The motor configuration has a capacitor phase, which is in the circuit only during the starting period.

    Dedicated-purpose pool pump motor means an electric motor that is single-phase or polyphase which complies with and is certified to UL 1004-10 and/or is designed and/or marketed for use in dedicated- purpose pool pump applications.

    Designed and marketed means that the equipment is designed to fulfill the intended application and, when distributed in commerce, is designated and marketed solely for that application, with the designation on all the packaging and all publicly available documents (e.g., product literature, catalogs, and packaging labels).

    Designed and/or marketed means that the equipment is designed to fulfill the intended application and/or, when distributed in commerce, is designated and marketed for that application, with the designation on the packaging and/or any publicly available documents (e.g., product literature, catalogs, and packaging labels).

    Drive means a power converter (such as a variable speed drive or phase-converter).

    Integral cartridge-filter pool pump motor means a dedicated-purpose pool pump motor that is distributed in commerce as a component of an integral cartridge-filter pool pump as defined at 10 CFR 431.462.

    Integral sand-filter pool pump motor means a dedicated-purpose pool pump motor that is distributed in commerce as a component of an integral sand-filter pool pump as defined at 10 CFR 431.462.

    Maximum operating speed means the rated full-load speed of a motor powered by a 60 Hz alternating current (AC) source.

    Rigid electric spa pump motor means a dedicated-purpose pool pump motor that does not have a C-flange or square flange mounting and that is:

    (1) labeled,

    (2) designed, and

    (3) marketed for use only in rigid electric spas as defined at 10 CFR 431.462.

    Split phase means a single-phase induction motor configuration with an auxiliary winding displaced in magnetic position from, and connected in parallel with the main winding. The auxiliary circuit is open when the motor has attained a predetermined speed.

    Storable electric spa pump motor means a dedicated-purpose pool pump motor that is distributed in commerce as a component of a storable electric spa pump as defined at 10 CFR 431.462.

    Waterfall pump motor means a dedicated-purpose pool pump motor with a maximum speed less than or equal to 1,800 rpm that is designed and marketed for waterfall pump applications and labeled for use only with waterfall pumps.

    Scope of coverage

    DPPP motors meet the definition of electric motor at 10 CFR 431.12. The standards will apply to dedicated-purpose pool pump (DPPP) motors, including DPPP motors incorporated in DPPPs produced domestically and imported, with dedicated-purpose pool pump motor total horsepower (THP) as defined at 10 CFR 431.462 less than or equal to 5 THP, with the following exemptions:

    Exempted DPPP motors:

    • Polyphase motors capable of operating without a drive and distributed in commerce without a drive that converts single-phase power to polyphase power

    • Waterfall pump motors

    • Rigid electric spa pump motors

    • Storable electric spa pump motors

    • Integral cartridge-filter pool pump motors

    • Integral sand-filter pool pump motors

    Prescriptive requirements

    There will be prescriptive requirements for all DPPP motors, for DPPP motors with a THP greater than or equal to 1.15 THP, and for DPPP motors with freeze protection controls. DPPP motors include motors manufactured domestically, motors imported alone, and motors imported as a component of a DPPP assembly.

    DPPP motors

    DPPP motors must not operate with a capacitor start induction run (CSIR) or split phase (SP) configuration at maximum operating speed.

    DPPP motors with THP greater than or equal to 1.15 THP

    DPPP motors with THP greater than or equal to 1.15 THP will have a prescriptive speed control requirement.

    Prescriptive Requirement: Variable Speed Control

    Each dedicated-purpose pool pump motor with a dedicated-purpose pool pump motor total horsepower greater than or equal to 1.15 THP shall meet the definition of a variable-speed control dedicated- purpose pool pump motor.

    A variable-speed control dedicated-purpose pool pump motor means:

    A dedicated-purpose pool pump motor that is capable of operating at four or more discrete, user- or pre-determined operating speeds, where one of the operating speeds is the maximum operating speed and at least:

    • One of the operating speeds is 75% to 85% of the maximum operating speed;

    • One of the operating speeds is 45% to 55% of the maximum operating speed;

    • One of the operating speeds is less than or equal to 40% of the maximum operating speed and greater than zero.

    And that must be distributed in commerce either:

    (1) With a variable speed drive and with a user interface that changes the speed in response to pre- programmed user preferences and allows the user to select the duration of each speed and/or the on/off times;

    (2) With a variable speed drive and without a user interface that changes the speed in response to pre-programmed user preferences and allows the user to select the duration of each speed and/or the on/off times, but is unable to operate without the presence of a user interface; or

    (3) Without a variable speed drive and with or without a user interface, but is unable to operate without the presence of a variable speed drive.

    And:

    (1) Any high speed override capability shall be for a temporary period not to exceed one 24-hour cycle without resetting to default settings or resuming normal operation according to pre- programmed user preferences; and

    (2) Any factory default setting for daily run time schedule may not include more hours at an operating speed above 55% of maximum operating speed than the hours at or below 55% of maximum operating speed; or if a motor is distributed in commerce without a default setting for daily run time schedule, the default operating speed after any priming cycle (if applicable) must be no greater than 55% of the maximum operating speed.

    DPPP motors with freeze protection controls

    For all dedicated-purpose pool pump motors distributed in commerce with freeze protection controls, the motor must be shipped with freeze protection disabled or with the following default, user- adjustable settings:

    (1) The default dry-bulb air temperature setting is no greater than 40 °F;

    (2) The default run time setting shall be no greater than 1 hour (before the temperature is rechecked); and

    (3) The default motor speed shall not be more than 1/2 of the maximum speed.

    Labeling

    If DOE is able to implement labeling requirements, the permanent nameplate must be marked clearly with the following information:

    (A) The dedicated-purpose pool pump motor total horsepower; and

    (B) Either: single-speed, two-speed, multi-speed, or variable-speed control.

    Reporting

    Certification reporting requirements should include, but not be limited to,:

    (A) For dedicated-purpose pool pump motors distributed in commerce with freeze protection controls, a statement regarding whether freeze protection is shipped enabled or disabled, and for dedicated-purpose pool pump motors distributed in commerce with freeze protection controls enabled, the default dry-bulb air temperature setting (in °F), default run time setting (in minutes), and default motor speed (in rpm).

    Compliance date

    The compliance date should be July 19, 2021 to align with the compliance date of the DPPP standards.

    Verification of THP

    For purposes of verifying THP, DOE should use the DPPP test procedure at 10 CFR 431 Appendix C to Subpart Y.

    [FR Doc. 2018-19577 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Part 44 [Docket No. OCC-2018-0010] RIN 1557-AE27 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 248 [Docket No. R-1608] RIN 7100-AF 06 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Part 351 RIN 3064-AE67 COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 75 RIN 3038-AE72 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 255 [Release no. BHCA-3; File no. S7-14-18] RIN 3235-AM10 Extension of Comment Period for Proposed Revisions to Prohibitions and Restrictions on Proprietary Trading and Certain Interests in, and Relationships With, Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds AGENCY:

    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Treasury (OCC); Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC); Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) (collectively, the “Agencies”).

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On July 17, 2018, the Agencies published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (proposal) that would amend the regulations implementing section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act. Section 13 contains certain restrictions on the ability of a banking entity and nonbank financial company supervised by the Board to engage in proprietary trading and have certain interests in, or relationships with, a hedge fund or private equity fund. The proposed amendments are intended to provide banking entities with clarity about what activities are prohibited and to improve supervision and implementation of section 13.

    In response to requests from commenters regarding issues addressed in the proposal, the public comment period has been extended for 30 days until October 17, 2018. This action will allow interested persons additional time to analyze the proposal and prepare their comments.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the notice of proposed rulemaking published on July 17, 2018 (83 FR 33432), regarding proposed revisions to prohibitions and restrictions on proprietary trading and certain interests in, and relationships with, hedge funds and private equity funds, is extended from September 17, 2018, to October 17, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the methods identified in the proposal.1 Please submit your comments using only one method.

    1See 83 FR 33432, 33432-33 (July 17, 2018).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    OCC: Tabitha Edgens, Senior Attorney; Mark O'Horo, Attorney, Chief Counsel's Office, (202) 649-5510; for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219.

    Board: Kevin Tran, Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202) 452-2309, Amy Lorenc, Financial Analyst, (202) 452-5293, David Lynch, Deputy Associate Director, (202) 452-2081, David McArthur, Senior Economist, (202) 452-2985, Division of Supervision and Regulation; Flora Ahn, Senior Counsel, (202) 452-2317, Gregory Frischmann, Counsel, (202) 452-2803, or Kirin Walsh, Attorney, (202) 452-3058, Legal Division, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets NW, Washington, DC 20551. For the hearing impaired only, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), (202) 263-4869.

    FDIC: Bobby R. Bean, Associate Director, [email protected], Michael Spencer, Chief, Capital Markets Strategies Section, [email protected], or Brian Cox, Capital Markets Policy Analyst, [email protected], Capital Markets Branch, (202) 898-6888; Michael B. Phillips, Counsel, [email protected], Benjamin J. Klein, Counsel, [email protected], or Annmarie H. Boyd, Counsel, [email protected], Legal Division, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20429.

    SEC: Andrew R. Bernstein (Senior Special Counsel), Sophia Colas (Attorney-Adviser), Sam Litz (Attorney-Adviser), Aaron Washington (Special Counsel), Elizabeth Sandoe (Senior Special Counsel), Carol McGee (Assistant Director), or Josephine J. Tao (Assistant Director), at (202) 551-5777, Division of Trading and Markets, and Nicholas Cordell, Matthew Cook, Elizabeth Blase, Aaron Gilbride (Branch Chief), Brian McLaughlin Johnson (Assistant Director), and Sara Cortes (Assistant Director), at (202) 551-6787 or [email protected], Division of Investment Management, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

    CFTC: Erik Remmler, Deputy Director, (202) 418-7630, [email protected]; Cantrell Dumas, Special Counsel, (202) 418-5043, [email protected]; Jeffrey Hasterok, Data and Risk Analyst, (646) 746-9736, [email protected], Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight; Mark Fajfar, Assistant General Counsel, (202) 418-6636, [email protected], Office of the General Counsel; Stephen Kane, Research Economist, (202) 418-5911, [email protected], Office of the Chief Economist; Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On July 17, 2018, the Agencies published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking that would amend the regulations implementing section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act.2 Section 13 contains certain restrictions on the ability of a banking entity and nonbank financial company supervised by the Board to engage in proprietary trading and have certain interests in, or relationships with, a hedge fund or private equity fund. The proposed amendments are intended to provide banking entities with clarity about what activities are prohibited and to improve supervision and implementation of section 13. The proposal stated that the public comment period would close on September 17, 2018.3

    2 83 FR 33432-33605.

    3 83 FR 33432-33605.

    The Agencies have received requests from the public asking the Agencies to extend the comment period for the proposal.4 These requests suggested that an extension of the comment period would help commenters provide feedback on the proposed changes and detailed requests for comment in the proposal. This extension of the comment period will allow interested persons additional time to analyze the proposal and prepare their comments. Accordingly, the comment period for the proposal is extended from September 17, 2018, to October 17, 2018.

    4See joint comment letter to the Agencies from Better Markets, Americans for Financial Reform, Public Citizen and the Center for American Progress (July 10, 2018); comment letter to the Agencies from U.S. Senators Sherrod Brown and Jeffrey A. Merkley (August 6, 2018); comment letter to the Agencies from the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions (July 25, 2018).

    Dated: August 31, 2018. Joseph M. Otting, Comptroller of the Currency. By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, acting through the Secretary of the Board under delegated authority, August 29, 2018. Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board. Dated at Washington, DC on August 28, 2018. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Valerie Jean Best, Assistant Executive Secretary.

    By the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Brent J. Fields, Secretary. Issued in Washington, DC, on August 30, 2018, by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19649 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P; 4810-33-P; 6714-01-P; 8011-01-P; 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0741; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Tyndall AFB, FL AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to establish Class E surface airspace at Tyndall Air Force Base, (AFB), FL, for the safety of aircraft landing and departing the airport when the air traffic control tower is closed. Also, this action proposes to amend Class D airspace by updating the geographic coordinates of this airport, as well as replacing the outdated term “Airport/Facility Directory” with “Chart Supplement”. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg. Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify the Docket No. FAA-2018-0741; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line 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 proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would establish Class E surface airspace and amend Class D airspace at Tyndall AFB, FL, to support IFR operations at this airport.

    Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.

    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-2018-0741 and Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13) and be submitted in triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number.) You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0741; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-13.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

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

    Availability of NPRMs

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

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

    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 Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E surface airspace within a 5.4-mile radius of Tyndall AFB, FL, for the safety of aircraft landing and departing the airport when the air traffic control tower is closed.

    In addition, the geographic coordinates of the airport in Class D airspace would be updated to coincide with the FAA's database.

    Finally, the outdated term `Airport/Facility Directory' would be replaced with `Chart Supplement' under the Class D description.

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

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

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

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 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, and effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASO FL D Tyndall AFB, FL [Amended] Tyndall AFB, FL (Lat. 30°04′09″ N, long. 85°34′30″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,500 feet MSL within a 5.4-mile radius of Tyndall AFB. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as Surface Areas. ASO FL E2 Tyndall AFB, FL [New] Tyndall AFB, FL (Lat. 30°04′09″ N, long. 85°34′30″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 5.4-mile radius of Tyndall AFB. This Class E airspace is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 29, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19488 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0486; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-11] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Hardinsburg, KY AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Breckinridge County Airport, Hardinsburg, KY, to accommodate new area navigation (RNAV) global positioning system (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures serving the airport. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg. Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or (202)-366-9826. You must identify the Docket No. FAA-2018-0486; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-11, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line 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 Ave., College Park, GA 30337; telephone (404) 305-6364.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in title 49 of the 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 proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority, as it would establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Breckinridge County Airport, Hardinsburg, KY to support standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at this airport.

    Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.

    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-2018-0486 and Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-11) and be submitted in triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number.) You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0486; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-11.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

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

    Availability of NPRMs

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

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337.

    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 Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius of Breckinridge County Airport, Hardinsburg, KY, providing the controlled airspace required to support the new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at this airport.

    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 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 proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

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

    PART 71 —DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 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, and effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO KY E5 Hardinsburg, KY [New] Breckinridge County Airport, KY (Lat. 37°47′05″ N, long. 86°26′29″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius of Breckinridge County Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 29, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19492 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0845] Safety Zone; Spaceport Camden, Woodbine, GA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is seeking comments from interested persons regarding a proposal to establish safety zones on the navigable waterways in the vicinity of the proposed Spaceport Camden, near Woodbine, Georgia during rocket tests, launches, and landing operations. The proposed safety zones would be necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by rocket launches and landings, and by various rocket tests.

    DATES:

    Your comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2018-0845 using the Federal portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this notice of inquiry, call or email LT Joseph Palmquist, Marine Safety Unit Savannah, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 912-652-4353 x221, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register II. Background and Purpose

    The Board of County Commissioners of Camden County, Georgia proposes to develop and operate a commercial space launch site, called Spaceport Camden, in an unincorporated area of Camden County, Georgia, approximately 11.5 miles due east of the town of Woodbine, Georgia. The site, near Floyd Creek, is on the coast, surrounded by salt marshes to the east and south, and the Satilla River to the north. In support of Spaceport Camden, the Board of County Commissioners of Camden County, Georgia requested that the Coast Guard establish safety zones which would be enforced during launch, landing, and rocket test activities at the site.

    The Coast Guard establishes safety zones over areas of water and/or shore for safety or environmental purposes pursuant to the authority contained in 33 CFR part 165. A safety zone is a “. . . water area, shore area, or water and shore area to which, for safety or environmental purposes, access is limited to authorized persons, vehicles, or vessels.”

    The applicants for Spaceport Camden propose up to 12 annual launches and landings during daylight hours, with one possible nighttime launch per year, of liquid-fueled, small to medium-large lift-class, orbital and suborbital vertical launch vehicles. In support of the proposed launches, the applicants for Spaceport Camden propose up to 12 static fire engine tests per year. Launch trajectories would vary from 83 to 115 degrees for vehicles up to and including medium-large lift class. Because the trajectory of these launches would take the rockets over various navigable waterways, creeks and tributaries, sections of land, and areas offshore, applicants are required to limit or restrict access to certain areas surrounding a rocket test/launch site based on specific hazard analysis. The applicant's request to establish safety zones during rocket launches, landings, and various tests is one element in meeting these safety requirements.

    The range of potential safety zones for launch and landing activities encompasses an area which accounts for safety concerns associated with all potential launch trajectories. Individual launch safety zones could be smaller and depend on several factors unique to each event, such as actual trajectory, lift class, and payload. The range of potential safety zones for rocket tests encompasses a smaller area directly around the commercial space launch site. In all instances, the proposed safety zones would be necessary to safeguard persons, property, and the marine environment during rocket launches, landings, and rocket test activities.

    Proposed Launch/Landing Safety Zone

    The geographic area which encompasses all potential launch trajectories and accounts for the largest possible launch vehicle is defined by nine total corner points, identified below. Individual launch safety zones could be smaller dependent upon aspects unique to each launch activity, such as specific launch trajectories and the size of each launch vehicle:

    1. In vicinity of the western portion of Shellbine Creek, south of Union Carbide Rd, Latitude: 30°54′17.0″ N, Longitude: 81°30′45.0″ W 2. In vicinity of Cabin Bluff, at the end of Union Carbide Rd, Latitude: 30°53′6.75″ N, Longitude: 81°30′56.5″ W 3. Cumberland River, just west of Cumberland Island, approximately 2 nautical miles (2.3 miles) north of Stafford Island, Latitude: 30°50′56.15″ N, Longitude: 81°28′39.4″ W 4. Plum Orchard—West side of Cumberland Island, approximately 1.5 nautical miles (1.7 miles) south of Table Point, Latitude: 30°51′22.12″ N, Longitude: 81°27′55.3″ W 5. Kings Bottom Trail Head—West side of Cumberland Island, approximately 1 nautical mile (1.15 miles) south of Table Point, Latitude: 30°51′58.53″ N, Longitude: 81°27′44.8″ W 6. Offshore—Approximately 13 nautical miles (15 miles) east of the southern portion of Cumberland Island; approximately 5 nautical miles (5.75 miles) northeast of St. Mary's entrance buoy, Latitude: 30°46′1.80″ N, Longitude: 81°10′15.5″ W 7. Offshore—Approximately 10 nautical miles (11.5 miles) east of Jekyll Point; approximately 3.5 nautical miles (4 miles) southeast of St. Simons Sound entrance buoy, Latitude: 31°01′33.65″ N, Longitude: 81°10′15.5″ W 8. St. Andrew Sound—600 yards south of Jekyll Point, Latitude: 31°00′23.6″ N, Longitude: 81°26′4.75″ W 9. In vicinity of Todd Creek, approximately 1 nautical mile (1.15 miles) west of Floyd Basin, Latitude: 30°57′38.0″ N, Longitude: 81°32′25.5″ W Proposed Test Activity Safety Zone

    The proposed safety zone for test activities encompasses an area within a one nautical mile (1.15 miles) radius in each direction from the location of the launch site pad. The location of the launch site: Latitude: 30°56′50.67″ N, Longitude: 81°30′23.34″ W.

    III. Information Requested

    In support of the applicant's request and to provide for the public safety in connection with potential operations at Spaceport Camden, the COTP Savannah is seeking comments from interested persons on the establishment of two proposed safety zones on the navigable waters surrounding Spaceport Camden, in the vicinity of Woodbine, Georgia. These safety zones would be enforced during rocket launches, landings, and various rocket tests. Launch/landing safety zones would support launch/landing activities while test site safety zones would support rocket test activities. Vessels, both commercial and recreational, would be prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the safety zone unless specifically authorized by the COTP Savannah or a designated representative.

    For launch activities, the safety zone is anticipated to be in effect for approximately four to six hours for medium-large launchers, but not longer than 12 hours. For small launches, the safety zone is anticipated to be in effect for two to three hours. A safety zone for rocket test activity is anticipated to be in effect for approximately 60 minutes or less. The COTP Savannah or a designated representative would inform the public through broadcast notice to mariners of the enforcement periods of the safety zone.

    IV. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. In your submission, please include the docket number for this notice of inquiry and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.

    Documents mentioned in this notice of inquiry as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's instructions.

    We plan to hold a public meeting to receive oral comments on this notice of inquiry and will announce the date, time, and location in a separate document published in the Federal Register. If you signed up for docket email alerts mentioned in the paragraph above, you will receive an email notice when the public meeting notice is published and placed in the docket.

    Dated: September 4, 2018. N.C. Witt, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Savannah.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19661 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 635 [Docket No. 180517486-8772-01] RIN 0648-XG263 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 2019 Atlantic Shark Commercial Fishing Year AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would establish quotas, opening dates, and retention limits for the 2019 fishing year for the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries. Quotas would be adjusted as required or allowable based on any over- and/or underharvests experienced during the 2018 fishing year. In addition, NMFS proposes opening dates and commercial retention limits based on adaptive management measures to provide, to the extent practicable, fishing opportunities for commercial shark fishermen in all regions and areas. The proposed measures could affect fishing opportunities for commercial shark fishermen in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received by October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2018-0097, by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0097, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Submit written comments to Brad McHale, NMFS/SF1, 1315 East-West Highway, National Marine Fisheries Service, SSMC3, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

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

    Copies of this proposed rule and supporting documents are available from the HMS Management Division website at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/atlantic-highly-migratory-species or by contacting Lauren Latchford or Chanté Davis by phone at (301) 427-8503.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karyl Brewster-Geisz, Lauren Latchford, or Chanté Davis at (301) 427-8503.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Atlantic commercial shark fisheries are managed under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its amendments are implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. For the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries, the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments established commercial shark retention limits, commercial quotas for species and management groups, and accounting measures for under- and overharvests for the shark fisheries. The FMP also includes adaptive management measures, such as flexible opening dates for the fishing year and inseason adjustments to shark trip limits, which provide management flexibility in furtherance of equitable fishing opportunities, to the extent practicable, for commercial shark fishermen in all regions and areas.

    2019 Proposed Quotas

    This proposed rule would adjust the quota levels for the different shark stocks and management groups for the 2019 Atlantic commercial shark fishing year based on over- and underharvests that occurred during the 2018 fishing year, consistent with existing regulations at 50 CFR 635.27(b). Over- and underharvests are accounted for in the same region, sub-region, and/or fishery in which they occurred the following year, except that large overharvests may be spread over a number of subsequent fishing years up to a maximum of five years. Shark stocks that are overfished, have overfishing occurring, or have an unknown status, as well as management groups that contain one or more stocks that are overfished, have overfishing occurring, or have an unknown stock status, will not have underharvest carried over in the following year. Stocks or management groups that are not overfished and have no overfishing occurring may have any underharvest carried over in the following year, up to 50 percent of the base quota.

    Based on harvests to date, and after considering catch rates and landings from previous years, NMFS proposes to adjust the 2019 quotas for some management groups as shown in Table 1. In the final rule, NMFS will adjust the quotas as needed based on dealer reports received by mid-October 2018. Thus, all of the 2019 proposed quotas for the respective stocks and management groups will be subject to further adjustment after NMFS considers the dealer reports through mid-October. All dealer reports that are received after the October date will be used to adjust 2020 quotas, as appropriate.

    While the sub-quota for the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated large coastal shark (LCS) was exceeded this year, based on current landings in the eastern Gulf of Mexico for that management group and based on catch rates from previous years from the eastern Gulf of Mexico, NMFS does not believe the overall regional Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS quota will be exceeded. Thus, NMFS proposes the base line quotas for the eastern and western Gulf of Mexico sub-regions. If catch rates in the eastern Gulf of Mexico increase, it is possible that in the final rule NMFS would need to reduce the western Gulf of Mexico sub-regional aggregated LCS quota to account for that sub-region's overharvest.

    Because the Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark management group and smoothhound shark management groups in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic regions have been determined not to be overfished, and to have no overfishing occurring, available underharvest (up to 50 percent of the base quota) from the 2018 fishing year for these management groups may be applied to the respective 2019 quotas. NMFS proposes to account for any underharvest of Gulf of Mexico blacktip sharks by dividing underharvest between the eastern and western Gulf of Mexico sub-regional quotas based on the sub-regional quota split percentage implemented in Amendment 6 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP).

    For the sandbar shark, aggregated large coastal shark (LCS), hammerhead shark, non-blacknose small coastal shark (SCS), blacknose shark, blue shark, porbeagle shark, and pelagic shark (other than porbeagle or blue sharks) management groups, the 2018 underharvests cannot be carried over to the 2019 fishing year because those stocks or management groups have been determined to be overfished, overfished with overfishing occurring, or have an unknown status. Furthermore, with the exception of the sub-regional western Gulf of Mexico overharvest of the aggregated LCS quota described above, there were no overharvests to account for in these management groups. Thus, NMFS proposes that quotas for these management groups be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment.

    The proposed 2019 quotas by species and management group are summarized in Table 1; the description of the calculations for each stock and management group can be found below.

    Table 1—2019 Proposed Quotas and Opening Dates for the Atlantic Shark Management Groups [All quotas and landings are dressed weight (dw), in metric tons (mt), unless specified otherwise. Table includes landings data as of July 13, 2018; final quotas are subject to change based on landings as of October 2018. 1 mt = 2,204.6 lb.] Region or
  • sub-region
  • Management group 2018 Annual quota Preliminary 2018 landings Adjustments 2 2019 base
  • Annual quota
  • 2019 proposed
  • annual quota
  • (A) (B) 1 (C) (D) (D + C) Western Gulf of Mexico Blacktip Sharks 347.2 mt dw
  • 765,392 lb dw
  • 330.2 mt dw
  • 727,992 lb dw
  • 34.6 mt dw 3
  • 76,401 lb dw
  • 231.0 mt dw
  • 510,261 lb dw
  • 265.6 mt dw.
  • 586,662.2 lb dw.
  • Aggregated Large Coastal Sharks 72 mt dw
  • 158,724 lb dw
  • 92.2 mt dw
  • 203,400 lb dw
  • 72.0 mt dw
  • 158,724 lb dw
  • 72.0 mt dw.
  • 158,724 lb dw.
  • Hammerhead Sharks 11.9 mt dw
  • 26,301 lb dw
  • 11.0 mt dw
  • 24,292 lb dw
  • 11.9 mt dw
  • 26,301 lb dw
  • 11.9 mt dw.
  • 26,301 lb dw.
  • Eastern Gulf of Mexico Blacktip Sharks 37.7 mt dw
  • 83,158 lb dw
  • 16.3 mt dw
  • 35,856 lb dw
  • 3.8 mt dw 3
  • 8,301 lb dw
  • 25.1 mt dw
  • 55,439 lb dw
  • 28.9 mt dw.
  • 63,740 lb dw
  • Aggregated Large Coastal Sharks 85.5 mt dw
  • 188,593 lb dw
  • 37.5 mt dw
  • 82,751 lb dw
  • 85.5 mt dw
  • 188,593 lb dw
  • 85.5 mt dw.
  • 188,593 lb dw.
  • Hammerhead Sharks 13.4 mt dw
  • 29,421 lb dw
  • 6.2 mt dw
  • 13,696 lb dw
  • 13.4 mt dw
  • 29,421 lb dw
  • 13.4 mt dw.
  • 29,421 lb dw.
  • Gulf of Mexico Non-Blacknose Small Coastal Sharks 112.6 mt dw
  • 248,215 lb dw
  • 27.5 mt dw
  • 60,731 lb dw
  • 112.6 mt dw
  • 248,215 lb dw
  • 112.6. mt dw.
  • 248,215 lb dw.
  • Smoothhound Sharks 504.6 mt dw
  • 1,112,441 lb dw
  • 0 mt dw
  • 0 lb dw
  • 168.2 mt dw
  • 370,814 lb dw
  • 336.4 mt dw
  • 741,627 lb dw
  • 504.6 mt dw.
  • 1,112,441 lb dw.
  • Atlantic Aggregated Large Coastal Sharks 168.9 mt dw
  • 372,552 lb dw
  • 45.9 mt dw
  • 101,245 lb dw
  • 168.9 mt dw
  • 372,552 lb dw
  • 168.9 mt dw.
  • 372,552 lb dw.
  • Hammerhead Sharks 27.1 mt dw
  • 59,736 lb dw
  • 4.9 mt dw
  • 10,777 lb dw
  • 27.1 mt dw
  • 59,736 lb dw
  • 27.1 mt dw.
  • 59,736 lb dw.
  • Non-Blacknose Small Coastal Sharks 264.1 mt dw
  • 582,333 lb dw
  • 55.1 mt dw
  • 121,385 lb dw
  • 264.1 mt dw
  • 582,333 lb dw
  • 264.1 mt dw.
  • 582,333 lb dw
  • Blacknose Sharks (South of 34° N lat. only) 17.2 mt dw
  • (37,921 lb dw)
  • 3.4 mt dw
  • 7,501 lb dw
  • 17.2 mt dw
  • 37,921 lb dw
  • 17.2 mt dw
  • 3,7921 lb dw.
  • Smoothhound Sharks 1802.6 mt dw
  • 3,971,587 lb dw
  • 261.4 mt dw
  • 576,181 lb dw
  • 600.85 mt dw
  • 1,324,634 lb dw
  • 1201.7 mt dw
  • 2,649,268 lb dw
  • 1802.55 mt dw.
  • 3,973,902 lb dw.
  • No regional quotas Non-Sandbar LCS Research 50.0 mt dw
  • 110,230 lb dw
  • 11.2 mt dw
  • 24,799 lb dw
  • 50.0 mt dw
  • 110,230 lb dw
  • 50.0 mt dw.
  • 110,230 lb dw.
  • Sandbar Shark Research 90.7 mt dw
  • 199,943 lb dw
  • 31.0 mt dw
  • 68,443 lb dw
  • 90.7 mt dw
  • 199,943 lb dw
  • 90.7 mt dw.
  • 199,943 lb dw.
  • Blue Sharks 273.0 mt dw
  • 601,856 lb dw
  • <13.6 mt dw
  • (<30,000 lb dw)
  • 273.0 mt dw
  • 601,856 lb dw
  • 273.0 mt dw.
  • 601,856 lb dw.
  • Porbeagle Sharks 1.7 mt dw
  • 3,748 lb dw
  • 0 mt dw
  • 0 lb dw
  • 1.7 mt dw
  • 3,748 lb dw
  • 1.7 mt dw.
  • 3,748 lb dw.
  • Pelagic Sharks Other Than Porbeagle or Blue sharks 488.0 mt dw
  • 1,075,856 lb dw
  • 38.1 mt dw
  • 83,896 lb dw
  • 488.0 mt dw
  • 1,075,856 lb dw
  • 488.0 mt dw.
  • 1,075,856 lb dw.
  • 1 Landings are from January 1, 2018, through July 13, 2018, and are subject to change. 2 Underharvest adjustments can only be applied to stocks or management groups that are not overfished and have no overfishing occurring. Also, the underharvest adjustments cannot exceed 50 percent of the base quota. 3 This proposed rule would increase the overall Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark quota due to an overall underharvest of 38.4 mt dw (84,702 lb dw) in 2018. The overall quota would be split based on percentages that are allocated to each sub-region, as explained in the text.
    1. Proposed 2019 Quotas for the Gulf of Mexico Region Shark Management Groups

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for blacktip sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region is 265.6 mt dw (586,662 lb dw) and the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region is 28.9 mt dw (63,740 lb dw; Table 1). As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings for blacktip sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region were at 95 percent (330.2 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels (347.2 mt dw), while the blacktip sharks in the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region were at 43 percent (16.3 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels (37.7 mt dw). Reported landings have not exceeded the 2018 quota to date, and the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region fishery was closed on March 13, 2018 (83 FR 10802). Gulf of Mexico blacktip sharks have not been declared to be overfished, to have overfishing occurring, or to have an unknown status. Pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii), underharvests for blacktip sharks within the Gulf of Mexico region therefore could be applied to the 2019 quotas up to 50 percent of the base quota. Additionally, any underharvest would be divided between the two sub-regions, based on the percentages that are allocated to each sub-region, which are set forth in § 635.27(b)(1)(ii)(C). To date, the overall Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark management group is underharvested by 38.4 mt dw (84,702 lb dw). Accordingly, the western Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark quota would be increased by 34.6 mt dw or 90.2 percent of the underharvest, while the eastern Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark sub-regional quota would be increased by 3.8 mt dw, or 9.8 percent of the underharvest (Table 1). Thus, the proposed western sub-regional Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark commercial quota is 265.6 mt dw (586,662 lb dw), and the proposed eastern sub-regional Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark commercial quota is 28.9 mt dw (63,740 lb dw).

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for aggregated LCS in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region is 72.0 mt dw (158,724 lb dw), and the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region is 85.5 mt dw (188,593 lb dw; Table 1). As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings for aggregated LCS in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region were at 128 percent (92.2 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels (72.0 mt dw), while the aggregated LCS in the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region were at 44 percent (37.5 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels (85.5 mt dw). Reported landings have not exceeded the overall Gulf of Mexico regional 2018 quota to date, and the western aggregated LCS sub-region fishery was closed on March 13, 2018 (83 FR 10802). Given the unknown status of some of the shark species within the Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS management group, underharvests cannot be carried over pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii). Therefore, based on both preliminary estimates and catch rates from previous years, and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quotas for aggregated LCS in the western Gulf of Mexico and eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-regions be equal to their annual base quotas without adjustment, because the overall regional quota has not been overharvested and because underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quotas for hammerhead sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region and eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region are 11.9 mt dw (26,301 lb dw) and 13.4 mt dw (29,421 lb dw), respectively (Table 1). As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings for hammerhead sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region were at 92 percent (11.0 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels (11.9 mt dw), while landings of hammerhead sharks in the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region were at 47 percent (6.2 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels (13.4 mt dw). Reported landings from both Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic regions have not exceeded the 2018 overall hammerhead quota to date, and the western hammerhead shark Gulf of Mexico sub-region fishery was closed on March 13, 2018 (83 FR 10802). Given the overfished status of the scalloped hammerhead shark, the hammerhead shark quota cannot be adjusted for any underharvests. Therefore, based on both preliminary estimates and catch rates from previous years, the fact that the 2018 overall hammerhead shark quota has not been overharvested to date, and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2)(ii), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quotas for hammerhead sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico and eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-regions be equal to their annual base quotas without adjustment.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for non-blacknose SCS in the Gulf of Mexico region is 112.6 mt dw (248,215 lb dw). As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings of non-blacknose SCS were at 24 percent (27.5 mt dw) of their 2018 quota level (112.6 mt dw) in the Gulf of Mexico region. Reported landings have not exceeded the 2018 quota to date. Given the unknown status of bonnethead sharks within the Gulf of Mexico non-blacknose SCS management group, underharvests cannot be carried forward pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii). Therefore, based on both preliminary estimates and catch rates from previous years, and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quota for non-blacknose SCS in the Gulf of Mexico region be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment, because there have not been any overharvests and because underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for smoothhound sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region is 504.6 mt dw (1,112,441 lb dw). As of July 13, 2018, there are no preliminary reported landings of smoothhound sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region. Gulf of Mexico smoothhound sharks have not been declared to be overfished, to have overfishing occurring, or to have an unknown status. Pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii), underharvests for smoothhound sharks within the Gulf of Mexico region therefore could be applied to the 2019 quotas up to 50 percent of the base quota. Accordingly, NMFS proposes to increase the 2019 Gulf of Mexico smoothhound shark quota to adjust for anticipated underharvests in 2018 as allowed. The proposed 2019 adjusted base annual quota for Gulf of Mexico smoothhound sharks is 504.6 mt dw (336.4 mt dw annual base quota + 168.2 mt dw 2018 underharvest = 504.6 mt dw 2019 adjusted annual quota).

    2. Proposed 2019 Quotas for the Atlantic Region Shark Management Groups

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for aggregated LCS in the Atlantic region is 168.9 mt dw (372,552 lb dw). As of July 13, 2018, the aggregated LCS fishery in the Atlantic region is still open and preliminary landings indicate that only 27 percent of the quota, or 45.9 mt dw, has been harvested. Given the unknown status of some of the shark species within the Atlantic aggregated LCS management group, underharvests cannot be carried over pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii). Therefore, based on both preliminary estimates and catch rates from previous years, and consistent with current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2018 quota for aggregated LCS in the Atlantic region be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment, because there have not been any overharvests and underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for hammerhead sharks in the Atlantic region is 27.1 mt dw (59,736 lb dw). Currently, the hammerhead shark fishery in the Atlantic region is still open and preliminary landings as of July 13, 2018, indicate that only 18 percent of the Atlantic regional quota, or 4.9 mt dw, has been harvested. Reported landings from both Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic regions have not exceeded the 2018 overall hammerhead quota to date. Given the overfished status of hammerhead sharks, underharvests cannot be carried forward pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii). Therefore, based on both preliminary estimates and catch rates from previous years, and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quota for hammerhead sharks in the Atlantic region be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment, because the overall hammerhead shark quota has not been overharvested, and because underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for non-blacknose SCS in the Atlantic region is 264.1 mt dw (582,333 lb dw). As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings of non-blacknose SCS were at 21 percent (55.1 mt dw) of their 2018 quota level in the Atlantic region. Reported landings have not exceeded the 2018 quota to date. Given the unknown status of bonnethead sharks within the Atlantic non-blacknose SCS management group, underharvests cannot be carried forward pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii). Therefore, based on preliminary estimates of catch rates from previous years, and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quota for non-blacknose SCS in the Atlantic region be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment, because there have not been any overharvests, and because underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for blacknose sharks in the Atlantic region is 17.2 mt dw (37,921 lb dw). This quota is available in the Atlantic region only for those vessels operating south of 34° N. latitude. North of 34° N. latitude, retention, landing, or sale of blacknose sharks is prohibited. As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings of blacknose sharks were at 20 percent (3.4 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels in the Atlantic region. Reported landings have not exceeded the 2018 quota to date. Pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2), because blacknose sharks have been declared to be overfished with overfishing occurring in the Atlantic region, NMFS could not carry forward the remaining underharvest. Therefore, NMFS proposes that the 2019 Atlantic blacknose shark quota be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quota for smoothhound sharks in the Atlantic region is 1,802.6 mt dw (3,973,902 lb dw). As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings of smoothhound sharks were at 14 percent (261.4 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels in the Atlantic region. Atlantic smoothhound sharks have not been declared to be overfished, to have overfishing occurring, or to have an unknown status. Pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii), underharvests for smoothhound sharks within the Atlantic region therefore could be applied to the 2019 quotas up to 50 percent of the base quota. Accordingly, NMFS proposes to increase the 2019 Atlantic smoothhound shark quota to adjust for anticipated underharvests in 2018 as allowed. The proposed 2019 adjusted base annual quota for Atlantic smoothhound sharks is 1,802.6 mt dw (1,201.7 mt dw annual base quota + 600.9 mt dw 2018 underharvest = 1,802.6 mt dw 2019 adjusted annual quota).

    3. Proposed 2019 Quotas for Shark Management Groups With No Regional Quotas

    The 2019 proposed commercial quotas within the shark research fishery are 50 mt dw (110,230 lb dw) for research LCS and 90 mt dw (199,943 lb dw) for sandbar sharks. Within the shark research fishery, as of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings of research LCS were at 22 percent (11.2 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels, and sandbar shark reported landings were at 34 percent (31.0 mt dw) of their 2018 quota levels. Reported landings have not exceeded the 2018 quotas to date. Under § 635.27(b)(2)(ii), because sandbar sharks and scalloped hammerhead sharks within the research LCS management group have been determined to be either overfished or overfished with overfishing occurring, underharvests for these management groups cannot be carried forward to the 2019 quotas. Therefore, based on preliminary estimates, and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quota in the shark research fishery be equal to the annual base quota without adjustment because there have not been any overharvests, and because underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    The 2019 proposed commercial quotas for blue sharks, porbeagle sharks, and pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle or blue sharks) are 273.0 mt dw (601,856 lb dw), 1.7 mt dw (3,748 lb dw), and 488.0 mt dw (1,075,856 lb dw), respectively. As of July 13, 2018, preliminary reported landings of blue sharks were at less than 5 percent (less than 13.6 mt dw) of their 2018 quota level (273.0 mt dw), there are no preliminary reported landings of porbeagle sharks, and landings of pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle and blue sharks) were at 8 percent (38.1 mt dw) of their 2018 quota level (488.0 mt dw). Given that these pelagic species are overfished, have overfishing occurring, or have an unknown status, underharvests cannot be carried forward pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2)(ii). Therefore, based on preliminary estimates and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS proposes that the 2019 quotas for blue sharks, porbeagle sharks, and pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle and blue sharks) be equal to their annual base quotas without adjustment, because there have not been any overharvests and because underharvests cannot be carried over due to stock status.

    4. Proposed Opening Dates and Retention Limits for the 2019 Atlantic Commercial Shark Fishing Year

    For each fishery, NMFS considered the seven “Opening Commercial Fishing Season Criteria” listed at § 635.27(b)(3). The Criteria includes factors such as the available annual quotas for the current fishing season, estimated season length and average weekly catch rates from previous years, length of the season and fishery participation in past years, impacts to accomplishing objectives of the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments, temporal variation in behavior or biology of target species (e.g., seasonal distribution or abundance), impact of catch rates in one region on another, and effects of delayed openings.

    NMFS applied the Opening Commercial Fishing Season Criteria by examining the over- and underharvests of the different management groups in the 2018 fishing year to determine the likely effects of the proposed commercial quotas for 2019 on shark stocks and fishermen across regional and sub-regional fishing areas. NMFS also examined the potential season length and previous catch rates to ensure, to the extent practicable, that equitable fishing opportunities be provided to fishermen in all areas. Lastly, NMFS examined the seasonal variation of the different species/management groups and the effects on fishing opportunities.

    NMFS also considered the six “Inseason trip limit adjustment criteria” listed at § 635.24(a)(8) for directed shark limited access permit holders intending to land LCS other than sandbar sharks. Those criteria are: the amount of remaining shark quota in the relevant area or region, to date, based on dealer reports; the catch rates of the relevant shark species/complexes, to date, based on dealer reports; estimated date of fishery closure based on when the landings are projected to reach 80-percent of the available overall, regional, and/or sub-regional quota, if the fishery's landings are not projected to reach 100 percent of the applicable quota before the end of the season, or when the season of a quota-linked management group is closed; effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments; variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migratory patterns of the relevant shark species based on scientific and fishery-based knowledge; and/or effects of catch rates in one part of a region precluding vessels in another part of that region from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the relevant quota.

    After considering all these criteria, NMFS is proposing to open the 2019 Atlantic commercial shark fishing season for all shark management groups in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea, on or about January 1, 2019, after the publication of the final rule for this action (Table 2). NMFS is also proposing to start the 2019 commercial shark fishing season with the commercial retention limit of 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip in both the eastern and western Gulf of Mexico sub-regions, and a commercial retention limit of 25 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip in the Atlantic region (Table 2). NMFS will consider public comments received during the current year and catch rates from this year. Any retention limits that are proposed could change as a result of public comments as well as catch rates and landings information based on updated data available when drafting the final rule.

    Table 2—Quota Linkages, Season Opening Dates, and Commercial Retention Limit by Regional or Sub-Regional Shark Management Group Region or sub-
  • region
  • Management group Quota linkages Season opening dates Commercial retention limits for directed shark limited access permit holders
  • (inseason adjustments are possible)
  • Western Gulf of Mexico Blacktip Sharks
  • Aggregated Large Coastal Sharks
  • Hammerhead Sharks
  • Not Linked
  • Linked
  • January 1, 2019 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip.
    Eastern Gulf of Mexico Blacktip Sharks
  • Aggregated Large Coastal Sharks
  • Hammerhead Sharks
  • Not Linked
  • Linked
  • January 1, 2019 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip.
  • NMFS anticipates an inseason increase to 50 large coastal sharks other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip around April 1, 2019.
  • Gulf of Mexico Non-Blacknose Small Coastal Sharks
  • Smoothhound Sharks
  • Not Linked
  • Not Linked
  • January 1, 2019
  • January 1, 2019
  • N/A.
  • N/A.
  • Atlantic Aggregated Large Coastal Sharks
  • Hammerhead Sharks
  • Linked January 1, 2019 25 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip.
  • If quota is landed quickly (e.g., if approximately 20 percent of quota is caught at the beginning of the year), NMFS anticipates an inseason reduction (e.g., to 3 or fewer LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip), then an inseason increase to 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip around July 15, 2019.
  • Non-Blacknose Small Coastal Sharks Linked (South of 34° N lat. only) January 1, 2019 N/A. Blacknose Sharks (South of 34° N lat. only) 8 Blacknose sharks per vessel per trip (applies to directed and incidental permit holders). Smoothhound Sharks Not Linked January 1, 2019 N/A. No regional quotas Non-Sandbar LCS Research
  • Sandbar Shark Research
  • Linked January 1, 2019 N/A.
    Blue Sharks
  • Porbeagle Sharks
  • Pelagic Sharks Other Than Porbeagle or Blue
  • Not Linked January 1, 2019 N/A.

    In the Gulf of Mexico region, NMFS proposes opening the fishing season on or about January 1, 2019, for the aggregated LCS, blacktip sharks, and hammerhead shark management groups with the commercial retention limits of 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip for directed shark permit holders in the eastern and western sub-region. This opening date and retention limit combination would provide, to the extent practicable, equitable opportunities across the fisheries management sub-regions. This opening date takes into account all the season opening criteria listed in § 635.27(b)(3), and particularly the criteria that NMFS consider the length of the season for the different species and/or management group in the previous years (§ 635.27(b)(3)(ii) and (iii)) and whether fishermen were able to participate in the fishery in those years (§ 635.27(b)(3)(v)). The proposed commercial retention limits take into account the criteria listed in § 635.24(a)(8), and particularly the criterion that NMFS consider the catch rates of the relevant shark species/complexes based on dealer reports to date (§ 635.24(a)(8)(ii)). NMFS may also adjust the retention limit in the Gulf of Mexico region throughout the season to ensure fishermen in all parts of the region have an opportunity to harvest aggregated LCS, blacktip sharks, and hammerhead sharks (see the criteria listed at § 635.27(b)(3)(v) and § 635.24(a)(8)(ii), (v), and (vi)). In 2018, the aggregated LCS, hammerhead, and blacktip shark management groups in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region were closed on March 13, 2018 (82 FR 20447). As such, in 2019, NMFS is proposing a reduction in the commercial trip limit for these management groups in order to ensure the management group is open until at least April 2019, which is when the State of Louisiana closes state waters to shark fishing and when that State has previously asked that NMFS close Federal shark fisheries to match state regulations (see the criteria listed at § 635.27(b)(3)(vii) and § 635.24(a)(8)(iii)). In the eastern Gulf of Mexico, NMFS is proposing a lower trip limit to ensure fishermen in both Gulf of Mexico sub-regions have an opportunity to harvest aggregated LCS, blacktip sharks, and hammerhead sharks and to reduce any confusion or inequities caused by establishing different catch limits for each sub-region. When the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region closes, which is expected to occur around April 1, 2019, NMFS may increase the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region retention limit, potentially up to 50 or 55 sharks per trip. Modifying the retention limit on an inseason basis in this manner is similar to what NMFS has done successfully in recent years in the Atlantic region. NMFS expects such changes in retention limit to allow fishermen in the eastern Gulf of Mexico the opportunity to fully land the available quotas.

    In the Atlantic region, NMFS proposes opening the aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark management groups on or about January 1, 2019. This opening date is the same date that these management groups opened in 2018. As described below, this opening date also takes into account all the criteria listed in § 635.27(b)(3), and particularly the criterion that NMFS consider the effects of catch rates in one part of a region precluding vessels in another part of that region from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the different species and/or management quotas (§ 635.27(b)(3)(v)). The 2018 data indicates that an opening date of January 1, coupled with inseason adjustments to the retention limit, provided a reasonable opportunity for fishermen in every part of each region to harvest a portion of the available quotas (§ 635.27(b)(3)(i)) while accounting for variations in seasonal distribution of the different species in the management groups (§ 635.27(b)(3)(iv)). In 2018, when the aggregated LCS quota was harvested too quickly, NMFS reduced the retention limit to three sharks per trip (May 10, 2018; 83 FR 17765) to allow fishermen in the North Atlantic an opportunity to fish later in the year when sharks are available in the North Atlantic area (see the criteria at § 635.24(a)(3)(i), (ii), (v), and (vi)). NMFS then increased the retention limit to 36 sharks per trip on July 18, 2018 (83 FR 33870), to increase fishing opportunities for all fishermen across the Atlantic region. Because the quotas we propose for 2019 are the same as the quotas in 2018, NMFS expects that the season lengths and therefore the participation of various fishermen throughout the region, would be similar in 2019 (§ 635.27(b)(3)(ii) and (iii)). Based on the recent performance of the fishery, the January 1 opening date appears to meet the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments (§ 635.27(b)(3)(vi)). Therefore, changing the opening date in the fishery seems unnecessary.

    In addition, for the aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark management groups in the Atlantic region, NMFS proposes opening the fishing year with the commercial retention limit for directed shark limited access permit holders of 25 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip. This retention limit should allow fishermen to harvest some of the 2019 quota at the beginning of the year when sharks are more prevalent in the South Atlantic area (see the criteria at § 635.24(a)(3)(i), (ii), (v), and (vi)). As was done in 2018, if it appears that the quota is being harvested too quickly (i.e., about 20 percent) to allow directed fishermen throughout the entire region an opportunity to fish and ensure enough quota remains until later in the year, NMFS would reduce the commercial retention limits to incidental levels (3 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip) or another level calculated to reduce the harvest of LCS taking into account § 635.27(b)(3) and the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria listed in § 635.24(a)(8). If the quota continues to be harvested quickly, NMFS could reduce the retention limit to 0 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip to ensure enough quota remains until later in the year. If either situation occurs, NMFS would publish in the Federal Register notification of any inseason adjustments of the retention limit to an appropriate limit of sharks per trip. In 2018, NMFS reduced the retention limit to 3 LCS other than sandbar sharks on May 10, 2018 (83 FR 21744) when the aggregated LCS landings reached approximately 20 percent of the aggregated LCS quota, and did not need to reduce it further.

    Also, as was done in 2018, NMFS will consider increasing the commercial retention limits per trip at a later date if necessary to provide fishermen in the northern portion of the Atlantic region an opportunity to retain aggregated LCS and hammerhead sharks after considering the appropriate inseason adjustment criteria. Similarly, at some point later in the year (e.g., July 15), potentially equivalent to how the 2018 fishing season operated, NMFS may consider increasing the retention limit to 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip or another amount, as deemed appropriate, after considering the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria. If the quota is being harvested too quickly or too slowly, NMFS could adjust the retention limit appropriately to ensure the fishery remains open most of the rest of the year. Since the fishery is still open with a majority of the quota available, NMFS will monitor the rest of the fishing year and could make changes to the proposed 2019 opening date if necessary to ensure equitable fishing opportunities.

    All of the shark management groups would remain open until December 31, 2019, or until NMFS determines that the landings for any shark management group have reached, or are projected to reach, 80-percent of the available overall, regional, and/or sub-regional quota, if the fishery's landings are not projected to reach 100 percent of the applicable quota before the end of the season, or when the quota-linked management group is closed. If NMFS determines that a non-linked shark species or management group must be closed, then, consistent with § 635.28(b)(2) for non-linked quotas (e.g., eastern Gulf of Mexico blacktip, western Gulf of Mexico blacktip, Gulf of Mexico non-blacknose SCS, pelagic sharks, or the Atlantic or Gulf of Mexico smoothhound sharks), NMFS will publish in the Federal Register a notice of closure for that shark species, shark management group, region, and/or sub-region that will be effective no fewer than four days from the date of filing (83 FR 31677). For the blacktip shark management group, regulations at § 635.28(b)(5)(i) through (v) authorize NMFS to close the management group before landings reach, or are expected to reach, 80-percent of the available overall, regional, and/or sub-regional quota, after considering the following criteria and other relevant factors: Season length based on available sub-regional quota and average sub-regional catch rates; variability in regional and/or sub-regional seasonal distribution, abundance, and migratory patterns; effects on accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments; amount of remaining shark quotas in the relevant sub-region; and regional and/or sub-regional catch rates of the relevant shark species or management groups. From the effective date and time of the closure until NMFS announces, via the publication of a notice in the Federal Register, that additional quota is available and the season is reopened, the fisheries for the shark species or management group are closed, even across fishing years.

    If NMFS determines that a linked shark species or management group must be closed, then, consistent with § 635.28(b)(3) for linked quotas and the Final Rule to Revise Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Shark Fishery Closure Regulations (83 FR 31677), NMFS will publish in the Federal Register a notice of closure for all of the species and/or management groups in a linked group that will be effective no fewer than four days from date of filing. From the effective date and time of the closure until NMFS announces, via the publication of a notice in the Federal Register, that additional quota is available and the season is reopened, the fisheries for all linked species and/or management groups are closed, even across fishing years. The linked quotas of the species and/or management groups are Atlantic hammerhead sharks and Atlantic aggregated LCS; eastern Gulf of Mexico hammerhead sharks and eastern Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS; western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead sharks and western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS; and Atlantic blacknose and Atlantic non-blacknose SCS south of 34° N. latitude.

    Request for Comments

    Comments on this proposed rule may be submitted via www.regulations.gov or by mail. NMFS solicits comments on this proposed rule by October 11, 2018 (see DATES and ADDRESSES).

    Classification

    The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.

    These proposed specifications are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    NMFS determined that the final rules to implement Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP (June 24, 2008, 73 FR 35778; corrected on July 15, 2008, 73 FR 40658), Amendment 5a to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP (78 FR 40318; July 3, 2013), Amendment 6 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP (80 FR 50073; August 18, 2015), and Amendment 9 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP (80 FR 73128; November 24, 2015) are consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the approved coastal management program of coastal states on the Atlantic including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea as required under the Coastal Zone Management Act. Pursuant to 15 CFR 930.41(a), NMFS provided the Coastal Zone Management Program of each coastal state a 60-day period to review the consistency determination and to advise the Agency of their concurrence. NMFS received concurrence with the consistency determinations from several states and inferred consistency from those states that did not respond within the 60-day time period. This proposed action to establish opening dates and adjust quotas for the 2019 fishing year for the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries does not change the framework previously consulted upon; therefore, no additional consultation is required.

    An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. The IRFA analysis follows.

    Section 603(b)(1) of the RFA requires agencies to explain the purpose of the rule. This rule, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments, is being proposed to establish the 2019 commercial shark fishing quotas, retention limits, and fishing seasons. Without this rule, the commercial shark fisheries would close on December 31, 2018, and would not open until another action was taken. This proposed rule would be implemented according to the regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments. Thus, NMFS expects few, if any, economic impacts to fishermen other than those already analyzed in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments, based on the quota adjustments.

    Section 603(b)(2) of the RFA requires agencies to explain the rule's objectives. The objectives of this rule are to: Adjust the baseline quotas for all shark management groups based on any over- and/or underharvests from the previous fishing year(s); establish the opening dates of the various management groups; and establish the retention limits for the blacktip shark, aggregated large coastal shark, and hammerhead shark management groups in order to provide, to the extent practicable, equitable opportunities across the fishing management regions and/or sub-regions while also considering the ecological needs of the different shark species.

    Section 603(b)(3) of the RFA requires agencies to provide an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule would apply. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size criteria for all major industry sectors in the United States, including fish harvesters. Provision is made under SBA's regulations for an agency to develop its own industry-specific size standards after consultation with Advocacy and an opportunity for public comment (see 13 CFR 121.903(c)). Under this provision, NMFS may establish size standards that differ from those established by the SBA Office of Size Standards, but only for use by NMFS and only for the purpose of conducting an analysis of economic effects in fulfillment of the agency's obligations under the RFA. To utilize this provision, NMFS must publish such size standards in the Federal Register, which NMFS did on December 29, 2015 (80 FR 81194). In this final rule effective on July 1, 2016, NMFS established a small business size standard of $11 million in annual gross receipts for all businesses in the commercial fishing industry (NAICS 11411) for RFA compliance purposes. NMFS considers all HMS permit holders to be small entities because they had average annual receipts of less than $11 million for commercial fishing.

    As of October 2017, the proposed rule would apply to the approximately 221 directed commercial shark permit holders, 269 incidental commercial shark permit holders, 154 smoothhound shark permit holders, and 113 commercial shark dealers. Not all permit holders are active in the fishery in any given year. Active directed commercial shark permit holders are defined as those with valid permits that landed one shark based on HMS electronic dealer reports. Of the 490 directed and incidental commercial shark permit holders, only 28 permit holders landed sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region and only 78 landed sharks in the Atlantic region. Of the 154 smoothhound shark permit holders, only 26 permit holders landed smoothhound sharks in the Atlantic region and none landed smoothhound sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region. NMFS has determined that the proposed rule would not likely affect any small governmental jurisdictions.

    This proposed rule does not contain any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements (5 U.S.C. 603(b)(4)). Similarly, this proposed rule would not conflict, duplicate, or overlap with other relevant Federal rules (5 U.S.C. 603(b)(5)). Fishermen, dealers, and managers in these fisheries must comply with a number of international agreements as domestically implemented, domestic laws, and FMPs. These include, but are not limited to, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act, the High Seas Fishing Compliance Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.

    Section 603(c) of the RFA requires each IRFA to contain a description of any significant alternatives to the proposed rule which would accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities. Additionally, the RFA (5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(4)) lists four general categories of significant alternatives that would assist an agency in the development of significant alternatives. These categories of alternatives are: (1) Establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) use of performance rather than design standards; and, (4) exemptions from coverage of the rule for small entities. In order to meet the objectives of this proposed rule, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS cannot exempt small entities or change the reporting requirements only for small entities because all the entities affected are considered small entities; therefore, there are no alternatives discussed that fall under the first, second, and fourth categories described above. NMFS does not know of any performance or design standards that would satisfy the aforementioned objectives of this rulemaking while, concurrently, complying with the Magnuson-Stevens Act; therefore, there are no alternatives considered under the third category.

    This rulemaking does not establish management measures to be implemented, but rather implements previously adopted and analyzed measures with adjustments, as specified in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments and the Environmental Assessment (EA) that accompanied the 2011 shark quota specifications rule (75 FR 76302; December 8, 2010). Thus, NMFS proposes to adjust quotas established and analyzed in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments by subtracting the underharvest or adding the overharvest as allowable. Thus, NMFS has limited flexibility to modify the quotas in this rule, the impacts of which were analyzed in previous regulatory flexibility analyses.

    Based on the 2017 ex-vessel price (Table 3), fully harvesting the unadjusted 2019 Atlantic shark commercial baseline quotas could result in total fleet revenues of $7,184,943. For the Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark management group, NMFS is proposing to increase the baseline sub-regional quotas due to the underharvests in 2018. The increase for the western Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark management group could result in a $79,243 gain in total revenues for fishermen in that sub-region, while the increase for the eastern Gulf of Mexico blacktip shark management group could result in a $9,781 gain in total revenues for fishermen in that sub-region. For the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic smoothhound shark management groups, NMFS is proposing to increase the baseline quotas due to the underharvest in 2018. This would cause a potential gain in revenue of $581,718 for the fleet in the Gulf of Mexico region and a potential gain in revenue of $1,323,867 for the fleet in the Atlantic region.

    All of these changes in gross revenues are similar to the changes in gross revenues analyzed in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments. The final regulatory flexibility analyses for those amendments concluded that the economic impacts on these small entities are expected to be minimal. In the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP and its amendments and the EA for the 2011 shark quota specifications rule, NMFS stated it would be conducting annual rulemakings and considering the potential economic impacts of adjusting the quotas for under- and overharvests at that time.

    Table 3—Average Ex-Vessel Prices per lb dw for Each Shark Management Group, 2017 Region Species Average
  • ex-vessel
  • meat price
  • Average
  • ex-vessel
  • fin price
  • Western Gulf of Mexico Blacktip Shark $0.51 $11.03 Aggregated LCS 0.51 12.51 Hammerhead Shark 0.67 11.67 Eastern Gulf of Mexico Blacktip Shark 0.62 8.22 Aggregated LCS 0.43 13.00 Hammerhead Shark 0.55 12.80 Gulf of Mexico Non-Blacknose SCS 0.38 8.68 Smoothhound Shark 1.50 1.91 Atlantic Aggregated LCS 0.95 11.47 Hammerhead Shark 0.41 13.91 Non-Blacknose SCS 0.96 7.33 Blacknose Shark 1.05 7.33 Smoothhound Shark 0.70 1.63 No Region Shark Research Fishery (Aggregated LCS) 0.80 12.40 Shark Research Fishery (Sandbar only) 0.50 12.40 Blue shark 1.40 11.44 Porbeagle shark* 1.54 2.82 Other Pelagic sharks 1.52 2.82 * Used other pelagic shark ex-vessel prices for porbeagle sharks ex-vessel prices since there currently are no landings of porbeagle sharks.

    For this rule, NMFS also reviewed the criteria at § 635.27(b)(3) to determine when opening each fishery would provide equitable opportunities for fishermen, to the extent practicable, while also considering the ecological needs of the different species. The opening dates of the fishing season(s) could vary depending upon the available annual quota, catch rates, and number of fishing participants during the year. For the 2019 fishing year, NMFS is proposing to open all of the shark management groups on the effective date of the final rule for this action (expected to be on or about January 1). The direct and indirect economic impacts would be neutral on a short- and long-term basis because NMFS is not proposing to change the opening dates of these fisheries from the status quo.

    Authority

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

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19594 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 176 Tuesday, September 11, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit; CA; Meeks Bay Restoration Project AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

    SUMMARY:

    The USDA Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU) will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Meeks Bay Restoration Project. The LTBMU proposes to conduct restoration and recreation enhancement work at Meeks Bay Resort, Meeks Bay Campground, and in Meeks Creek and Meeks Marina.

    DATES:

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received by October 26, 2018. The draft EIS is expected August 2019 and the final EIS is expected February 2020.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments to Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, 35 College Drive, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150. Comments may also be sent via email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 530-543-2693. Project information will be posted to the project website http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/ltbmu/meeksbayrestoration. A public meeting will be held at Meeks Bay Resort, 7941 Emerald Bay Road, Meeks Bay, CA.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gina Thompson, 530-543-2675, [email protected] or Denise Downie, 530-543-2683, [email protected]

    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose and Need for Action

    The deteriorating condition of the existing marina infrastructure, concerns over aquatic invasive species, and concerns over degraded habitat for native species have prompted the need for action in Meeks Bay. The purpose of this project is to move the Meeks Creek stream channel and wetland/lagoon below State Route 89 (SR89) to a more natural condition where geomorphic and hydrologic processes support a functioning ecosystem while continuing to support sustainable recreation opportunities.

    There is a need to improve water quality in Meeks Creek; restore degraded aquatic, riparian, and wetland habitats and barrier beaches; provide high quality habitat that is resilient to a changing climate; improve fish passage through the SR 89 stream crossing; control or eradicate current populations of terrestrial and aquatic invasive plant species; maintain and enhance access to Lake Tahoe and National Forest System lands; provide sustainable recreation opportunities consistent with a functioning ecosystem; enhance educational and interpretive opportunities; enhance species of value to the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California; and promote the Federally protected species Tahoe yellowcress (Rorippa subumbellata) and Lahontan cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi).

    Proposed Action

    All project activities are proposed at the Meeks Bay Resort (7941 Emerald Bay Road, Meesk Bay, CA), the Meeks Bay Campground (just south of Meeks Bay Resort on Emerald Bay Road), in the Meeks Marina located between the two recreation facilities, or in Meeks Creek.

    1. Aquatic Invasive Species Eradication: Control or eradicate aquatic invasive species (e.g., warm water fish, American bullfrogs, aquatic invasive weeds) from the proposed project area using manual (chemical free) methods. Treatment of aquatic invasive species is a multi-year effort and the threat of new infestations moving into the area post implementation is high. As a result, monitoring and continued control actions are a key element in long-term success.

    2. Remove the existing marina infrastructure: Existing marina infrastructure to be removed includes the concrete boat ramp, steel and concrete sewalls, boulder riprap, the marina office, and other various underground support structures for the marina infrastructure.

    3. Restore Meeks Lagoon in the location of the existing marina: Recontour the stream and marina banks to recreate lagoon topography similar to the lagoon that was present before Meeks Marina was constructed. Place natural materials resistant to erosion on the bank slopes. Remove trees up to 30 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) as needed for topography changes. Revegetate with native plant species appropriate to the site. Remove, store, and transplant after construction any Tahoe yellowcress (Rorippa subumbellata) populations as needed to protect plants from project activities.

    4. Restore Meeks Creek from the SR 89 crossing to the confluence of Lake Tahoe: Recontour stream banks and reduce stream forces that cause erosion (i.e., realign portions of the stream course). The stream banks would be reconstructed and revegetated with desirable vegetation and would be designed to be in a state of dynamic equilibrium (stream beds and banks are neither accumulating nor eroding excessively). Fell trees up to 30 inches dbh as needed and install large wood in the creek south of SR 89 to improve aquatic habitat. Logs would be anchored in position using natural materials. Install grade control structures that blend visually with the surrounding natural environment. Restoration activities would extend less than 1/4 mile upstream from the crossing of Meeks Creek at SR 89.

    5. Install Utility Infrastructure: Construct infrastructure to secure the Tahoe City Public Utility District sewer line that crosses Meeks Creek. Relocate powerline infrastructure from within the restoration footprint. Relocate the USFS waterline from Meeks Creek bridge to under the scour limits of the restored Meeks Creek channel. Install or relocate necessary utility infrastructure either above or below ground for project activities, including water, sewer, electric, and communication lines.

    6. Implement Resource Protection Barriers: Install new barriers (natural or fenced) in areas of relocated Tahoe yellow cress (Rorippa subumbellata) communities. Natural barriers would include willows or other vegetation screening, downed logs, boulders, or other natural materials.

    7. Wildlife Enhancement Actions: Install nest/perch structures for waterfowl, install bat boxes, and plant willow in select locations for willow flycatcher.

    8. Construct a Pier: Construct a pier at furthest south end of USFS property in Meeks Bay Campground. The pier would be 12-18 feet wide and accessible via small boats from Lake Tahoe and via a universally accessible walkway on land that would accommodate both day use and boat-in camping opportunities. The pier would allow temporary mooring of 10-20 boats and be up to 300 feet long. Utilities on the pier would accommodate electrical and water. The pier would be designed for access by a maintenance vehicle.

    9. Construct a Boat Launch: Construct a double-lane boat launch, marina office, and supporting infrastructure adjacent to the pier. The launch access would be designed to launch boats at water elevation level 6,223 feet and above. Support infrastructure would include an aquatic invasive species inspection station.

    10. Reconstruct Trailer Parking and Vehicular Circulation Routes: Construct a boat trailer parking area and vehicular circulation routes as needed within Meeks Bay Campground for the pier and boat launch. Reconstruct and realign day use parking areas and access roads as needed. The capacity of parking spaces dedicated for day use will remain within 20% of existing levels. The capacity of the boat trailer and vehicle parking will be sized to meet the capacity of the pier and boat ramp.

    11. Reconstruct Meeks Bay Campground: Reconstruct Meeks Bay Campground (south of Meeks Creek) to include utilities (water, electrical), host sites, restrooms, and a centralized waste dump station. The capacity of the camping units will remain within 20% of existing. Types of campging units constructed may include tent camping sites, full hookup sites, and/or yurt type sites or a combination of these. The campground facilities would be designed to function during the shoulder seasons (i.e. cold-resistant utilities at campsites and restrooms).

    12. Install Pedestrian Connectivity Routes: Construct a pedestrian/bike bridge over Meeks Creek to connect Meeks Bay Resort to Meeks Bay Campground. The bridge would be sized to accommodate two-way pedestrian and bicycle traffic, as well as standard vehicle loading for maintenance vehicles. Install an accessible multi-use pathway connecting Meeks Bay Resort commercial core area to the Meeks Bay Campground and the new pier/boat launch. Construct accessible beach access routes using stable, non-eroding materials, from parking areas and access points to the beach that meet Forest Service universal accessibility standards.

    13. Install Interpretation Opportunties: Install interpretive opportunities along the lagoon area that highlight restoration activities, history of the Washoe Tribe in Meeks Bay, and species of concern to the Washoe Tribe.

    14. Construct Day Use Parking Areas: Construct a day use parking area in the location of the former trailer parking in Meeks Resort to accommodate approximately 20 vehicles and be designed to accommodate Washoe Tribal Elders and other persons with disabilities. Construct the day use parking areas and access routes in Meeks Bay Resort as described in the Meeks Bay Master Plan.

    15. Implement Shoreline Stabilization Measures: Remove and replace gabion walls and concrete wall along the north end of Meeks Bay with natural retaining structures that can accommodate beach wave run-up action.

    16. Install Best Management Practices: Install permanent Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the parking lot areas, restrooms, and along roadways to capture and infiltrate storm water. Permanent BMPs would be consistent with USFS, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA), and Water Board requirements. BMPs would include, but not be limited to, installation of infiltration basins, re-contouring and repaving of the parking areas to ensure proper drainage of storm water off paved surfaces, drip-line trenches, or other means of directing and infiltrating storm water to prevent run-off into Lake Tahoe.

    Possible Alternatives

    Possible alternatives based on existing public comment and agency input include an alternative that fully reconstructs the existing marina (including supporting infrastructure such as parking areas and utilities). Additional alternatives will be developed based on public comment received during the scoping period.

    Responsible Official

    Forest Supervisor Jeff Marsolais.

    Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The responsible official will decide: (1) Whether or not to implement the project activities as described in the proposed action, (2) whether or not to implement the project activities as described in one of the alternatives analyzed in detail, (3) whether to implement a combination of alternatives analyzed in detail, or (4) whether to take no action.

    Preliminary Issues

    Preliminary issues that have been identified are maintaining access to the existing recreation opportunities on the site, and the potential impacts to the character of Meeks Bay from restoration activities and the relocation of recreation infrastructure.

    Permits or Licenses Required

    Permits for work in Meeks Creek would be required from the Army Corps of Engineers since the actions are executed in Waters of the US. Permits for project work from the local Water Board would be required. Project permits from the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency would be required. County building permits for the aquatic invasive species inspection station may apply.

    Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the EIS. A public open house for the project will be held at the Meeks Marina on October 10 at 2:00 p.m. PST. Entry to the Marina for the meeting will be through the Meeks Bay Resort, 7941 Emerald Bay Road, Meesk Bay, CA. Project documents, information on the public meeting, and additional supporting information will be posted to the project website http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/ltbmu/meeksbayrestoration.

    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the EIS. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.

    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however.

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Chris French, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19682 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the New Hampshire Advisory Committee; Correction AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Correction: Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission on Civil Rights published a document September 4, 2018, announcing an upcoming New Hampshire Advisory Committee. The document contained incorrect date and address to the meeting.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara de La Viez, DFO, at [email protected] or 202-376-7533.

    CORRECTION: In the Federal Register of September 4, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-19036, on pages 44857-448584 in the third columns, delete the “Dates” and replace it with September 12, 2018 at 4 p.m. EDT, and delete the “Addresses” and replace it with 87 Middle Street, Manchester, NH 03101.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19593 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Nevada State Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Nevada Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 2:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Thursday, September 13, 2018, the purpose of meeting is for the Committee to debrief the hearing on policing practices.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday, September 13, 2018, at 2:00 p.m. PT.

    Public Call Information:

    Dial: 877-260-1479.

    Conference ID: 9065619.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-260-1479, conference ID number: 9065619. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=261. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Debrief III. Update on Additional Written Comment and Materials for Consideration IV. Discussion Regarding Requesting Additional Testimony V. Public Comment VI. Next Steps Dated: September 6, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19720 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the California Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the California State Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 10:00 a.m. (Pacific Time) Thursday, September 13, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to continue reviewing project proposal examining Proposition 47.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on September 13, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. PT.

    Public Call Information:

    Dial: 877-260-1479.

    Conference ID: 9387568.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-260-1479, conference ID number: 9387568. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at https://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=237. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, https://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Discuss Proposition 47 Project Proposal III. Public Comment IV. Next Steps V. Adjournment Dated: September 6, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19724 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Tuesday, September 11, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is to review draft findings and recommendations and introduction sections for the OR SAC report on human trafficking.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 11, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. PT.

    Public Call Information: Dial: 877-260-1479, Conference ID: 2620359.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the above toll-free call-in number. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

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

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

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Review Draft Findings and Recommendations Section Edits III. Review Draft Introduction Section IV. Public Comment V. Next Steps VI. Adjournment Dated: September 6, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19722 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Alabama Advisory Committee To Discuss Access to Voting in the State AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Alabama Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Monday, September 17, 2018, at 1 p.m. (Central) for the purpose discussing the access to voting report and strategies to move forward with the report.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Monday, September 17, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. (Central). Public Call Information: Dial: 877-710-4181, Conference ID: 1713129.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Barreras, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-260-1479, conference ID: 1713129. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwestern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn Street, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to David Barreras at [email protected]. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Midwestern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Alabama Advisory Committee link (http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/committee.aspx?cid=233&aid=17). Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Roll Call Update on submission of Summary of Testimony Next Steps for the Report Public Comment Adjournment Dated: September 6, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19721 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Missouri Advisory Committee To Discuss Civil Rights Topics in the State AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Missouri Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Thursday, September 20, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. (Central) for the purpose discussing civil rights topics in the state.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday, September 20, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. (Central).

    Public Call Information: Dial: 877-260-1479, Conference ID: 5952926.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Barreras, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 877-260-1479, conference ID: 5952926. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwestern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn Street, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324 or emailed to David Barreras at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Midwestern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Missouri Advisory Committee link (https://facadatabase.gov/committee/committee.aspx?cid=258&aid=17). Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Roll Call Discussion of Topics for Study Next Steps Public Comment Adjournment Dated: September 6, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19723 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-56-2018] Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone—Lufkin, Texas, Under Alternative Site Framework

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the City of Lufkin to establish a foreign-trade zone in Lufkin, Texas, within the Port Arthur-Beaumont CBP port of entry, under the alternative site framework (ASF) adopted by the FTZ Board (15 CFR Sec. 400.2(c)). The ASF is an option for grantees for the establishment or reorganization of zones and can permit significantly greater flexibility in the designation of new “subzones” or “usage-driven” FTZ sites for operators/users located within a grantee's “service area” in the context of the FTZ Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for a zone project. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on September 5, 2018. The applicant is authorized to make the proposal under Texas Statutes, Business and Commerce Code, Title 15, Chapter 681.

    The proposed zone would be the fourth zone for the Port Arthur-Beaumont CBP port of entry. The existing zones—FTZ 115, Beaumont; FTZ 116, Port Arthur; and, FTZ 117, Orange—were approved on March 20, 1985 (Board Oder 296). The Foreign-Trade Zone of Southeast Texas, Inc., is the grantee of FTZs 115, 116 and 117.

    The applicant's proposed service area under the ASF would be the City of Lufkin and a portion of its Extra Territorial Jurisdiction, as described in the application. If approved, the applicant would be able to serve sites throughout the service area based on companies' needs for FTZ designation. The applicant has indicated that the proposed service area is within the Port Arthur-Beaumont Customs and Border Protection port of entry.

    The application indicates a need for zone services in the City of Lufkin area. Several firms have indicated an interest in using zone procedures. Specific production approvals are not being sought at this time. Such requests would be made to the FTZ Board on a case-by-case basis.

    In accordance with the FTZ Board's regulations, Camille Evans of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and to report findings and recommendations to the FTZ Board.

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is November 13, 2018. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to November 26, 2018.

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

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

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19701 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security [Docket No. 170802716-7716-01] National Defense Stockpile Market Impact Committee Request for Public Comments on the Potential Market Impact of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2020 Annual Materials Plan AGENCY:

    Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of inquiry; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The purpose of this notice is to advise the public that the National Defense Stockpile Market Impact Committee, co-chaired by the Departments of Commerce and State, is seeking public comments on the potential market impact of the proposed Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Stockpile Annual Materials Plan. The role of the Market Impact Committee is to advise the National Defense Stockpile Manager on the projected domestic and foreign economic effects of all acquisitions, conversions, and disposals involving the stockpile and related material research and development projects. Public comments are an important element of the Committee's market impact review process.

    DATES:

    To be considered, written comments must be received by October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Address all comments concerning this notice to Eric Longnecker, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Room 3876, Washington, DC 20230, fax: (202) 482-5650 (Attn: Eric Longnecker), email: [email protected]; and Matthew McManus, Deputy Director, Office of Policy Analysis and Public Diplomacy, U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Energy Resources, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20520, fax: (202) 647-7431 (Attn: Matthew McManus), email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Parya Fenton, Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, telephone: (202) 482-8228, fax: (202) 482-5650 (Attn: Parya Fenton), email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Under the authority of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Revision Act of 1979, as amended (the Stock Piling Act) (50 U.S.C. 98 et seq.), the Department of Defense's Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), as National Defense Stockpile Manager, maintains a stockpile of strategic and critical materials to supply the military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States for national defense. Section 9(b)(2)(G)(ii) of the Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98h(b)(2)(H)(ii)) authorizes the National Defense Stockpile Manager to fund material research and development projects to develop new materials for the stockpile.

    Section 3314 of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1993 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (50 U.S.C. 98h-1) formally established a Market Impact Committee (the Committee) to “advise the National Defense Stockpile Manager on the projected domestic and foreign economic effects of all acquisitions and disposals of materials from the stockpile. . . .” The Committee must also balance market impact concerns with the statutory requirement to protect the U.S. Government against avoidable loss.

    The Committee is comprised of representatives from the Departments of Commerce, State, Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, the Treasury, and Homeland Security, and is co-chaired by the Departments of Commerce and State. The FY 1993 NDAA directs the Committee to consult with industry representatives that produce, process, or consume the materials stored in or of interest to the National Defense Stockpile Manager.

    As the National Defense Stockpile Manager, the DLA must produce an Annual Materials Plan proposing the maximum quantity of each listed material that may be acquired, disposed of, upgraded, converted, recovered, or sold by the DLA in a particular fiscal year. In Attachment 1, the DLA lists the quantities and types of activity (potential disposals, potential acquisitions, potential conversions (upgrade, rotation, reprocessing, etc.) or potential recovery from government sources) associated with each material in its proposed FY 2020 Annual Materials Plan (“AMP”). The quantities listed in Attachment 1 are not acquisition, disposal, upgrade, conversion, recovery, reprocessing, or sales target quantities, but rather a statement of the proposed maximum quantity of each listed material that may be acquired, disposed of, upgraded, converted, recovered, or sold in a particular fiscal year by the DLA, as noted. The quantity of each material that will actually be acquired or offered for sale will depend on the market for the material at the time of the acquisition or offering, as well as on the quantity of each material approved for acquisition, disposal, conversion (upgrade, rotation, reprocessing, etc.), or recovery by Congress.

    The Committee is seeking public comments on the potential market impact associated with the proposed FY 2020 AMP as enumerated in Attachment 1. Public comments are an important element of the Committee's market impact review process.

    Submission of Comments

    The Committee requests that interested parties provide written comments, supporting data and documentation, and any other relevant information on the potential market impact of the quantities associated with the proposed FY 2020 AMP. All comments must be submitted to the addresses indicated in this notice. All comments submitted through email must include the phrase “Market Impact Committee Notice of Inquiry” in the subject line.

    The Committee encourages interested persons who wish to comment to do so at the earliest possible time. The period for submission of comments will close on October 11, 2018. The Committee will consider all comments received before the close of the comment period. Comments received after the end of the comment period will be considered, if possible, but their consideration cannot be assured.

    All comments submitted in response to this notice will be made a matter of public record and will be available for public inspection and copying. Anyone submitting business confidential information should clearly identify the business confidential portion of the submission and also provide a non-confidential submission that can be placed in the public record. The Committee will seek to protect such information to the extent permitted by law.

    The Office of Administration, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, displays public comments on the BIS Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) website at https://efoia.bis.doc.gov/. This office does not maintain a separate public inspection facility. If you have technical difficulties accessing this website, please call BIS's Office of Administration at (202) 482-1900 for assistance.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Richard Ashooh, Assistant Secretary for Export Administration. Attachment 1 Proposed Fiscal Year 2020 Annual Materials Plan Material Unit Quantity Footnote Potential Disposals Beryllium Metal ST 8 Chromium, Ferro ST 23,500 Chromium, Metal ST 200 Germanium Scrap kg 3,000 Manganese, Ferro ST 50,000 Manganese, Metallurgical Grade SDT 322,025 Nickel Based Alloys Lbs 600,000 Platinum Tr Oz 8,380 PGM—Iridium Tr Oz 489 Tantalum Carbide Powder Lb Ta 3,777 Tantalum Scrap Lbs 190 Titanium Based Alloys Lbs 150,000 Tungsten Metal Powder LB W 275,738 Tungsten Ores and Concentrates LB W 3,000,000 Zinc ST 7,993 Potential Acquisitions Antimony MT 1,100 Boron Carbide MT 1,000 High Modulus High Strength Carbon Fibers MT 72 Carbon Fibers m2 5,000 Cerium MT 900 CZT (Cadmium Zinc Tellurium substrates) cm2 32,000 Electrolytic Manganese Metal MT 5,000 Lanthanum MT 4,100 Potassium Nitrate Lbs 100,000 Rare Earth Magnet Feedstock MT 100 Rayon MT 600 RDX/HMX/IMX/TNT Lbs 7,000,000 Silicon Carbide Fibers Lbs 875 TATB (Triamino-Trinitrobenzene) Lbs 48,000 Tantalum Lb Ta 33,990 Tin MT 40 Tungsten Rhenium Metal kg 5,000 Potential Conversions (Upgrade, rotation, reprocessing, etc.) Beryllium Metal ST 8 CZT (Cadmium Zinc Tellurium substrates) cm2 32,000 High Modulus High Strength Carbon Fibers MT 72 Dysprosium MT 0.5 Europium MT 35 Germanium (Scrap) kg 5,000 Iridium Catalyst Lbs 50 Lithium Ion Materials MT 25 Rare Earths Elements MT 12 Silicon Carbide Fibers Lbs 875 Tin MT 804 Potential Recovery from Government Sources Bearing Steel MT 50 E-Waste MT 50 (1) Gadolinium Oxide MT 4 Germanium (Scrap) kg 5,000 Iridium Catalyst (Scrap) Lbs 50 Lithium Ion Materials MT 25 Magnesium Metal MT 25 Rhenium Metal kg 500 Super Alloys Lbs 1,500,000 Tantalum MT 10 Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Rods (Scrap) kg 250 Zirconia Oxide MT 4 Footnote Key: 1 Strategic and Critical Materials collected from E-Waste (Strategic Materials collected from electronics waste).
    [FR Doc. 2018-19617 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Procedures for Submitting Requests for Expedited Relief From Quantitative Limits—Existing Contract: Section 232 National Security Investigations of Steel Imports AGENCY:

    Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

    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:

    To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 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]ov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    In the Proclamation of August 29, President Trump directed that as soon as practicable, the Secretary of Commerce shall issue procedures for requests for exclusions described in clause 2 to allow for exclusion requests for countries subject to quantitative limitations. The U.S. Department of Commerce will create an exclusion process for clause 2 by posting the newly created form on the Commerce website. Requesters will complete this form and send the form, the required certification, and any needed attachments to the U.S. Department of Commerce at the email address [email protected] The posting of this exclusion procedure on the Commerce website will fulfill the Presidential directive included in the most recent Proclamation, as well as the earlier Proclamations that directed the Secretary of Commerce to create an exclusion process to ensure users of steel in the United States would continue to have access to the steel that they may need.

    “The Secretary shall, on an expedited basis, grant relief from the quantitative limitation set forth in Proclamation 9740 and Proclamation 9759 and their accompanying annexes for any steel article where (i) the party requesting relief entered into a written contract for production and shipment of such steel article before March 8, 2018; (ii) such contract specifies the quantity of such steel article that is to be produced and shipped to the United States consistent with a schedule contained in such contract; (iii) such steel article is to be used to construct a facility in the United States and such steel article cannot be procured from a supplier in the United States to meet the delivery schedule and specifications contained in such contract.”

    II. Method of Collection

    Exclusion requests described in the procedures posted on the Commerce website for clause 2 exclusion from the Proclamation of August 29 will be submitted to the U.S. Department of Commerce by email. All exclusion requests under clause 2 must be in electronic form, but may be submitted at any time. However, exclusion requests requested under clause 2 if granted will only be valid till March 31, 2019. All submissions for exclusion requests are entirely voluntary.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0694-0140.

    Form Number(s): N/A.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Private Sector.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,717.

    Estimated Time per Response: 10 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 17,170.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0. (This is not the cost of respondents' time, but the indirect costs respondents may incur for such things as purchases of specialized software or hardware needed to report, or expenditures for accounting or records maintenance services required specifically by the collection.)

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Legal Authority: Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. 1862).

    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. 2018-19659 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-044] 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2018 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping order on 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) from the People's Republic of China (China) covering the October 7, 2016, through March 31, 2018, period of review (POR).

    DATES:

    Applicable September 11, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Paul Stolz, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4474.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On April 2, 2018, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on R-134A from China.1 On April 27, and April 30, 2018, Commerce received timely requests for review from two producers and/or exporters of the subject merchandise: T.T. International Co., Ltd. (TTI) and Zhejiang Sanmei Chemical Ind. Co., Ltd. (also known as Zhejiang Sanmei Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. or “Zhejiang Sanmei”) (Sanmei).2 Based on these requests, on June 6, 2018, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review covering the October 7, 2016, through March 31, 2018 POR, with respect to TTI and Sanmei.3 On August 7 and 21, 2018, TTI and Sanmei, respectively, timely withdrew their requests for an antidumping duty administrative review, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).4 No other party requested a review of this order.

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 83 FR 13949 (April 2, 2018).

    2See the letter from TTI, “1,1,1,3-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) from the People's Republic of China: Request for Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated April 27, 2018 and the letter from Sanmei, “1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) from the People's Republic of China: Request for Administrative Review,” dated April 30, 2018.

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 26258 (June 6, 2018) (Initiation Notice).

    4See letter from TTI, “Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (R134a) from the People's Republic of China; Withdrawal of Request for Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated August 7, 2018, and letter from Sanmei, “1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134A) from China: Withdrawal of Request for Antidumping Duty Administrative,” dated August 21, 2018.

    Rescission

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party who requested a review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. TTI and Sanmei both timely withdrew their requests for an administrative review within the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of this order. Therefore, we are rescinding the administrative review of antidumping duty order on R-134A from China covering the period October 7, 2016 through March 31, 2018, in its entirety.

    Assessment

    Because Commerce is rescinding this administrative review in its entirety, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of R-134A from China. The entries to which this administrative review pertains shall be assessed antidumping duties at rates equal to the cash deposits of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

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

    Notification to Interested Parties

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

    Dated: August 31, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19568 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-909] Certain Steel Nails From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that certain steel nails (nails) from the People's Republic of China (China) were sold in the United States at less than normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR), August 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 11, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Susan Pulongbarit or Benito Ballesteros, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4031 or (202) 482-7425, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On October 16, 2017, Commerce published in the Federal Register the notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on nails from China 1 for the POR, August 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017.2 Commerce initiated a review with respect to 145 companies.3 Pursuant to section 777A(c)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce selected three mandatory respondents, The Stanley Works (Langfang) Fastening Systems Co., Ltd. and Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. (collectively, Stanley), Dezhou Hualude Hardware Products Co. Ltd. (Dezhou Hualude), and Shandong Dinglong Import & Export Co., Ltd. (Shandong Dinglong).4 On April 30, 2018, Commerce extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results by 90 days.5 On August 1, 2018, Commerce fully extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results to September 4, 2018.6

    1See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China, 73 FR 44961 (August 1, 2008).

    2See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 48051, 48056-58 (October 16, 2017); See also corrections in Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 52268, 52271 n. 4 (November 13, 2017); and Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 57705, 57707 n.5 (December 7, 2017) (collectively, Initiation Notice).

    3Id.

    4See Memorandum, “Respondent Selection for Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Sampling Meeting with Outside Parties,” dated April 6, 2018.

    5See Memorandum, “Ninth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated April 30, 2018.

    6See Memorandum, Ninth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated August 2, 2018.

    Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this review are nails from China. For a full description of the scope, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice.7

    7See Memorandum, “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 2016-2017 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China,” dated concurrently with this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

    Based on the no-shipments letters filed by nine companies,8 Commerce preliminarily determined that these companies had no shipments during the POR. For additional information regarding this determination, including a list of these companies, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Consistent with our assessment practice in non-market economy (NME) administrative reviews, Commerce is not rescinding this review for these companies, but intends to complete the review and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review.9

    8 Although Shanxi Yuci Broad Wire Products Co., Ltd. and Certified Products International Inc. each submitted a no shipments letter, they are not among the 145 companies initiated on in this review, and therefore are not subject to this review. Therefore, we only evaluated the no shipment claims of the nine companies that submitted no shipments letters and for which this review was initiated.

    9See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65694-95 (October 24, 2011) and the “Assessment Rates” section, below.

    Separate Rates

    Commerce preliminarily determined that information placed on the record by the three mandatory respondents, as well as by the 19 other separate rate applicants, demonstrates that these companies are entitled to separate rate status. See Preliminary Results of Review section below. For additional information, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    China-Wide Entity

    Commerce's policy regarding conditional review of the China-wide entity applies to this administrative review.10 Under this policy, the China-wide entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or Commerce self-initiates, a review of the entity. Because no party requested a review of the China-wide entity in this review, the entity is not under review and the weighted-average dumping margin determined for the China-wide entity is not subject to change (i.e., 118.04 percent) as a result of this review.11 Aside from the companies discussed above, Commerce considers all other companies for which a review was requested 12 to be part of the China-wide entity. For additional information, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum; see also Appendix I for a list of companies considered as part of the China-wide entity.

    10See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013) (Sampling Methodology Notice).

    11Id.; Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 18816, 18817 and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    12See Appendix I.

    Sample Rate Calculation

    In the Sampling Methodology Notice, we stated that, in order to calculate a rate to assign the non-selected companies when using a sampling procedure, Commerce will calculate a “sample rate” based upon an average of the rates for the selected respondents, weighted by the import share of their corresponding strata.13 The respondents selected for individual examination through the sampling process will receive their own rates; all companies in the sample population who were not selected for individual examination will receive the sample rate.14 Accordingly, we have calculated the sample rate by averaging the rates for the three selected respondents, weighted by the import share of their corresponding strata.15 The non-selected companies entitled to a separate rate have been assigned the sample rate. For additional information and a discussion of the issues examined with regard to the calculation of the sample rate, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    13See Sampling Methodology Notice, 78 FR at 65965.

    14Id.

    15See Memorandum, “Preliminary Results of the Ninth Antidumping Administrative Review of Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Calculation of the Sample Margin for Respondents Not Selected for Individual Examination,” dated concurrently with this memorandum (Sample Rate Memorandum).

    Methodology

    Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) and 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act. Constructed export prices and export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because China is an NME country within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, NV has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Preliminary Results of Review

    Commerce preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period August 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017:

    Exporter/producer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • Dezhou Hualude 40.03 Shandong Dinglong 118.04 Stanley 3.85 Hebei Canzhou New Century Foreign Trade Co. Ltd 36.93 Mingguang Ruifeng Hardware Products Co. Ltd 36.93 Qingdao D&L Group Ltd 36.93 SDC International Australia Pty. Ltd 36.93 Shandong Oriental Cherry Hardware Group Co. Ltd 36.93 Shanghai Curvet Hardware Products Co. Ltd 36.93 Shanghai Yueda Nails Co. Ltd 36.93 Shanxi Hairui Trade Co., Ltd 36.93 Shanxi Pioneer Hardware Industrial Co. Ltd 36.93 Shanxi Tianli Industries Co. Ltd 36.93 S-Mart (Tianjin) Technology Development Co. Ltd 36.93 Suntec Industries Co. Ltd 36.93 Tianjin Huixingshangmao Co. Ltd 36.93 Tianjin Jinchi Metal Products Co. Ltd 36.93 Tianjin Jinghai County Hongli Industry and Business Co. Ltd 36.93 Tianjin Universal Machinery Imp. & Exp 36.93 Tianjin Zhonglian Metals Ware Co. Ltd 36.93 Xi'An Metals and Minerals Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd 36.93 Zhangjiagang Lianfeng Metals Products Co. Ltd 36.93
    Disclosure

    Commerce intends to disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days of its public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Public Comment

    Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results, unless the Secretary alters the time limit. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.16 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this administrative review are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    16See 19 CFR 351.309; see also 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements).

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, whether any participant is a foreign national, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of our analysis of all issues raised in the case briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, unless extended.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.17 Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.

    17See 19 CFR 351.212(b).

    For any individually examined respondent whose weighted average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent) in the final results of this review, Commerce will calculate importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where an importer-specific ad valorem rate is not zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation.18 Where either a respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.19

    18See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    19See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this review for shipments of the subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by sections 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the companies listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is de minimis, then cash deposit rate will be zero); (2) for previously examined China and non-China exporters not listed above that at the time of entry are eligible for a separate rate based on a prior completed segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter-specific cash deposit rate; (3) for all China exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate at the time of entry, the cash deposit rate will be that for the China-wide entity (i.e., 118.04 percent); and (4) for all non-China exporters of subject merchandise which at the time of entry are not eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the China exporter that supplied that non-China exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This preliminary determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I China-Wide Entity 1. Air It on Inc. 2. A-Jax Enterprises Ltd. 3. A-Jax International Co. Ltd. 4. Anhui Amigo Imp.& Exp. Co. Ltd. 5. Anhui Tea Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. 6. Beijing Catic Industry Ltd. 7. Beijing Qin-Li Jeff Trading Co., Ltd. 8. Bodi Corporation. 9. Cana (Rizhou) Hardward Co. Ltd. 10. Cangzhou Xinqiao Int'l Trade Co. Ltd. 11. Certified Products Taiwan Inc. 12. Changzhou Kya Trading Co. Ltd. 13. Chia Pao Metal Co. Ltd. 14. China Dinghao Co. Ltd. 15. China Staple Enterprise Co. Ltd. 16. Chinapack Ningbo Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. 17. Chite Enterprise Co. Ltd. 18. Crelux Int'l Co. Ltd. 19. Daejin Steel Co. Ltd. 20. Dingzhou Baota Metal Products Co. Ltd. 21. Dong E Fuqiang Metal Products Co. Ltd. 22. Ejen Brother Limited. 23. Faithful Engineering Products Co. Ltd. 24. Fastening Care. 25. Fastgrow International Co. Inc. 26. Foshan Hosontool Development Hardware Co. Ltd. 27. Glori-Industry Hong Kong Inc. 28. Guangdong Meite Mechanical Co. Ltd. 29. Hangzhou Spring Washer Co. Ltd. 30. Hebei Handform Plastic Products Co. Ltd. 31. Hebei Minghao Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. 32. Hengtuo Metal Products Co. Ltd 33. Hongyi (HK) Hardware Products Co. Ltd. 34. Huaiyang County Yinfeng Plastic Factory. 35. Huanghua Yingjin Hardware Products. 36. Inmax Industries Sdn. Bhd. 37. Jade Shuttle Enterprise Co. Ltd. 38. Jiangsu General Science Technology Co. Ltd. 39. Jiangsu Huaiyin Guex Tools. 40. Jiaxing TSR Hardware Inc. 41. Jinhai Hardware Co. Ltd. 42. Jinsco International Corp. 43. Jinsheung Steel Corporation. 44. Koram Inc. 45. Korea Wire Co. Ltd. 46. Liaocheng Minghui Hardware Products. 47. Maanshan Lilai International Trade. Co. Ltd. 48. Mingguang Abundant Hardware Products Co. Ltd. 49. Nailtech Co. Ltd. 50. Nanjing Nuochun Hardware Co. Ltd. 51. Nanjing Tianxingtong Electronic Technology Co. Ltd. 52. Nanjing Tianyu International Co. Ltd. 53. Nanjing Zeejoe International Trade. 54. Ningbo Adv. Tools Co. Ltd. 55. Ningbo Fine Hardware Production Co. Ltd. 56. Overseas Distribution Services Inc. 57. Overseas International Steel Industry. 58. Paslode Fasteners Co. Ltd. 59. Patek Tool Co. Ltd. 60. President Industrial Inc. 61. Promising Way (Hong Kong) Ltd. 62. Qingda Jisco Co. Ltd. 63. Qingdao D&L Hardware Co. Ltd. 64. Qingdao Gold Dragon Co. Ltd. 65. Qingdao Hongyuan Nail Industry Co. Ltd. 66. Qingdao Meijialucky Industry and Co. 67. Qingdao MST Industry and Commerce Co. Ltd. 68. Qingdao Top Steel Industrial Co. Ltd. 69. Qingdao Uni-Trend International. 70. Quzhou Monsoon Hardware Co. Ltd. 71. Rise Time Industrial Ltd. 72. Romp Coil Nail Industries Inc. 73. R-Time Group Inc. 74. Shandong Liaocheng Minghua Metal Pvt. Ltd. 75. Shanghai Haoray International Trade Co. Ltd. 76. Shanghai Pioneer Speakers Co. Ltd. 77. Shanghai Seti Enterprise Int'l Co. Ltd. 78. Shanxi Easyfix Trade Co. Ltd. 79. Shaoxing Chengye Metal Producing Co. Ltd. 80. Shenzhen Xinjintal Hardware Co. Ltd. 81. Suzhou Xingya Nail Co. Ltd. 82. Taizhou Dajiang Ind. Co. Ltd. 83. Theps International. 84. Tianji Hweschun Fasteners Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 85. Tianjin Baisheng Metal Products Co. Ltd. 86. Tianjin Bluekin Indusries Ltd. 87. Tianjin Coways Metal Products Co. Ltd. 88. Tianjin Dagang Jingang Nail Factory. 89. Tianjin Evangel Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. 90. Tianjin Fulida Supply Co. Ltd. 91. Tianjin Jin Xin Sheng Long Metal Products Co. Ltd. 92. Tianjin Jinghai Yicheng Metal Pvt. 93. Tianjin Jinlin Pharmaceutical Factory. 94. Tianjin Jinmao Imp. & Exp. Corp. Ltd. 95. Tianjin Lianda Group Co. Ltd. 96. Tianjin Tianhua Environmental Plastics Co. Ltd. 97. Tianjin Yong Sheng Towel Mill. 98. Tianjin Yongye Furniture Co. Ltd. 99. Tianjin Zhonglian Times Technology. 100. Tianjin Zhongsheng Garment Co. Ltd. 101. Unicore Tianjin Fasteners Co. Ltd. 102. Win Fasteners Manufactory (Thailand) Co. Ltd. 103. Wulian Zhanpeng Metals Co. Ltd. 104. Yongchang Metal Product Co. 105. Yuyao Dingfeng Engineering Co. Ltd. 106. Zhangjiagang Longxiang Industries Co. Ltd. 107. Zhaoqing Harvest Nails Co. Ltd. 108. Zhejiang Best Nail Industry Co. Ltd. 109. Zhejiang Jihengkang (JHK) Door Ind. Co. Ltd. 110. Zhejiang Yiwu Yongzhou Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. 111. Zhong Shan Daheng Metal Products Co. Ltd. 112. Zhong Shan Shen Neng Metals Products Co. Ltd. 113. Zhucheng Jinming Metal Products Co. Ltd. 114. Zhucheng Runfang Paper Co. Ltd. Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Scope of the Order 4. Discussion of the Methodology a. Preliminary Determination of No Shipments b. Non-Market Economy Country Status c. Separate Rates 5. Use of Application of Facts Otherwise Available 6. Use of Adverse Inference 7. Sample Rate Calculation 8. Surrogate Country 9. Date of Sale 10. Normal Value Comparisons 11. Factor Valuation Methodology 12. Comparisons to Normal Value 13. Currency Conversion 14. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2018-19698 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

    Applicable September 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

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

    Initiation of Review

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

    DOC case No. ITC case No. Country Product Commerce contact A-533-823 731-TA-929 India Silicomanganese (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. A-588-857 731-TA-919 Japan Welded Large Diameter Line Pipe (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. A-834-807 731-TA-930 Kazakhstan Silicomanganese (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. A-307-820 731-TA-931 Venezuela Silicomanganese (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. Filing Information

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

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

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

    2See section 782(b) of the Act.

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

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

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

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

    Letters of Appearance and Administrative Protective Orders

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

    Information Required From Interested Parties

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

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

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

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

    Dated: August 30, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19766 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review AGENCY:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda E. Brown, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4735.

    Background

    Each year during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation, an interested party, as defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), may request, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213, that the Department of Commerce (Commerce) conduct an administrative review of that antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation.

    All deadlines for the submission of comments or actions by Commerce discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting date.

    Respondent Selection

    In the event Commerce limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews initiated pursuant to requests made for the orders identified below, Commerce intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the period of review. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties having an APO within five days of publication of the initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 21 days of publication of the initiation Federal Register notice. Therefore, we encourage all parties interested in commenting on respondent selection to submit their APO applications on the date of publication of the initiation notice, or as soon thereafter as possible. Commerce invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within five days of placement of the CBP data on the record of the review.

    In the event Commerce decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:

    In general, Commerce finds that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” (i.e., treated as a single entity for purposes of calculating antidumping duty rates) require a substantial amount of detailed information and analysis, which often require follow-up questions and analysis. Accordingly, Commerce will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of a review and will not collapse companies at the respondent selection phase unless there has been a determination to collapse certain companies in a previous segment of this antidumping proceeding (i.e., investigation, administrative review, new shipper review or changed circumstances review). For any company subject to a review, if Commerce determined, or continued to treat, that company as collapsed with others, Commerce will assume that such companies continue to operate in the same manner and will collapse them for respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, Commerce will not collapse companies for purposes of respondent selection. Parties are requested to (a) identify which companies subject to review previously were collapsed, and (b) provide a citation to the proceeding in which they were collapsed. Further, if companies are requested to complete a Quantity and Value Questionnaire for purposes of respondent selection, in general each company must report volume and value data separately for itself. Parties should not include data for any other party, even if they believe they should be treated as a single entity with that other party. If a company was collapsed with another company or companies in the most recently completed segment of a proceeding where Commerce considered collapsing that entity, complete quantity and value data for that collapsed entity must be submitted.

    Deadline for Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that requests a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that Commerce may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. Determinations by Commerce to extend the 90-day deadline will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Opportunity to Request a Review: Not later than the last day of September 2018,1 interested parties may request administrative review of the following orders, findings, or suspended investigations, with anniversary dates in September for the following periods:

    1 Or the next business day, if the deadline falls on a weekend, federal holiday or any other day when Commerce is closed.

    Period of review Antidumping Duty Proceedings BELARUS: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-822-804 9/1/17-8/31/18 BRAZIL: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, A-351-843 9/1/17-8/31/18 BRAZIL: Emulsion Styrene-Butadiene Rubber, A-351-849 2/24/17-8/3/18 INDIA: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, A-533-865 9/1/17-8/31/18 INDIA: Lined Paper Products, A-533-843 9/1/17-8/31/18 INDIA: Oil Country Tubular Goods, A-533-857 9/1/17-8/31/18 INDONESIA: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-560-811 9/1/17-8/31/18 JAPAN: Stainless Steel Wire Rod, A-588-843 9/1/17-8/31/18 LATVIA: Stainless Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-449-804 9/1/17-8/31/18 MEXICO: Emulsion Styrene-Butadiene Rubber, A-201-848 2/24/17-8/31/18 MEXICO: Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes, A-201-847 9/1/17-8/31/18 MEXICO: Magnesia Carbon Bricks, A-201-837 9/1/17-8/31/18 MOLDOVA: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-841-804 9/1/17-8/31/18 POLAND: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-455-803 9/1/17-8/31/18 POLAND: Emulsion Styrene-Butadiene Rubber, A-455-805 2/24/17-8/31/18 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, A-580-881 9/1/17-8/31/18 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Emulsion Styrene-Butadiene Rubber, A-580-890 2/24/17-8/31/18 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Pipes and Tubes, A-580-880 9/1/17-8/31/18 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Oil Country Tubular Goods, A-580-870 9/1/17-8/31/18 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Stainless Steel Wire Rod, A-580-829 9/1/17-8/31/18 SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM: Oil Country Tubular Goods, A-552-817 9/1/17-8/31/18 TAIWAN: Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge, A-583-844 9/1/17-8/31/18 TAIWAN: Raw Flexible Magnets, A-583-842 9/1/17-8/31/18 TAIWAN: Stainless Steel Wire Rod, A-583-828 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Freshwater Crawfish Tailmeat, A-570-848 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Foundry Coke, A-570-862 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks, A-570-941 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Lined Paper Products, A-570-901 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Magnesia Carbon Bricks, A-570-954 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge, A-570-952 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires, A-570-912 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Raw Flexible Magnets, A-570-922 9/1/17-8/31/18 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-570-860 9/1/17-8/31/18 TURKEY: Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes, A-489-824 9/1/17-8/31/18 TURKEY: Oil Country Tubular Goods, A-489-816 9/1/17-8/31/18 UKRAINE: Solid Agricultural Grade Ammonium Nitrate, A-823-810 9/1/17-6/11/18 UKRAINE: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars, A-823-809 9/1/17-8/31/18 UNITED KINGDOM: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, A-412-824 9/1/17-8/31/18 Countervailing Duty Proceedings BRAZIL: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, C-351-844 1/1/17-12/31/17 INDIA: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, C-533-866 1/1/17-12/31/17 INDIA: Lined Paper Products, C-533-844 1/1/17-12/31/17 INDIA: Oil Country Tubular Goods, C-533-858 1/1/17-12/31/17 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products, C-580-882 1/1/17-12/31/17 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks, C-570-942 1/1/17-12/31/17 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Magnesia Carbon Bricks, C-570-955 1/1/17-12/31/17 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge, C-570-953 1/1/17-12/31/17 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires, C-570-913 1/1/17-12/31/17 THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Raw Flexible Magnets, C-570-923 1/1/17-12/31/17 TURKEY: Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes, C-489-825 1/1/17-12/31/17 TURKEY: Oil Country Tubular Goods, C-489-817 1/1/17-12/31/17 Suspension Agreements

    None.

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), an interested party as defined by section 771(9) of the Act may request in writing that the Secretary conduct an administrative review. For both antidumping and countervailing duty reviews, the interested party must specify the individual producers or exporters covered by an antidumping finding or an antidumping or countervailing duty order or suspension agreement for which it is requesting a review. In addition, a domestic interested party or an interested party described in section 771(9)(B) of the Act must state why it desires the Secretary to review those particular producers or exporters. If the interested party intends for the Secretary to review sales of merchandise by an exporter (or a producer if that producer also exports merchandise from other suppliers) which was produced in more than one country of origin and each country of origin is subject to a separate order, then the interested party must state specifically, on an order-by-order basis, which exporter(s) the request is intended to cover.

    Note that, for any party Commerce was unable to locate in prior segments, Commerce will not accept a request for an administrative review of that party absent new information as to the party's location. Moreover, if the interested party who files a request for review is unable to locate the producer or exporter for which it requested the review, the interested party must provide an explanation of the attempts it made to locate the producer or exporter at the same time it files its request for review, in order for the Secretary to determine if the interested party's attempts were reasonable, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(ii).

    As explained in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), and Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011), Commerce clarified its practice with respect to the collection of final antidumping duties on imports of merchandise where intermediate firms are involved. The public should be aware of this clarification in determining whether to request an administrative review of merchandise subject to antidumping findings and orders.2

    2See also the Enforcement and Compliance website at http://trade.gov/enforcement/.

    Commerce no longer considers the non-market economy (NME) entity as an exporter conditionally subject to an antidumping duty administrative reviews.3 Accordingly, the NME entity will not be under review unless Commerce specifically receives a request for, or self-initiates, a review of the NME entity.4 In administrative reviews of antidumping duty orders on merchandise from NME countries where a review of the NME entity has not been initiated, but where an individual exporter for which a review was initiated does not qualify for a separate rate, Commerce will issue a final decision indicating that the company in question is part of the NME entity. However, in that situation, because no review of the NME entity was conducted, the NME entity's entries were not subject to the review and the rate for the NME entity is not subject to change as a result of that review (although the rate for the individual exporter may change as a function of the finding that the exporter is part of the NME entity). Following initiation of an antidumping administrative review when there is no review requested of the NME entity, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate entries for all exporters not named in the initiation notice, including those that were suspended at the NME entity rate.

    3See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013).

    4 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1), parties should specify that they are requesting a review of entries from exporters comprising the entity, and to the extent possible, include the names of such exporters in their request.

    All requests must be filed electronically in Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS) on Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS website at http://access.trade.gov.5 Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(l)(i), a copy of each request must be served on the petitioner and each exporter or producer specified in the request.

    5See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011).

    Commerce will publish in the Federal Register a notice of “Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation” for requests received by the last day of September 2018. If Commerce does not receive, by the last day of September 2018, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, Commerce will instruct CBP to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered.

    For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures “gap” period of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the period of review.

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

    Dated: August 30, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19764 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-028] Hydrofluorocarbon Blends From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that sales of hydrofluorocarbon blends (HFCs), from the People's Republic of China (China) have been made below normal value (NV). We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 11, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Manuel Rey, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5518.

    Background

    Commerce is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on HFCs from China.1 The notice of initiation of this administrative review was published on October 16, 2017.2 This review covers 12 producers and/or exporters of the subject merchandise. Commerce selected two exporters for individual examination (i.e., T.T. International Co., Ltd. (TTI); and Weitron International Refrigeration Equipment (Kunshan) Co., Ltd. (Weitron)). The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017.

    1See Hydrofluorocarbon Blends from the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order, 81 FR 55436 (October 16, 2017) (Order).

    2See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 48051 (October 16, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    In April 2018, we extended the preliminary results of this review to no later than September 4, 2018.3

    3See Memorandum, “Hydrofluorocarbon Blends from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated April 13, 2018. In this memorandum, we noted that Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines affected by the closure of the Federal Government from January 20 through January 22, 2018. See Memorandum, “Deadlines Affected by the Shutdown of the Federal Government,” dated January 23, 2018. As a result, the revised deadline for the preliminary results became September 4, 2018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Scope of the Order

    The products subject to this order are HFC blends. HFC blends covered by the scope are R-404A, a zeotropic mixture consisting of 52 percent 1,1,1 Trifluoroethane, 44 percent Pentafluoroethane, and 4 percent 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; R-407A, a zeotropic mixture of 20 percent Difluoromethane, 40 percent Pentafluoroethane, and 40 percent 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; R-407C, a zeotropic mixture of 23 percent Difluoromethane, 25 percent Pentafluoroethane, and 52 percent 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; R-410A, a zeotropic mixture of 50 percent Difluoromethane and 50 percent Pentafluoroethane; and R-507A, an azeotropic mixture of 50 percent Pentafluoroethane and 50 percent 1,1,1-Trifluoroethane also known as R-507. The foregoing percentages are nominal percentages by weight. Actual percentages of single component refrigerants by weight may vary by plus or minus two percent points from the nominal percentage identified above.4

    4 For a complete description of the scope of the order, see Memorandum, “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 2016-2017 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Hydrofluorocarbon Blends from the People's Republic of China,” issued concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

    Based on our analysis of CBP information and information provided by the companies, we preliminarily determine that Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., Ltd. and Zhejiang Yonghe Refrigerant Co., Ltd. had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. In addition, Commerce finds that, consistent with its assessment practice in non-market economy (NME) cases, it is appropriate not to rescind the review in part in these circumstances, but to complete the review with respect to these two companies and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results.5 For additional information regarding this determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    5See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65694-95 (October 24, 2011) and the “Assessment Rates” section, below.

    Methodology

    Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We calculated export prices for the sole participating mandatory respondent, TTI, in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because China is an NME country within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, we calculated NV for TTI in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to this notice.

    Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate

    As indicated in the “Preliminary Results of Review” section below, we preliminarily determine that a weighted-average dumping margin of 283.63 percent applies to the three firms not selected for individual review which are eligible for a separate rate. For further information, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum at “Separate Rate Assigned to Non-Selected Companies.”

    Preliminary Results of Review

    Six companies involved in the administrative review, including the mandatory respondent Weitron, did not demonstrate that they are entitled to a separate rate.6 Therefore, we preliminarily find these companies to be part of the China-wide entity.7 The rate previously established for the China-wide entity is 216.37 percent.

    6 These six companies are: (1) Arkema Daikin Advanced Fluorochemicals (Changsu) Co., Ltd.; (2) Dongyang Weihua Refrigerants Co., Ltd.; (3) Sinochem Environmental Protection Chemicals (Taicang) Co., Ltd.; (4) Weitron; (5) Zhejiang Lantian Environmental Protection Fluoro Material Co. Ltd.; and (6) Zhejiang Quzhou Lianzhou Refrigerants Co., Ltd.

    7See Preliminary Decision Memorandum, at “Companies Not Receiving a Separate Rate.” Pursuant to Commerce's change in practice, Commerce no longer considers the NME entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65970 (November 4, 2013). Under this practice, the NME entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or Commerce self-initiates, a review of the entity. Because no party requested a review of the entity, the entity is not under review and the entity's rate is not subject to change.

    We preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period February 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017:

    Exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • T.T. International Co., Ltd 283.63 Shandong Huaan New Material Co., Ltd.* 283.63 Zhejiang Sanmei Chemical Industry Co. Ltd.* 283.63 Zhejiang Yonghe Refrigerant Co., Ltd.* 283.63 * This company was not selected as a mandatory respondent but is subject to this administrative review and demonstrated that it qualified for a separate rate during the POR.
    Disclosure and Public Comment

    Commerce intends to disclose calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice.8 Interested parties may submit case briefs to Commerce no later than seven days after the date of the final verification report issued in this administrative review. Rebuttals briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.9 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.10

    8See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    9See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    10See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.11 Hearing requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to issues raised in the briefs.12 If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.13

    11See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    12Id.

    13See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the publication date of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, unless otherwise extended.14

    14See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon completion of the administrative review, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.

    For TTI, we will calculate importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's (or customer's) examined sales to the total entered value of those sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importer- (or customer-) specific rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. We intend to instruct CBP to take into account the “provisional measures deposit cap,” in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(d).

    Pursuant to Commerce's assessment practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales data submitted by TTI, we will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the China-wide rate. Additionally, if we determine that an exporter had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's cash deposit rate) will be liquidated at the China-wide rate.15

    15See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).

    For the respondents which were not selected for individual examination in this administrative review and which qualified for a separate rate, the assessment rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin determined for the non-examined respondent in the final results of this administrative review. We will also instruct CBP to take into account the “provisional measures deposit cap” in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(d).

    For the final results, if we continue to treat the six exporters preliminarily found not to qualify for separate rates as part of the China-wide entity, we will instruct CBP to apply an ad valorem assessment rate of 216.37 percent, the current rate established for the China-wide entity, to all entries of subject merchandise during the POR which were exported by those companies.16

    16 For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).

    We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above which have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, then a cash deposit rate of zero will be established for that company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be equal to the exporter/producer-specific weighted-average dumping margin published for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established for the China-wide entity, 216.37 percent; and (4) for all non-Chinese exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing these preliminary results of review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: August 31, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Scope of the Order 4. Discussion of the Methodology a. Preliminary Determination of No Shipments b. Non-Market Economy Country Status c. Separate Rates i. Separate Rate Recipients 1. Wholly Foreign-Owned Companies 2. Wholly China-Owned Companies and Joint Ventures a. Absence of De Jure Control b. Absence of De Facto Control 3. Companies Not Receiving a Separate Rate a. Weitron b. Companies Who Did Not File Separate Rate Applications c. Separate Rate Assigned to Non-Selected Companies d. The China-Wide Entity e. Surrogate Country f. Date of Sale g. Normal Value Comparisons h. Determination of Comparison Method i. Export Price i. Irrecoverable Value-Added Tax ii. TTI j. Normal Value i. Factor Valuations ii. By-Products iii. Currency Conversion iv. Verification 5. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2018-19700 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-583-814] Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Taiwan: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Taiwan for the period of review (POR) November 1, 2016, through October 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 11, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Flessner, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6312.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On November 1, 2017, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order 1 on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Taiwan for the POR.2 Commerce received a timely request from Wheatland Tube (the petitioner), in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), to conduct an administrative review of this antidumping duty order with respect to 11 companies.3

    1See Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Taiwan: Antidumping Order, 49 FR 19369 (May 7, 1984).

    2See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 82 FR 50260 (November 1, 2017).

    3See Petitioner Letter re: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Taiwan: Request for Administrative Review, dated November 30, 2017.

    On January 11, 2018, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation with respect to 11 companies: Chung Hung Steel; Femco; Founder Land; Kao Hsing Chang Iron & Steel Corp.; Kounan Steel; Luen Jin; Mayer Steel Pipe; Shin Yang Steel; Tension Steel Industries; Vulcan Industrial; and Wan Chi Steel Industrial.4 On April 9, 2018, the petitioner timely withdrew its request for an administrative review.5

    4See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 1329 (January 11, 2018).

    5See Petitioner Letter re: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Taiwan: Withdrawal of Review Request, dated April 9, 2018.

    Rescission of Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The petitioner withdrew its request for review by the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of this order. Therefore, we are rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Taiwan covering the period November 1, 2016, through October 31, 2017, in its entirety.

    Assessment

    Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

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

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

    Dated: September 4, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19586 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-016] Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Preliminary Determination of No Shipments, and Rescission, in Part; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that certain producers and exporters of passenger vehicle and light truck tires (passenger tires) from the People's Republic of China (China) made sales of subject merchandise at prices below normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR) August 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 11, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Toni Page, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1398.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On August 10, 2015, Commerce issued an antidumping duty (AD) order on passenger tires from China.1 Several interested parties requested that Commerce conduct an administrative review of the AD Order, and on October 16, 2017, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the AD Order for 59 producers/exporters for the POR.2 Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines affected by the closure of the Federal Government from January 20 through 22, 2018.3

    1See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Duty Determination and Antidumping Duty Order; and Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty Order, 80 FR 47902 (August 10, 2015) (AD Order).

    2See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 48051 (October 16, 2017) (Initiation Notice). The Initiation Notice inadvertently misspelled the names of two producer/exporters, which were corrected in a subsequent publication. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 57705 (December 7, 2017).

    3 See Memorandum, “Deadlines Affected by the Shutdown of the Federal Government” (Tolling Memorandum), (January 23, 2018). All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by three days.

    Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.4

    4 See “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China, Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; and Rescission, in part; 2016-2017,” (September 4, 2018) (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Methodology

    Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce preliminarily determines that Junhong's reported U.S. sales were export price (EP). We calculated EP sales in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Given that China is a non-market economy (NME) country, within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, Commerce calculated NV in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying the preliminary results of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is made available to the public via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is provided in Appendix 1 to this notice.

    Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party or parties that requested a review withdraws the request within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of the requested review. Actyon Tyre Resources Co., Limited; Cooper (Kunshan) Tire Co., Ltd.; Hangzhou Yokohama Tire Co., Ltd.; Hongtyre Goup Co.; ITG Voma Corporation; Koryo International Industrial Limited; Kumho Tire Co., Inc.; Crown International Corporation (Crown); Shandong Wanda Boto Tyre Co., Ltd. (Boto Tyre); Qingdao Nama Industrial Co., Ltd.; Shandong Changfeng Tyres Co., Ltd.; Shandong Guofeng Rubber Plastics; Shandong Guofeng Rubber Plastics Co., Ltd.; Shandong Zhongyi Rubber Co., Ltd.; Shengtai Group Co., Ltd.; The Yokohama Rubber Company, Ltd.; Tyrechamp Group Co., Limited; and the Sailun Group Co., Ltd. (i.e., Sailun Jinyu Group Co., Ltd.)/Sailun Tire International Corp./Shandong Jinyu Industrial Co., Ltd./Sailun Jinyu Group (Hong Kong) Co., Limited/Dynamic Tire Corp./Husky Tire Corp./Seatex International Inc./Seatex PTE. Ltd.) withdrew their respective requests for an administrative review within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation.

    When Commerce initiated the instant administrative review, we inadvertently did not include ITG Voma Corporation in the list of companies for which an administrative review was requested or initiated.5 As noted above, ITG Voma Corporation did timely file a withdrawal request. Therefore, we will accept its request and rescind this administrative review with respect to ITG Voma Corporation.

    5 ITG Voma Corporation timely filed a request for an administrative review. See ITG Voma Corporation's letter, “Passenger Vehicle and Light Tires from the People's Republic of China: Request for Review—2016-2017 Review Period,” (August 31, 2017).

    No other parties requested an administrative review of the order with respect to the aforementioned companies, except for Crown and Boto Tyre. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce is rescinding this review of the AD order on passenger tires from China with respect to the listed companies, except for Crown and Boto Tyre.

    As noted above, Crown and Boto Tyre timely filed withdrawal requests for their respective administrative reviews. However, the petitioner filed administrative review requests for these companies, but did not file any subsequent withdrawal requests. Therefore, both Crown and Boto Tyre are still subject to the instant administrative review. Boto Tyre timely filed a separate rate certification prior to its withdrawal request. We reviewed Boto Tyre's separate rate certification request and preliminarily find that it qualifies for separate rate status in this administrative review. Crown did not file a separate application or certificate and, thus, is preliminarily considered to be part of the China-wide entity.

    Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

    Based on an analysis of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) information, and comments provided by interested parties, Commerce preliminarily determines that two companies under review, Federal Tire (Jiangxi), Ltd. and Highpoint Trading, Ltd. each had no shipments during the POR. For additional information regarding this determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Consistent with an announced refinement to its assessment practice in NME cases, Commerce is not rescinding this review, in part, but intends to complete the review with respect to the companies for which it has preliminarily found no shipments and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review.6

    6See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65694-95 (October 24, 2011) and the “Assessment Rates” section, below.

    In addition, six companies: Fleming Limited; Haohua Orient International Trade Ltd.; Qingdao Lakesea Tyre Co., Ltd.; Riversun Industry Limited; Safe & Well (HK) International Trading Limited; and Windforce Tyre Co., Limited filed no shipment certifications, even though an administrative review was not requested for or initiated on their behalf. Because these companies are not subject to this review, Commerce will not inquire further regarding their no shipment status.

    Also, Best Choice International Trade Co., Limited (Best Choice) filed a no shipment certification; however, we previously collapsed Best Choice and BC Tyre into a single entity in the prior review.7 Because there is no evidence on the record that contradicts our prior collapsing determination or the evidence on this record, we preliminarily continue to find that BC Tyre and Best Choice is a single entity in this administrative review.8 Therefore, we preliminarily find that Best Choice does not qualify for no-shipment status and will be part of the China-wide entity. However, we intend to seek additional information from this entity following these preliminary results.

    7See the Preliminary Determination Memorandum at “Discussion of Methodology.”

    8Id. In addition, as explained in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, there is evidence on the record of this review that Best Choice and BC Tyre Group Limited continue to have intertwined operations in this review. For a business proprietary discussion of the Best Choice and BC Tyre Group Limited relationship, please see Commerce Memorandum, “Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Separate Rate Status,” (September 4, 2018) (Preliminary Separate Rate Memorandum).

    Separate Rates

    Commerce preliminarily determines that the information placed on the record by Junhong, as well as by the other companies listed in the rate table in the “Preliminary Results of Review” section below, demonstrates that these companies are entitled to separate rate status. Neither the Act nor Commerce's regulations address the establishment of the rate applied to individual companies not selected for examination where Commerce limited its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Commerce's practice in cases involving limited selection based on exporters accounting for the largest volume of imports has been to look to section 735(c)(5) of the Act for guidance, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs Commerce to use rates established for individually investigated producers and exporters, excluding any rates that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available in investigations. In the instant administrative review, Junhong is the only reviewed respondent that received a calculated weighted-average margin. Therefore, for the preliminary results, Commerce has preliminarily determined to assign Junhong's margin to the non-selected separate-rate companies.

    In addition, Commerce preliminarily determines that certain companies have not demonstrated their entitlement to separate rate status because: (1) They withdrew their participation from the administrative review; or (2) they did not rebut the presumption of de jure or de facto government control of their operations.9 See Appendix 2 of this Federal Register notice for a complete list of companies not receiving a separate rate.

    9See Preliminary Denial of Separate Rate Status Memorandum for a complete discussion regarding the companies preliminarily not granted separate rate status.

    Commerce is treating the companies for which it did not grant separate rate status as part of the China-wide entity. Because no party requested a review of the China-wide entity, the entity is not under review, and the entity's rate (i.e., 87.99 percent) 10 is not subject to change.11

    10See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Duty Determination and Antidumping Duty Order; and Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty Order, 80 FR 47902, 47906 (August 10, 2015) (Order).

    11 For additional information regarding Commerce's separate rate determinations, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Adjustments for Countervailable Subsidies

    Commerce has preliminarily adjusted Junhong's U.S. price for export subsidies, pursuant to 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act, and domestic subsidies passed-through, pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act.

    Preliminary Results of Review

    As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine the weighted-average dumping margins rates to be:

    Exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Zhaoqing Junhong Co., Ltd 73.63 Jiangsu Hankook Tire Co., Ltd 73.63 Kenda Rubber (China) Co., Ltd 73.63 Mayrun Tyre (Hong Kong) Limited 73.63 Qingdao Odyking Tyre Co., Ltd 73.63 Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd./Sentury Tire USA Inc./Sentury (Hong Kong) Trading Co., Limited 73.63 Shandong Anchi Tyres Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Hengyu Science & Technology Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Linglong Tyre Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Longyue Rubber Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong New Continent Tire Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Province Sanli Tire Manufactured Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Shuangwang Rubber Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Wanda Boto Tyre Co., Ltd 73.63 Shandong Yongsheng Rubber Group Co., Ltd 73.63 Shouguang Firemax Tyre Co., Ltd 73.63 Winrun Tyre Co., Ltd 73.63
    Disclosure and Public Comment

    Commerce intends to disclose to parties the calculations performed for these preliminary results of review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review.12 Rebuttal briefs may be filed no later than five days after case briefs are due, and may respond only to arguments raised in the case briefs.13 A table of contents, list of authorities used, and an executive summary of issues should accompany any briefs submitted to Commerce. The summary should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes.14

    12See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii).

    13See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    14See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2), (d)(2).

    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.15 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants in, and a list of the issues to be discussed at, the hearing. Oral arguments at the hearing will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, at a date and time to be determined.16 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date of the hearing.

    15See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    16See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    All submissions, with limited exceptions, must be filed electronically using ACCESS.17 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by Commerce's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the due date.Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/Dockets Unit in Room 18022 and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.18

    17See generally 19 CFR 351.303.

    18See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011).

    Unless otherwise extended, Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results of review, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results of this review, Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.19 Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review. For each individually examined respondent in this review whose weighted-average dumping margin in the final results of review is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), Commerce intends to calculate importer-specific assessment rates, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).20 Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, Commerce intends to calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates by aggregating the amount of dumping calculated for all U.S. sales to the importer, and dividing this amount by the total entered value of the sales to the importer.21 Where the importer did not report entered values, Commerce intends to calculate an importer-specific assessment rate by dividing the amount of dumping for reviewed sales to the importer by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions. Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation. Where either the respondent's weighted average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.22

    19See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    20See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012) (Final Modification).

    21See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    22See Final Modification, 77 FR at 8103.

    Pursuant to Commerce practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales database submitted by an exporter individually examined during this review, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the rate for the China-wide entity.23 Additionally, if Commerce determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's CBP case number will be liquidated at the rate for the China-wide entity.

    23See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011), for a full discussion of this practice.

    For the companies for which this review is rescinded, antidumping duties will be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions with respect to the companies for which this review is rescinded to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice.

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on POR entries, and for future deposits of estimated antidumping duties, where applicable.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    Commerce will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for antidumping duties equal to the weighted-average amount by which NV exceeds U.S. price. The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for shipments of the subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), then the cash deposit rate will be zero for that exporter); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed China and non-China exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) for all China exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate for the China-wide entity (i.e., 76.46 percent) 24 and (4) for all non-China exporters of subject merchandise that have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the China exporter that supplied that non- China exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    24See Order, 80 FR 47904.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties has occurred, and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties and/or an increase in the amount of antidumping duties by the amount of the countervailing duties.

    These preliminary results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix 1 List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Partial Rescission of Administrative Review IV. Scope of the Order V. Discussion of the Methodology VI. Recommendation Appendix 2 List of Companies Not Receiving Separate Rate Status 1. BC Tyre Group Limited 2. Best Choice International Trade Co., Limited 3. Chen Shin Tire & Rubber (China) Co., Ltd. 4. Crown International Corporation 5. Hankook Tire China Co., Ltd. 6. Hebei Tianrui Rubber Co., Ltd. 7. Hong Kong Tiancheng Investment & Trading Co., Limited 8. Hong Kong Tri-Ace Tire Co., Limited 9. Hwa Fong Rubber (Hong Kong) Ltd. 10. Hwa Fong Rubber (Suzhou) Ltd. 11. Qingdao Fullrun Tyre Corp. Ltd. 12. Qingdao Fullrun Tyre Tech Corp. Ltd. 13. Qingdao Nexen Tire Corporation 14. Qingdao Qianzhen Tyre Co., Ltd. 15. Qingdao Qihang Tyre Co., Ltd. 16. Qingdao Qizhou Rubber Co., Ltd. 17. Shandong Duratti Rubber Corporation Co., Ltd. 18. Shandong Haohua Tire Co., Ltd. 19. Shandong Haolong Rubber Tire Co., Ltd. 20. Shandong Haolong Rubber Co., Ltd. 21. Shandgong Hongsheng Rubber Co., Ltd. 22. Shandong Province Sanli Tire 23. Shifeng Juxing Tire Co., Ltd. 24. Southeast Mariner International Co., Ltd. 25. Toyo Tire (Zhangjiagang) Co., Ltd.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19699 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG011 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental To Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals Dolphin Relocation Project in Washington State AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to take small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project in Washington State.

    DATES:

    This authorization is effective from October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shane Guan, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as the issued IHA, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

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

    An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.

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

    The MMPA states that the term “take” means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal.

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

    Summary of Request

    On October 4, 2017, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal species incidental to the dolphin relocation project at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in Washington State, between October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2019. NMFS determined that the IHA application is adequate and complete on December 4, 2017, with a few minor comments and questions. WSDOT subsequently addressed all NMFS comments and submitted a revised IHA application on March 1, 2018. NMFS is proposing to authorize the take by Level B harassment of the following marine mammal species: Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris); California sea lion (Zalophus californianus); Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus); killer whale (Orcinus orca); gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus); humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae); minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata); harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena); Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli); and long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis).

    Description of Proposed Activity Overview

    The WSDOT is proposing to relocate one dolphin to improve safety at each of the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. The Olympic Class ferries have an atypical shape, which at some terminals causes the vessel to make contact with the inner dolphin prior to the stern reaching the intermediate or outer dolphin. This tends to cause rotation of the vessel away from the wingwalls and presents a safety issue. The project will reduce the risk of landing issues for Olympic Class ferries at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals.

    Dates and Duration

    Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water work timing restrictions to protect ESA-listed salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water construction is limited each year to July 16 through February 15.

    In-water construction at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal will commence after October 1, and is planned during the August 1, 2018, to February 15, 2019 in-water work window. In-water construction at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal will commence October 1, and is planned during the July 15, 2018, to February 15, 2019 in-water work window.

    Specified Geographic Region

    The Bremerton Ferry Terminal is located in the city of Bremerton, east of the Navy shipyard. Bremerton is on the shoreline of Sinclair Inlet, south of Bainbridge Island. Located in Kitsap County, Washington, the terminal is located in Section 24, Township 24 North, Range 1 East. The Edmonds Ferry Terminal is located in the city of Edmonds, along the downtown waterfront. Edmonds is in Snohomish County, approximately 15 miles north of Seattle. The terminal is located in Section 23, Township 27 North, Range 3 East (Figure 1-2 in the IHA application). Land use near both ferry terminals is a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and open space and/or undeveloped lands.

    Detailed Description of In-Water Pile Driving and Removal Associated With the Dolphin Relocation Project at Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals

    The proposed project includes vibratory hammer driving and removal creating elevated in-water and in-air noise that may impact marine mammals.

    The following construction activities (in sequence) are anticipated for the Bremerton Ferry Terminal.

    • Install one temporary 36-inch diameter steel indicator pile with a vibratory hammer. The temporary indicator pile will be used as a visual landing aid reference for vessel captains during construction. It will be relocated to become a fender pile for the new dolphin.

    • Remove the existing left outer dolphin that consists of six 36-inch diameter steel pipe piles with a vibratory hammer and/or by direct pull and clamshell removal.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, install three 30-inch steel pile reaction piles. This is a back group of piles that provide stability to the dolphin.

    • Install a concrete diaphragm (the diaphragm joins the piles at their tops), then use a vibratory hammer to install the remaining four 30-inch reaction piles.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, install three 36-inch diameter steel pipe fender piles; install fenders and attach rub panels to the fender piles. Fender piles absorb much of the energy as the ferry vessel makes contact with the dolphin.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, remove the 36-inch temporary indicator pile and install it as the last remaining fender pile along with the fender and fender panel.

    The following construction activities (in sequence) are anticipated for the Edmonds Ferry Terminal.

    • Install one temporary 36-inch diameter steel indicator pile with a vibratory hammer. The temporary indicator pile will be used as a visual landing aid reference for vessel captains during construction.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, install one 30-inch reaction pile.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, install the two remaining reaction piles through the diaphragm.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, remove three 36-inch steel pipe fender piles and reinstall them in their new locations.

    • Using a vibratory hammer, remove the 36-inch temporary indicator pile (this portion of the project will not reuse the indicator pile).

    A summary of the piles to be installed and removed, along with pile driving information, is provided in Table 1.

    Table 1—Summary of In-Water Pile Driving and Removal Durations Location Pile element Method Pile type Size
  • (inch)
  • Pile No. Duration/
  • pile
  • (min)
  • Number
  • pile/day
  • Duration
  • (days)
  • Bremerton Indicator pile Vibratory install Steel 36 1 20 1 1 Indicator pile Vibratory removal Steel 36 1 15 1 1 Existing dolphin Vibratory removal Steel 36 6 15 3 2 Relocate dolphin install Vibratory install Steel 36 4 20 3 2 Relocated dolphin install Vibratory install Steel 30 7 20 3 3 Subtotal 19 345 9 Edmond Indicator pile Vibratory install Steel 36 1 20 1 1 Indicator pile Vibratory removal Steel 36 1 15 1 1 Existing dolphin removal Vibratory removal Steel 36 3 15 3 1 Relocated dolphin Vibratory install Steel 36 3 20 3 1 Relocated dolphin Vibratory install Steel 30 3 20 3 1 Subtotal 11 200 5 Total 30 545 14

    Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in this document (please see “Mitigation” and “Monitoring and Reporting” sections).

    Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the Federal Register on April 16, 2018 (83 FR 16330). During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received comment letters from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation (WDC). Specific comments and responses are provided below.

    Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS require WSDOT to collect spectral data at the source to verify the spectrum of 36-in piles and adjust the Level A harassment zones as necessary, rather than continue to use the spectrum associated with 30-in piles.

    Response: NMFS agrees with the Commission that if WSDOT plans to conduct pile driving source level measurements, spectral data should be required to calculate Level A harassment zones. However, WSDOT stated that it does not plan to conduct source level measurements for the Bremerton-Edmonds ferry terminal construction. Instead, WSDOT plans to use broadband source level measurement on the 36-in piles collected at Edmonds Ferry Terminal in 2017 and applies the 30-in pile spectrum to model for Level A harassment zones. NMFS has determined that this is acceptable for this activity, though we plan to continue evaluating this determination as new information is collected. Therefore, since WSDOT does not plan to conduct source measurements for the Bremerton-Edmonds ferry terminal project, NMFS will not request it to acquire spectral data.

    Comment 2: The Commission commented that the method NMFS used to estimate the numbers of takes during the proposed activities, which summed fractions of takes for each species across project days, does not account for and negates the intent of NMFS' 24-hour reset policy. The Commission also recommends that NMFS develop and share guidance on this issue.

    Response: NMFS has provided the guidance to the Commission; and, as described therein and discussed subsequently, we have determined that the method used for rounding take estimates here is appropriate and does not conflict with the methodology that the Commission refers to as the “24-hour reset policy.”

    Comment 3: The Commission requested clarification of certain issues associated with NMFS's notice that one-year renewals could be issued in certain limited circumstances and expressed concern that the process would bypass the public notice and comment requirements. The Commission also suggested that NMFS should discuss the possibility of renewals through a more general route, such as a rulemaking, instead of notice in a specific authorization. The Commission further recommended that if NMFS did not pursue a more general route, that the agency provide the Commission and the public with a legal analysis supporting our conclusion that this process is consistent with the requirements of section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.

    Response: The process of issuing a renewal IHA does not bypass the public notice and comment requirements of the MMPA. The notice of the proposed IHA expressly notifies the public that under certain, limited conditions an applicant could seek a renewal IHA for an additional year. The notice describes the conditions under which such a renewal request could be considered and expressly seeks public comment in the event such a renewal is sought. Additional reference to this solicitation of public comment has recently been added at the beginning of FR notices that consider renewals. NMFS appreciates the streamlining achieved by the use of abbreviated Federal Register notices and intends to continue using them for proposed IHAs that include minor changes from previously issued IHAs, but which do not satisfy the renewal requirements. However, we believe our proposed method for issuing renewals meets statutory requirements and maximizes efficiency. Importantly, such renewals would be limited to where the activities are identical or nearly identical to those analyzed in the proposed IHA, monitoring does not indicate impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized, and the mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language for future proposed IHAs to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as are all IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on our website a description of the renewal process before any renewal is issued utilizing the new process.

    Comment 4: The WDC states that as part of the recently initiated Washington State Southern Resident Recovery Task Force, WSDOT should utilize locally available resources, including a hydrophone network and well-informed local sightings network, to monitor the presence, abundance, and movement of killer whales in the area during the project. WDC further recommends that if a protected species observer (PSO) is unable to differentiate between transient and resident killer whales, any killer whale sighting near the shutdown zone should result in shutdown measures. In addition, WDC recommends WSDOT employ soft-start or ramp-up methods for pile driving activities to give any marine mammal within hearing range time to respond to increased noise levels and leave the area before work begins.

    Response: NMFS agrees with WDC's recommendations. In fact, all the recommended mitigation and monitoring measures in the WDC's comment letter were already in the proposed IHA. These measures include, but not limited to, (1) coordinating with the Orca Network on a daily basis during pile driving to understand marine mammal presence near the project areas and also sharing project sightings data with Orca Network; (2) implementing shutdown measures if a killer whale is sighted near the shutdown zone when the ecotype of the killer whale is unknown, and (3) implementing ramp-up methods for pile driving activities.

    Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

    We have reviewed the applicant's species information, which summarizes available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and auditory capabilities of the potentially affected species—for accuracy and completeness and refer the reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the applications, as well as to NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region#reports).

    Table 2 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminal project area and summarizes information related to the population or stock, including potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2017). PBR, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population, is considered in concert with known sources of ongoing anthropogenic mortality to assess the population-level effects of the anticipated mortality from a specific project (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats.

    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS' 2017 U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal SARs (Carretta et al., 2018). The 2017 SAR is available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region#reports.

    Table 2—Marine Mammals With Potential Presence Within the Proposed Project Area Common name Scientific name Stock ESA/MMPA
  • status;
  • strategic
  • (Y/N) 1
  • Stock abundance
  • (CV, Nmin, most recent
  • abundance survey) 2
  • PBR Annual
  • M/SI 3
  • Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Eschrichtiidae Gray whale Eschrichtius robustus Eastern North Pacific -; N 20,990 (0.05, 20,125) 624 132 Family Balaenopteridae Humpback whale Megaptera novaneagliae California/Oregon/Washington E/D;Y 1,918 (0.03, 1,976) 11.0 >6.5 Minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata California/Oregon/Washington -; N 636 (0.72, 369) 3.5 >1.3 Family Delphinidae Killer whale Orcinus orca Eastern N Pacific Southern resident E/D; Y 83 (NA, 83) 0.14 0 West coast transient -; N 243 (NA, 243) 2.4 0 Long-beaked common dolphin Delphinus delphis California -; N 101,305 (0.49, 68,432) 657 >35.4 Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) Harbor porpoise Phocoena phocoena Washington inland waters -; N 11,233 (0.37, 8,308) 66 7.2 Dall's porpoise Phocoenoides dali California/Oregon/Washington -; N 25,750 (0.45, 17,954) 172 0.3 Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) California sea lion Zalophus californianus U.S. -; N 296,750 (NA, 153,337) 9,200 389 Steller sea lion Eumetopias jubatus Eastern U.S. -; N 41,638 (NA, 41,638) 2,498 108 Family Phocidae (earless seals) Harbor seal Phoca vitulina Washington northern inland waters -; N 11,036 4 (unk, unk) 1,641 43 Northern elephant seal Mirounga angustirostris California breeding -; N 179,000 (NA, 81,368) 4,882 8.8 1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region#reports. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 3 These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 4 Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here.

    All species that could potentially occur in the proposed construction areas are included in Table 2. Although the SRKW could occur in the vicinity of the project area, WSDOT proposes to implement strict monitoring and mitigation measures with assistance from local marine mammal researchers and observers. Thus, the take of this marine mammal stock can be avoided (see details in Mitigation section).

    In addition, sea otters may be found in Puget Sound area. However, this species is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are not considered further in this document.

    Marine Mammal Hearing

    Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016) described generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. The functional groups and the associated frequencies are indicated below (note that these frequency ranges correspond to the range for the composite group, with the entire range not necessarily reflecting the capabilities of every species within that group):

    • Low-frequency cetaceans (mysticetes): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 hertz (Hz) and 35 kilohertz (kHz);

    • Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger toothed whales, beaked whales, and most delphinids): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;

    • High-frequency cetaceans (porpoises, river dolphins, and members of the genera Kogia and Cephalorhynchus; including two members of the genus Lagenorhynchus, on the basis of recent echolocation data and genetic data): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz.

    • Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz;

    • Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz.

    The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013).

    The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013).

    For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency ranges, please see NMFS (2016) for a review of available information. Eleven marine mammal species (7 cetacean and 4 pinniped (2 otariid and 2 phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed construction activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean species that may be present, one species is classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., gray, humpback, and minke whales), two are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans (killer whale and long-beaked common dolphin), and two are classified as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor and Dall's porpoise).

    Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

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

    Potential impacts to marine mammals from the Bremerton-Edmonds ferry terminal construction project are from noise generated during in-water pile driving and pile removal activities.

    Acoustic Effects

    Here, we first provide background information on marine mammal hearing before discussing the potential effects of the use of active acoustic sources on marine mammals.

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

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

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

    For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran, 2015). For pinnipeds in water, data are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal, and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al., 2012b).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Potential Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

    The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are associated with elevated sound levels produced by vibratory pile removal and pile driving in the area. However, other potential impacts to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.

    With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to communicate (Tavolga et al., 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson and Dill, 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the signal in relation to the natural background noise level.

    The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition (Engas et al., 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of sound (such as noise from impact pile driving) rather than continuous signals (such as noise from vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al., 1981), and a quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal intensity rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the same level.

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

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

    Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration of whether the number of takes is “small” and the negligible impact determination.

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

    Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to noise generated from vibratory pile driving and removal. Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown measures—discussed in detail below in Mitigation section), Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized.

    As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.

    Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these components in more detail and present the take estimate.

    Acoustic Thresholds

    Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).

    Level B harassment for non-explosive sources—Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above received levels of 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.

    Applicant's proposed activity includes the generation of non-impulse (vibratory pile driving and removal) source; and, only the 120-dB re 1 μPa (rms) is used.

    Level A harassment for non-explosive sources—NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 2016) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). Applicant's proposed activity would generate and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and pile removal) noises.

    These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the best available science and soliciting input multiple times from both the public and peer reviewers to inform the final product and are provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.

    Table 3—Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria for Non-Explosive Sound Underwater Hearing group PTS onset thresholds Impulsive Non-impulsive Behavioral thresholds Impulsive Non-impulsive Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans L pk,flat: 219 dB; L E,LF,24h: 183 dB L E,LF,24h: 199 dB L rms,flat: 160 dB L rms,flat: 120 dB. Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans L pk,flat: 230 dB; L E,MF,24h: 185 dB L E,MF,24h: 198 dB High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans L pk,flat: 202 dB; L E,HF,24h: 155 dB L E,HF,24h: 173 dB Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) L pk,flat: 218 dB; L E,PW,24h: 185 dB L E,PW,24h: 201 dB Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) L pk,flat: 232 dB; L E,OW,24h: 203 dB L E,OW,24h: 219 dB * Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered. Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript “flat” is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded. Ensonified Area

    Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds.

    Source Levels

    The project includes vibratory removal and/or driving of 30-inch and 36-inch diameter hollow steel piles. Based on in-water measurements at Edmonds Ferry Terminal in 2017 (WSDOT 2017), vibratory driving of 30-inch steel piles generated 174 dB rms re 1 µPa at 10 meters and vibratory pile driving of a 36-inch steel pile generated 177 dB rms re 1 µPa measured at 10 meters. As a conservative estimate, vibratory pile removal source level of 36-in steel pile is based on 36-in pile installation level of 177 dB re 1 µPa SEL.

    A summary of source levels from different pile driving and pile removal activities is provided in Table 4.

    Table 4—Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Source Levels [At 10 m from source] Method Pile type/size SEL
  • (dB re 1 µPa2−s)
  • SPLrms
  • (dB re 1 µPa)
  • Vibratory driving/removal 36-in steel pile 177 177 Vibratory driving 30-in steel pile 174 174

    These source levels are used to compute the Level A harassment zones and to estimate the Level B harassment zones. For Level A harassment zones, since the peak source levels for both pile driving are below the injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used to do the calculations using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016).

    Estimating Harassment Zones

    For Level B harassment, ensonified areas are based on WSDOT's source measurements (see above) computed using 15 * log(R) for transmission loss to derive the distances up to 120-dB isopleths.

    For Level A harassment, calculation is based on duration of installation/removal per pile and number of piles installed or removed per day, using spectral modeling based on vibratory pile driving recordings made at Edmonds Ferry Terminal for the same piles. One-second sound exposure level (SEL) power spectral densities (PSDs) were calculated and used as representative pile driving sources to assess Level A harassment for marine mammals in different hearing groups. Initial results showed that Level A harassment zones from the 3-in piles were smaller than those from 30-in piles for high-frequency cetaceans, despite the broadband noise level from the 36-in pile being 3 dB higher than that of 30-in pile. Close examination of the pile driving spectra revealed some unusual high decay rate in the 36-in pile driving sound above 2 kHz. This unusual decay was probably due to the specific sediment in the pile driving location. Therefore, the spectrum for the 30-in pile was used to model the 36-in pile and scaled up to the 177 dB broadband level.

    Transmission loss due to absorption was also incorporated based using the equation

    TL(f) = 15log(R) + a(f) * R/1000 where TL(f) is frequency dependent transmission loss, and a(f) is frequency dependent transmission loss coefficient.

    Distances of ensonified area for different pile driving/removal activities for different marine mammal hearing groups is present in Table 5.

    Marine Mammal Occurrence

    In this section we provide the information about the presence, density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take calculations.

    In most cases, marine mammal density data are from the U.S. Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) except California sea lion and harbor porpoise. California sea lion density at Bremerton area is based on survey data of California sea lions at the Navy Shipyard at Bremerton from 2012-2016 (Navy 2017). Survey results indicate as many as 144 animals hauled out each day during this time period, with the majority of animals observed August through May and the greatest numbers observed in November. The average of the monthly maximum counts during the in-water work window provides an estimate of 69 sea lions per day. For harbor porpoise, because Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has better local distribution data based on recent survey in the area, local animal abundance are used to calculate the take numbers (Evenson, 2016).

    EN11SE18.000

    A summary of marine mammal density and local occurrence used for take estimates is provided in Table 6.

    Table 6—Marine Mammal Density and Local Occurrence in the WSDOT Project Area Species Density
  • (#/km2)
  • Gray whale 0.0051 Humpback whale 0.0007 Minke whale 0.00003 Killer whale (West coast transient) 0.002 Long-beaked common dolphin 0.002 Harbor porpoise 0.58 Dall's porpoise 0.048 California sea lion * 0.03 Steller sea lion 0.04 Harbor seal 1.22 Northern elephant seal 0.00001 * This density is only used for Edmonds Ferry Terminal area. For animals at Bremerton Ferry Terminal, a daily sighting of 69 animals is used for take estimates.
    Take Calculation and Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate. For all marine mammals except California sea lion at Bremerton Ferry Terminal area, takes were calculated as: Take = ensonified area × average animal abundance in the area × pile driving days and rounded up to the nearest integer. For California sea lion at Bremerton, take estimate is based on the average daily sighting of 69 animals within the area multiplied by the nine project days, which yield a total of 621 estimated takes.

    For calculated take number less than 10, such as northern elephant seals, transient killer whales, humpback whales, minke whales, and long-beaked common dolphins, takes numbers were adjusted to account for group encounter and the likelihood of encountering. Specifically, for northern elephant seal, take of 15 animals is estimated based on the likelihood of encountering this species during the project period. For transient killer whale, takes of 30 animals is estimated based on the group size and the likelihood of encountering in the area. For humpback and minke whales, takes of eight animals each are estimated based on the likelihood of encountering. For long-beaked common dolphin, take of 50 animals is estimated based on the group size and the likelihood of encountering in the area.

    No Level A harassment take is calculated using the aforementioned estimation method because of the small injury zones and relatively low average animal density in the area. Since the largest Level A harassment distance is only 35 m from the source for high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoise and Dall's porpoise), NMFS considers that WSDOT can effectively monitor such small zones to implement shutdown measures and avoid Level A harassment takes. Therefore, no Level A harassment take of marine mammal is anticipated for the dolphin replacement project at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals.

    A summary of estimated takes based on the above analysis is listed in Table 7.

    Table 7—Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to Received Noise Levels That Cause Level B Harassment Species Estimated
  • Level B
  • harassment
  • take
  • Abundance Percentage
    Gray whale 10 20,990 0 Humpback whale 8 1,918 0 Minke whale 8 636 2 Killer whale (West coast transient) 30 243 12 Killer whale (Southern resident) 0 83 0 Long-beaked common dolphin 50 101,305 0 Harbor porpoise 1,087 11,233 10 Dall's porpoise 90 25,750 0 California sea lion 1,149 296,750 0 Steller sea lion 75 41,638 0 Harbor seal 2,286 11,036 21 Northern elephant seal 15 179,000 0
    Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to include information about the availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).

    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully consider two primary factors:

    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as planned) the likelihood of effective implementation (probability implemented as planned); and

    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity.

    Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 1. Time Restriction

    In-water work must occur only during daylight hours, when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted.

    2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A, Level B Harassment Zones, and Shutdown Zones

    Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which include vibratory pile driving and pile removal, WSDOT must establish Level A harassment zones where received underwater SELcum could cause PTS (see above).

    WSDOT must also establish Level B harassment zones where received underwater SPLs are higher than 120 dBrms re 1 µPa for non-impulsive noise sources (vibratory pile driving and pile removal).

    WSDOT must establish shutdown zones within which marine mammals could be taken by Level A harassment. For Level A harassment zones that is less than 10 m from the source, a minimum of 10 m distance should be established as a shutdown zone.

    A summary of shutdown zones is provided in Table 8.

    Table 8—Shutdown Distances for Various Pile Driving Activities and Marine Mammal Hearing Groups Pile type, size & pile driving method Shutdown distance
  • (m)
  • LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean Phocid Otariid
    36″ indicate pile install (1 pile/day) 10 10 25 10 10 36″ indicate pile removal (1 pile/day) 10 10 10 10 10 36″ steel pile (existing dolphin) removal (3 piles/day) 25 10 35 10 10 36″ steel pile (relocated dolphin) install (3 piles/day) 25 10 35 10 10 30″ steel pile (relocated dolphin) install (3 piles/day) 25 10 25 10 10

    NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSO) shall conduct an initial 30-minute survey of the shutdown zones to ensure that no marine mammals are seen within the zones before pile driving and pile removal of a pile segment begins. If marine mammals are found within the shutdown zone, pile driving of the segment must be delayed until they move out of the area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then dives below, the contractor must wait 15 minutes. If no marine mammals are seen by the observer in that time it can be assumed that the animal has moved beyond the shutdown zone.

    If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a marine mammal is sighted within the designated shutdown zone prior to commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and continue to monitor the shutdown zone. Operations may not resume until the marine mammal has exited the shutdown zone or 30 minutes have elapsed since the last sighting.

    To verify the required monitoring distance, the shutdown zones and ZOIs will be determined by using a range finder or hand-held global positioning system device.

    3. Shutdown Measures

    WSDOT must implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is detected within or to be approaching the shutdown zones provided in Table 8 of this notice.

    WSDOT must implement shutdown measures if Southern Resident killer whales (SRKWs) are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone (zone of influence, or ZOI) during in-water construction activities.

    If a killer whale approaches the ZOI during pile driving or removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a transient killer whale, it must be assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT shall implement the shutdown measure described above.

    If a SRKW enters the ZOI undetected, in-water pile driving or pile removal must be suspended until the SRKW exits the ZOI to avoid further level B harassment.

    WSDOT must implement shutdown measures if the number of any allotted marine mammal takes reaches the limit under the IHA or if a marine mammal observed is not authorized for take under this IHA, if such marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone during pile removal activities.

    Based on our evaluation of the required measures, NMFS has determined that the prescribed mitigation measures provide the means effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

    Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.

    Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:

    • Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density).

    • Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).

    • Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.

    • How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks.

    • Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat).

    • Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

    Monitoring Measures

    WSDOT must employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its dolphin relocation project at Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. The purposes of marine mammal monitoring are to implement mitigation measures and learn more about impacts to marine mammals from WSDOT's construction activities. The PSOs must observe and collect data on marine mammals in and around the project area for 30 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal and pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs must meet the following requirements:

    1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are required;

    2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an observer;

    3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree in biological science or related field) or training for experience;

    4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one observer must be designated as lead observer or monitoring coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an observer; and

    5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.

    Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). Due to the different sizes of zones of influence (ZOI) from different pile types, two different ZOIs and different monitoring protocols corresponding to a specific pile type must be established.

    • For all vibratory driving/removal at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal, two land-based PSOs and one monitoring boat with one PSO and boat operator must monitor the Level A and Level B harassment zones.

    • For all vibratory driving/removal at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal, five land-based PSOs and two ferry-based PSOs must monitor the Level A and Level B harassment zones.

    • If the in-situ measurement showed that the Level B harassment zone at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal is under 15 km from the source, three land-based PSOs and one ferry-based PSO must be monitoring the Level A and Level B harassment zones.

    Locations of the land-based PSOs and routes of monitoring vessels are shown in WSDOT's Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, which is available online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities.

    6. PSOs must collect the following information during marine mammal monitoring:

    • Date and time that monitored activity begins and ends for each day conducted (monitoring period);

    • Construction activities occurring during each daily observation period, including how many and what type of piles driven;

    • Deviation from initial proposal in pile numbers, pile types, average driving times;

    • Weather parameters in each monitoring period (e.g., wind speed, percent cloud cover, visibility);

    • Water conditions in each monitoring period (e.g., sea state, tide state);

    • For each marine mammal sighting, the following information shall be collected:

    ○ Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine mammals;

    ○ Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from pile driving activity;

    ○ Location and distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point; and

    ○ Estimated amount of time that the animals remained in the Level B harassment zone;

    ○ Description of implementation of mitigation measures within each monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or delay); and

    ○ Other human activity in the area within each monitoring period.

    WSDOT may conduct noise field measurement at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal to determine the actual Level B harassment distance from the source during vibratory pile driving of 36” piles.

    Reporting Measures

    WSDOT is required to submit a draft monitoring report within 90 days after completion of the construction work or the expiration of the IHA, whichever comes earlier. In the case if WSDOT intends to renew the IHA in a subsequent year, a monitoring report should be submitted 60 days before the expiration of the current IHA (if issued). This report would detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed. NMFS would have an opportunity to provide comments on the report, and if NMFS has comments, WSDOT would address the comments and submit a final report to NMFS within 30 days.

    In addition, NMFS would require WSDOT to notify NMFS' Office of Protected Resources and NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator within 48 hours of sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the construction site. WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the Stranding Network with the species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition, if the animal is dead), location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and photo or video (if available).

    In the event that WSDOT finds an injured or dead marine mammal that is not in the construction area, WSDOT must report the same information as listed above to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible.

    Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).

    To avoid repetition, this introductory discussion of our analyses applies to all the species listed in Table 7, given that the anticipated effects of WSDOT's Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project involving pile driving and pile removal on marine mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature. There is no information about the nature or severity of the impacts, or the size, status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead to a different analysis by species for this activity, or else species-specific factors would be identified and analyzed.

    For all marine mammal species, takes that are anticipated and authorized are expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment, because of the small scale (only a total of 30 piles to be installed and removed) and short durations (maximum nine days pile driving/removal at Bremerton Ferry Terminal and five days pile driving/removal at Edmonds Ferry Terminal).

    Marine mammals present in the vicinity of the action area and taken by Level B harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (startle reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise levels during pile driving and pile removal. For these reasons, these behavioral impacts are not expected to affect marine mammals' growth, survival, and reproduction, especially considering the limited geographic area that would be affected in comparison to the much larger habitat for marine mammals in the Pacific Northwest.

    Take calculation based on marine mammal densities within the ensonified areas did not predict a Level A harassment take. In addition, the estimated Level A harassment zones are small (less than 35 m from the source) and can be effectively monitored to implement a shutdown measure if a marine mammal is detected to be moving towards that zone. The impacts are not expected to affect survival, and reproduction of the marine mammal population in the project vicinity.

    The project also is not expected to have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in the “Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat” section. There is no ESA designated critical area in the vicinity of the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminal areas. The project activities would not permanently modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may kill some fish and cause other fish to leave the area temporarily, thus impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences. Therefore, given the consideration of potential impacts to marine mammal prey species and their physical environment, WSDOT's proposed construction activity at Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals would not adversely affect marine mammal habitat.

    In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:

    • No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated or authorized;

    • All harassment is Level B harassment in the form of short-term behavioral modification; and

    • No areas of specific importance to affected species are impacted.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the prescribed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

    Small Numbers

    As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals.

    The estimated takes are below 21 percent of the population for all marine mammals.

    Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity (including the prescribed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks.

    Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts on the human environment.

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

    Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this case with NMFS West Coast Region Protected Resources Division, whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.

    The humpback whale and the killer whale (southern resident distinct population segment (DPS)) are the only marine mammal species listed under the ESA that could occur in the vicinity of WSDOT's proposed construction project. Two DPSs of the humpback whale stock, the Mexico DPS and the Central America DPS, are listed as threatened and endangered under the ESA, respectively. NMFS Office of Protected Resources has initiated consultation with NMFS West Coast Regional Office under section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of an IHA to WSDOT under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this activity. NMFS is authorizing take of California/Oregon/Washington stock of humpback whale, which are listed under the ESA.

    In March 2018, NMFS finished conducting its section 7 consultation and issued a Biological Opinion concluding that the issuance of the IHA associated with WSDOT's Bremerton-Edmonds ferry terminals construction project is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the endangered humpback and the Southern Resident killer whales.

    Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to the Washington State Department of Transportation for the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project in Washington State, provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19592 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Friday, September 14, 2018.

    PLACE:

    Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Enforcement matters. In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website at http://www.cftc.gov.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-5964.

    Natise L. Allen, Secretariat Program Assistant.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19832 Filed 9-7-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Renewal of the Agricultural Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Agricultural Advisory Committee renewal.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission) is publishing this notice to announce the renewal of the Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC). The Commission has determined that the renewal of the AAC is necessary and in the public's interest, and the Commission has consulted with the General Services Administration's Committee Management Secretariat regarding the AAC's renewal.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charlie Thornton, AAC Designated Federal Officer, at 202-418-5145 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The AAC's objectives and scope of activities are to assist the Commission in assessing issues affecting agricultural producers, processors, lenders and others interested in or affected by the agricultural commodity derivatives markets through public meetings, and Committee reports and recommendations. The AAC will operate for two years from the date of renewal unless the Commission directs that the AAC terminate on an earlier date. A copy of the AAC renewal charter has been filed with the Commission; the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry; the House Committee on Agriculture; the Library of Congress; and the General Services Administration's Committee Management Secretariat. A copy of the renewal charter will be posted on the Commission's website at http://www.cftc.gov.

    Dated: September 6, 2018. Robert Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19673 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2018-OS-0064] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Information collection notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Chief Management Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Non-Medical Counseling Program Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Room 14E08, Alexandria, VA 22350-2300, ATTN: Lee Kelley, or call (571) 372-4530.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Military One-Source Case Management System (CMS) Intake; OMB Control Number 0704-0528.

    Needs and Uses: This information collection is necessary to support the Military One-Source Case Management System, which was established for the purpose of providing comprehensive information to members of the Armed Forces and their families about the benefits and services available to them.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 56,396.

    Number of Respondents: 225,584.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 225,584.

    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

    Frequency: As required.

    Dated: September 6, 2018. Shelly E. Finke, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19739 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket ID ED-2018-FSA-0063] Privacy Act of 1974; Matching Program AGENCY:

    Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice of a new matching program.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 and the Computer Matching and Privacy Protections Amendments of 1990 (Privacy Act), and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance on the conduct of matching programs, notice is hereby given of the re-establishment of the matching program between the Department of Education (ED or Department) (recipient agency) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) (source agency).

    DATES:

    The period of this matching program is estimated to cover the 18-month period from October 10, 2018 through April 9, 2020. However, the computer matching agreement (CMA) will become applicable at the later of the following two dates: October 10, 2018 or 30 days after the publication of this notice, on September 11, 2018, unless comments have been received from interested members of the public requiring modification and republication of the notice. The matching program will continue for 18 months after the applicable date and may be extended for an additional 12 months, if the respective agency Data Integrity Boards (DIBs) determine that the conditions specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(o)(2)(D) have been met.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies, please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the Docket ID at the top of your comments.

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site under the “help” tab.

    Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver your comments about this new matching program, address them to: Marya Dennis, Management and Program Analyst, U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid, Union Center Plaza, 830 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20202-5454. Telephone: (202) 377-3385.

    Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments received from members of the public available for public viewing in their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly available.

    Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marya Dennis, Management and Program Analyst, U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid, Union Center Plaza, 830 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20202-5454. Telephone: (202) 377-3385.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act; OMB Final Guidance Interpreting the Provisions of Public Law 100-503, the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, published in the Federal Register on June 19, 1989 (54 FR 25818); and OMB Circular No. A-108, notice is hereby provided of the re-establishment of the matching program between SSA and ED to assist ED in the verification of Social Security numbers (SSNs) and confirmation of citizenship status as recorded in SSA records in order to verify the eligibility of applicants for student financial assistance under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA).

    Participating Agencies

    ED and SSA.

    Authority for Conducting the Matching Program

    ED is authorized to participate in the matching program under sections 428B(f) (20 U.S.C. 1078-2(f)), 483(a)(12) (20 U.S.C. 1090(a)(12)), 484(g) (20 U.S.C. 1091(g)), and 484(p) (20 U.S.C. 1091(p)) of the HEA.

    SSA is authorized to participate in the matching program under section 1106 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1306)) and the regulations promulgated pursuant to that section (20 CFR part 401).

    Purpose(s)

    The purpose of this matching program between ED and SSA is to assist the Secretary of Education with verification of immigration status and SSNs under 20 U.S.C. 1091(g) and (p). SSA will verify the issuance of an SSN and a date of death (if applicable) to students and the parent(s) of dependent students, and will confirm the citizenship status of those students applying for financial assistance programs authorized under title IV of the HEA. Verification of this information by SSA will help ED satisfy its obligation to ensure that individuals applying for financial assistance meet eligibility requirements of the HEA.

    Verification by this matching program effectuates the purpose of the HEA because it provides an efficient and comprehensive method of verifying the accuracy of each individual's SSN, date of death if applicable and claim to a citizenship status that permits that individual to qualify for title IV, HEA assistance.

    Categories of Individuals

    ED's systems of records involved in the matching program maintain information on individuals who apply for Federal student financial assistance through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and on individuals who apply to receive Person Authentication Service (PAS) Credentials, a user ID and password to electronically access their FAFSA record.

    SSA's system of records involved in the matching program maintains records about each individual who has applied for, and obtained an, SSN.

    Categories of Records

    ED's systems of records involved in the matching program contain (1) the information to determine an applicant's eligibility for Federal student financial assistance, and (2) the applicant's information to receive PAS Credentials, a user ID and password. The specific data elements that ED will transmit to SSA are: Students' and parent(s) of dependent students' SSN, first name, last name, and date of birth (DOB).

    SSA's system of records involved in the matching program maintains information required to apply for, and obtain, an SSN. The specific data elements that SSA will send back to ED include: SSN, first name, last name, DOB, and an SSA verification code on each record to indicate the match results. The verification codes are: 1 = No match on SSN, 3 = SSN match, name match, no match on DOB, 5 = SSN match, no match on name, DOB not checked, 6 = SSN not verified, Blank = SSN match, name match, DOB match. SSA will also send a date of death if one is present on SSA's database for the record. Records returned from SSA also will include a citizenship status code as follows: A = U.S. citizen, B = legal alien, eligible to work, C = legal alien, not eligible to work, D = other, E = alien, student restricted, F = conditionally legalized alien, * = foreign born, Blank = domestic born (U.S. citizen), N = unable to verify citizenship due to no match on name, DOB, or SSN.

    System(s) of Records

    There are two ED systems of records involved in this matching program. The first is entitled “Federal Student Aid Application File” (18-11-01) last published on August 3, 2011 (76 FR 46774), and the second is entitled “Person Authentication Service (PAS)” (18-11-12) published on March 20, 2015 (80 FR 14981).

    SSA's system of records involved in this matching program is entitled, “Master Files of Social Security Number (SSN) Holders and SSN Applications” (Enumeration System) 60-0058, last published in full on December 29, 2010 (75 FR 82121), modified on July 5, 2013 (78 FR 40542), February 13, 2014 (79 FR 8780), and July 3, 2018 (83 FR 31250) and (83 FR 31251).

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the contact person listed in the preceding paragraph.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: September 6, 2018. James F. Manning, Acting Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19738 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket ID ED-2018-FSA-0031] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    Federal Student Aid, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice of a New System of Records and Rescindment of a System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (Privacy Act), the Department of Education (Department) publishes this new notice of a system of records entitled “Postsecondary Education Participants System (PEPS)” (18-11-09) and a rescinded system of records entitled “Integrated Partner Management (IPM) system” (18-11-21). The Department is rescinding the IPM system because the Department did not implement it and will continue using the PEPS system of records.

    DATES:

    Submit your comments on the proposed new PEPS system of records notice and rescinded IPM system of records notice on or before October 11, 2018.

    The re-issuance of the PEPS and the rescission of the IPM systems of records notices will become applicable upon publication in the Federal Register on September 11, 2018, unless changes are made to the systems of records notices as a result of public comment. The routine uses listed under “ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND PURPOSES OF SUCH USES” for the new system of records will become applicable on October 11, 2018, unless the new system of records notice needs to be revised as a result of public comment. The Department will publish any changes to the systems of records notices or routine uses that result from public comment.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies, please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the Docket ID and at the top of your comments.

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site under the “help” tab.

    Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver your comments about either system of records, address them to: Director, Postsecondary Education Participants System, Office of Student Financial Assistance Programs, U.S. Department of Education, 830 First Street NE, Room 112G1, Washington, DC 20202.

    Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments received from members of the public available for public viewing in their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly available.

    Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an appointment for this type of accommodation or aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Director, Postsecondary Education Participants System, Office of Student Financial Assistance Programs, U.S. Department of Education, 830 First Street NE, Room 112G1, Washington, DC 20202.

    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), you may call the Federal Relay Service, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The PEPS enables the Department of Education effectively to administer the approval, periodic review, and oversight of postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the student aid programs under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA). A postsecondary educational institution must be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Department for that purpose, and the institution must also be authorized by the State in which it is located to be eligible for programs under title IV of the HEA. An eligible postsecondary institution must be approved by the Department for participation in programs under title IV of the HEA.

    Postsecondary educational institutions submit an application through the internet for participation in programs authorized under title IV of the HEA. PEPS is the back-end repository where the data provided by those institutions resides and can be accessed by Department staff to confirm compliance with title IV of the HEA. Any authorized user can perform an ad hoc data extract from PEPS, and the PEPS staff provides tailored extracts to users on request. A limited number of scheduled extracts and uploads are run on a routine basis. These are fixed files, and no changes are made on either side without written approval/notice on both sides.

    The PEPS system of records notice was last published in full in the Federal Register on June 4, 1999 (64 FR 30106, 30171-30173), and amended on December 27, 1999 (64 FR 72384, 72405). This system of records notice was rescinded on August 8, 2017 (82 FR 37089), with plans for the PEPS functions and records to be integrated into a new system of records entitled “Integrated Partner Management (IPM) system.” The Department subsequently determined not to bring the IPM system of records into service, and, as a result, PEPS was kept in service. The new PEPS system of records notice is being republished in full in accordance with the Privacy Act with modifications being made to system of records notices from the last publications in 1999. The IPM system of records notice is being rescinded.

    The Department is modifying the section of the PEPS notice entitled “SECURITY CLASSIFICATION” to add that the system is unclassified and the section of the PEPS notice entitled “SYSTEM LOCATION” to reflect the current addresses where the system is located. The Department is modifying the section entitled “SYSTEM MANAGER(S)” to reflect the current location of the Office of Student Financial Assistance Programs in Federal Student Aid.

    The Department is modifying the section of the notice entitled “RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES” to include that the system may obtain records from other persons or entities from which data is obtained under the section entitled “ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND PURPOSES OF SUCH USES.”

    The Department is modifying routine use (3) entitled “Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Disclosure” to indicate that the Department may make disclosures under this routine use when the Department requests representation from the Department of Justice for an employee of the Department who is being sued in his or her individual capacity as well as to change “an individual” to “a person” who has been designated by the Department or otherwise empowered to resolve or mediate disputes in order to avoid confusion because the word “individual” is a defined term under the Privacy Act.

    The Department is also modifying routine uses (5) entitled “Employee Grievance, Complaint, or Conduct Disclosure” and (6) “Labor Organization Disclosure” to clarify and promote the standardization of the language used in this routine use with that used in the Department's other systems of records notices. The Department is also modifying routine use (7) entitled “Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or Privacy Act Advice Disclosure” to permit the Department to obtain counsel necessary to ensure that individual privacy rights are protected under the Privacy Act.

    The Department is also modifying routine use (9) entitled “Contract Disclosure” and routine use (10) entitled “Research Disclosure” to remove language that respectively referenced safeguard requirements under subsection (m) of the Privacy Act and Privacy Act safeguards. The Department is revising the language in these routine uses to clarify that contractors and researchers to whom disclosures are made under these routine uses will be required to agree to safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of the records in the system. The Department is also revising routine use (9) to clarify that these safeguards will be entered into “as part of such a contract,” rather than “before entering into such a contract.”

    The Department is further modifying routine use (12) “Disclosure to the Office of Management and Budget or the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for Credit Reform Act (CRA) Support” to add that the Department may disclose records to the CBO as necessary to fulfill CRA requirements and to clarify that any disclosure must be in accordance with 2 U.S.C. 661b.

    Pursuant to the requirements in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) M-17-12, the Department is adding the routine use (13) entitled “Disclosure in the Course of Responding to a Breach of Data” and routine use (14) entitled “Disclosure in Assisting another Agency in Responding to a Breach of Data.”

    The Department is updating the section entitled “POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETENTION AND DISPOSAL OF RECORDS” to reflect the current Department records retention and disposition schedule covering records in this system. The Department is also updating the section entitled “ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL, AND PHYSICAL SAFEGUARDS” to include two-factor authentication, firewalls, encryption, and password protection as additional safeguards.

    The Department is modifying the sections entitled “RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES,” “CONTESTING RECORDS PROCEDURES,” and “NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES” to specify the required information that an individual must provide when making a request for access to or notification of a record or to contest the content of a record in the system.

    Finally, pursuant to the requirements of OMB Circular No. A-108, the Department is adding a new section entitled “HISTORY.”

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: September 6, 2018. James F. Manning, Acting Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Acting Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid of the U.S. Department of Education (Department) publishes a notice of a new and a rescinded system of records to read as follows:

    RESCINDED SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER

    Integrated Partner Management (IPM) system (18-11-21).

    HISTORY:

    The Integrated Partner Management system of records notice was published in the Federal Register on August 8, 2017 (82 FR 37089-37094).

    NEW SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER:

    Postsecondary Education Participants System (PEPS) (18-11-09).

    SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:

    Unclassified.

    SYSTEM LOCATION:

    Plano Technology Center, 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas, 75075-8427;

    Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of Education, 830 First Street NE, Room 41I1, Washington, DC 20202.

    See the Appendix at the end of this system of records notice for additional system locations.

    SYSTEM MANAGER(S):

    Director, Postsecondary Education Participants System, Office of Student Financial Assistance Programs, U.S. Department of Education (Department), 830 First Street NE, Room 112G1, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 377-3202.

    AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:

    Sections 481, 487, 498 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), (20 U.S.C. 1088, 1094, 1099c); Section 31001(i)(1) of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Public Law 104-134 (31 U.S.C. 7701).

    PURPOSE(S) OF THE SYSTEM:

    The information maintained in the PEPS is used for the purposes of determining the initial and continuing eligibility of and the administrative capability and financial responsibility of postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the student financial assistance programs authorized under title IV of the HEA, tracking school changes and maintaining a history of information regarding postsecondary educational institutions that have previously applied to participate or participated in these programs, and documenting any need for any protective or corrective action against a postsecondary educational institution or individual associated with that institution.

    CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:

    The PEPS maintains records about individuals who are owners of postsecondary educational institutions (either individually, as partners, or owners of the corporate entities that own those institutions); officials or authorized agents for those institutions; members of boards of directors or trustees of such institutions; employees of foreign entities that evaluate the quality of education; and individuals from third-party servicers that work with postsecondary educational institutions, including contact persons.

    CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:

    The PEPS maintains information regarding the eligibility, administrative capability, and financial responsibility of postsecondary educational institutions that participate in the student financial aid programs authorized under title IV of the HEA, including the names, Taxpayer Identification Numbers (generally Social Security numbers (SSNs)), business addresses, phone numbers of the individuals with substantial ownership interests in, or control over, those institutions, and personal identification numbers assigned by the Department.

    RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

    Information is obtained from applications submitted by postsecondary educational institutions and their owners who seek approval for such an institution to participate or continue participating under new ownership in the student financial assistance programs authorized under title IV of the HEA, from components of the Department, from other Federal, State and non-governmental agencies and organizations that acquire information relevant to the purposes of the PEPS. Information may also be obtained from other persons or entities from which data is obtained under routine uses set forth below.

    ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

    The Department may disclose information contained in a record in this system of records under the routine uses listed in this system of records without the consent of the individual if the disclosure is compatible with the purposes for which the record was collected. These disclosures may be made on a case-by-case basis or, if the Department has complied with the computer matching requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (Privacy Act), under a computer matching agreement.

    (1) Program Purposes. The Department may disclose information contained in the PEPS to appropriate guaranty agencies, educational and financial institutions, accrediting agencies, and appropriate Federal, State, or local agencies, in order to verify and assist with the determination of eligibility, administrative capability, and financial responsibility of postsecondary educational institutions that have applied to participate in the student financial assistance programs authorized under title IV of the HEA.

    (2) Enforcement Disclosure. In the event that information in this system of records indicates, either on its face or in connection with other information, a violation or potential violation of any applicable statute, regulation, or order of a competent authority, the Department may disclose the relevant records in the PEPS, as a routine use, to the appropriate agency, whether foreign, Federal, State, Tribal, or local, charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting such violation or charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, or executive order or rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto.

    (3) Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Disclosure.

    (a) Introduction. In the event that one of the parties listed below in subsections (i) through (v) is involved in judicial or administrative litigation or ADR, or has an interest in judicial or administrative litigation or ADR, the Department may disclose PEPS records to the parties described in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this routine use under the conditions specified in those paragraphs:

    (i) The Department of Education, or any component of the Department;

    (ii) Any Department employee in his or her official capacity;

    (iii) Any employee of the Department in his or her individual capacity where the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been requested to or has agreed to provide or arrange for representation for the employee;

    (iv) Any employee of the Department in his or her individual capacity where the agency has agreed to represent the employee; or

    (v) The United States, where the Department determines that the litigation is likely to affect the Department or any of its components.

    (b) Disclosure to the Department of Justice. If the Department determines that disclosure of certain records to the DOJ is relevant and necessary to judicial or administrative litigation or ADR, the Department may disclose those records as a routine use to the DOJ.

    (c) Adjudicative Disclosure. If the Department determines that disclosure of certain records to an adjudicative body before which the Department is authorized to appear, or to a person or entity designated by the Department or otherwise empowered to resolve or mediate disputes, is relevant and necessary to the judicial or administrative litigation or ADR, the Department may disclose those records as a routine use to that adjudicative body, person, or entity.

    (d) Disclosure to Parties, Counsel, Representatives, and Witnesses. If the Department determines that disclosure of certain records to a party, counsel, representative, or witness is relevant and necessary to the judicial or administrative litigation or ADR, the Department may disclose those records as a routine use to the party, counsel, representative, or witness.

    (4) Employment, Benefit, and Contracting Disclosure.

    (a) For decisions by the Department. The Department may disclose records to a Federal, State, or local agency maintaining civil, criminal, or other relevant enforcement or other pertinent records, or to another public authority or professional organization, if necessary to obtain information relevant to a Department decision concerning the hiring or retention of an employee or other personnel action, the issuance of a security clearance, the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license, grant, or other benefit.

    (b) For decisions by Other Public Agencies and Professional Organizations. The Department may disclose records to a Federal, State, local, or foreign agency or other public authority or professional organization, in connection with the hiring or retention of an employee or other personnel action, the issuance of a security clearance, the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license, grant, or other benefit, to the extent that the record is relevant and necessary to the receiving entity's decision on the matter.

    (5) Employee Grievance, Complaint, or Conduct Disclosure. If a record is relevant and necessary to an employee grievance, complaint, or disciplinary action involving a present or former employee of the Department, the Department may disclose a record from this system of records in the course of investigation, fact-finding, or adjudication, to any party to the grievance, complaint, or action; to the party's counsel or representative; to a witness; or to a designated fact-finder, mediator, or other person designated to resolve issues or decide the matter.

    (6) Labor Organization Disclosure. The Department may disclose records from this system of records to an arbitrator to resolve disputes under a negotiated grievance process or to officials of a labor organization recognized under 5 U.S.C. chapter 71 when relevant and necessary to their duties of exclusive representation.

    (7) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or Privacy Act Advice Disclosure. The Department may disclose records to the DOJ or the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) if the Department seeks advice regarding whether records maintained in this system of records are required to be disclosed under the FOIA or Privacy Act.

    (8) Disclosure to the DOJ. The Department may disclose records to the DOJ to the extent necessary for obtaining DOJ advice on any matter relevant to an audit, inspection, or other inquiry related to the programs covered by this system.

    (9) Contract Disclosure. If the Department contracts with an entity for the purpose of performing any function that requires disclosure of records in this system to employees of the contractor, the Department may disclose the records to those employees. As part of such a contract, the Department shall require the contractor to agree to maintain safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of the records in the system.

    (10) Research Disclosure. The Department may disclose records to a researcher if an appropriate official of the Department determines that the individual or organization to which the disclosure would be made is qualified to carry out specific research related to functions or purposes of this system of records. The official may disclose records from this system of records to that researcher solely for the purpose of carrying out that research related to the functions or purposes of this system of records. The researcher shall be required to agree to maintain safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of the disclosed records.

    (11) Congressional Member Disclosure. The Department may disclose records to a member of Congress from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the member made at the written request of that individual. The member's right to the information is no greater than the right of the individual who requested it.

    (12) Disclosure to the Office of Management and Budget or the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for Credit Reform Act (CRA) Support. The Department may disclose records to the OMB or the CBO as necessary to fulfill CRA requirements in accordance with 2 U.S.C. 661b.

    (13) Disclosure in the Course of Responding to a Breach of Data. The Department may disclose records to appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when (a) the Department suspects or has confirmed that there has been a breach of the system of records; (b) the Department has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed breach there is a risk of harm to individuals, the Department (including its information systems, program, and operation), the Federal Government, or national security; and (c) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the Department's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed breach or to prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    (14) Disclosure in Assisting another Agency in Responding to a Breach of Data. The Department may disclose records from this system to another Federal agency or Federal entity, when the Department determines that information from this system of records is reasonably necessary to assist the recipient agency or entity in (a) responding to a suspected or confirmed breach or (b) preventing, minimizing, or remedying the risk of harm to individuals, the recipient agency or entity (including its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal Government, or national security, resulting from a suspected or confirmed breach.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORAGE OF RECORDS:

    The records are maintained on electronic data files on a server.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETRIEVAL OF RECORDS:

    The records are indexed by the name of the institution or organization, and may be retrieved by the OPEID of postsecondary educational institution, EIN (Entity Identification Number) of the postsecondary educational institution or entity; or the name or the Taxpayer Identification Number (generally the Social Security number) of the individual.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETENTION AND DISPOSAL OF RECORDS:

    Records are maintained and disposed of in accordance with the Department Records Schedule 074: FSA Guaranty Agency, Financial and Education Institution Eligibility, Compliance, Monitoring and Oversight Records (N1-441-09-15). Records are destroyed/deleted 30 years after cut off. Cut off occurs at the end of the fiscal year when final action is completed.

    ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL, AND PHYSICAL SAFEGUARDS:

    All physical access to the Department of Education sites, and the site of Department contractor where this system of records is maintained, is controlled and monitored by security personnel who check each individual entering the building for his or her employee or visitor badge. The computer system employed by the Department offers a high degree of resistance to tampering and circumvention with firewalls, encryption, and password protection. This security system limits data access to staff of the Department, guarantors, accrediting agencies, State agencies, and Department contractors on a “need-to-know” basis, and controls individual users' ability to access and alter records within the system. All users of this system of records are given a unique user ID with personal identifiers. All interactions by individual users with the system are recorded. Access to the system requires two-factor authentication.

    RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:

    If you wish to gain access to any record in the system of records, you must contact the system manager at the address listed above. You must provide the necessary particulars of your name, SSN, and any other identifying information requested by the Department, while processing the request, to distinguish between individuals with the same name. Such requests must meet the requirements of 34 CFR 5b.5.

    CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:

    If you wish to contest the content of a record in the system pertaining to you, you must contact the system manager at the address listed above. The request to amend must be made in writing and addressed to the system manager at the address provided above with the necessary particulars of your name, SSN, and any other identifying information requested by the Department, while processing the request, to distinguish between individuals with the same name. The request must identify the particular record within the PEPS that you wish to have changed, state whether you wish to have the record amended, corrected, or deleted, and explain the reasons why you wish to have the record changed. Requests to amend a record must meet the requirements of the Department's Privacy Act regulations at 34 CFR 5b.7.

    NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:

    If you wish to determine whether a record exists regarding you in the system, you must contact the system manager at the address listed above. You must provide the necessary particulars of your name, SSN, and any other identifying information requested by the Department, while processing the request, to distinguish between individuals with the same name. Your request must meet the requirements of the regulations at 34 CFR 5b.5, including proof of identity.

    EXEMPTIONS PROMULGATED FOR THE SYSTEM:

    None.

    HISTORY:

    The system of records was published in the Federal Register on June 4, 1999 (64 FR 30106, 30171-30173), and amended on December 27, 1999 (64 FR 72384, 72405). This system of records was rescinded on August 8, 2017 (82 FR 37089-37094).

    Appendix to 18-11-09 ADDITIONAL SYSTEM LOCATIONS:

    Boston Office, 5 Post Office Square, Boston, MA 02109. New York Office, 32 Old Slip, New York, NY 10005. Philadelphia Office, The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107.

    Chicago Office, Citigroup Center, 500 W Madison Street Chicago, IL 60661.

    Atlanta Office, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303.

    Dallas Office, 1999 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    Kansas City Office, 1010 Walnut Street, Kansas City, MO 64106.

    Denver Office, Cesar E. Chavez Memorial Building, 1244 Speer Boulevard, Denver, CO 80204.

    San Francisco Office, 50 Beale Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

    Seattle Office, 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174.

    U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202.

    [FR Doc. 2018-19688 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2018-ICCD-0093] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; E-Complaint Form(FERPA) and PPRA E-Complaint Form AGENCY:

    Office of Management (OM), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2018-ICCD-0093. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9089, Washington, DC 20202-0023.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Angela Arrington, (202)260-8915.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: E-Complaint Form(FERPA) and PPRA E-Complaint Form.

    OMB Control Number: 1880-0544.

    Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 500.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 500.

    Abstract: The Family Policy Compliance Office (FPCO) reviews, investigates, and processes complaints of alleged violations of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) filed by parents and eligible students. FPCO's authority to investigate, review, and process complaints extends to allegations of violations of FERPA by any recipient of United States Department of Education (Department) funds under a program administered by the Secretary (e.g., schools, school districts, postsecondary institutions, state educational agencies, and other third parties that receive Department funds). This revision includes the addition of the PPRA Complaint form that would allow parents to file a complaint. The Department expects to receive more than 10 complaints under the PPRA requiring approval.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Stephanie Valentine, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19672 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Proposed Distribution of Residual Citronelle Settlement Agreement Funds AGENCY:

    Office of Hearings and Appeals, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of implementation of special refund procedures.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) of the Department of Energy (DOE) announces the procedures for the disbursement of residual funds (totaling approximately $59,000) remaining in various Citronelle Settlement Agreement escrow accounts to the parties to the Agreement.

    DATES:

    Comments are due by October 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are encouraged to submit written comments electronically to: Kristin L. Martin, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Hearings and Appeals, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585-0107, (202) 287-1550, Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kristin L. Martin, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Hearings and Appeals, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585-0107, (202) 287-1550, Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Cost of Living Council, a predecessor agency of the Department of Energy, acting pursuant to the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, Public Law 91 39, 84 Stat. 796, 799, on August 22, 1973, issued a system of price controls on the first sale of all domestic production of crude oil. Eventually, regulations were promulgated controlling the allocation and prices of many refined petroleum products in addition to crude oil and providing for enforcement of these regulations. See 10 CFR part 210 et seq.; see also Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-159, Exec. Order 11,748, 38 FR 33577 (December 6, 1973) (EPAA); Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, as amended, Public Law 92-210, 85 Stat. 743; Public Law 93-28, 87 Stat. 27, Exec. Order 11,748, 38 FR 33575 (December 4, 1973) (ESA); Cost of Living Council Order No. 47, 39 FR 24 (January 2, 1974).

    The Citronelle Settlement Agreement funds resulted from funds collected by the Department of Energy (DOE) in connection with the approval of exception relief from the price control regulations in effect for the 341 Tract Unit of Citronelle Field (Unit) by the DOE Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA). The 341 Tract Unit of the Citronelle Field, 10 DOE ¶ 81, 207 (1983).

    The Citronelle exception relief spawned years of administrative and judicial litigation, including litigation over the final terms and conditions of the relief, OHA's authority to grant the relief and the evidentiary basis for its decision, and the possible revision or termination of the relief. Ultimately, in December 1991, OHA issued a decision terminating the exception relief and requiring the transfer of the remaining Citronelle exception relief funds to an escrow account in the United States Treasury under the supervision of the DOE Controller. The 341 Tract Unit of the Citronelle Field, 21 DOE ¶ 81,009 (1991). In Apri1 1992, OHA issued a decision addressing certain claims to the Citronelle escrow account funds, establishing deadlines and procedures governing claims to the funds, and scheduling an evidentiary proceeding. The 341 Tract Unit of the Citronelle Field, 22 DOE ¶ 85,069 (1992). In May 1994, OHA issued a Decision and Order setting forth its determination of the percentage of the funds that should be allocated to various entities. The 341 Tract Unit of the Citronelle Field, 24 DOE ¶ 81,035 (1994).

    Those actions led to further litigation. The Unit appealed OHA's termination of exception relief decision to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which affirmed OHA's decision. The Unit then sought judicial review in R.H. Stechman, et al. v. Department of Energy, No. 94-0887-A-M (S.D. Ala. 1994).

    In order to avoid further extended judicial proceedings over the disposition of the Citronelle escrow account, DOE reached a settlement (Settlement Agreement) resolving, first, the claims to the DOE/Citronelle escrow fund reserved for various Refiner-Litigants and, second, the Unit's claims. The settlement agreement resolving the claims of the Refiner-Litigants was approved by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on December 6, 1995. See 61 FR 48946, 48947 (Sept. 17, 1996).

    The Settlement Agreement had five Parties and eight Eligible Entities or Groups. The Parties were: The United States, the Department of Energy, and specified Refiner-Litigants, Participant States, and Participant End-Users. The groups eligible to share in the remaining Citronelle funds were: the States, a group of End-Users, various Refiners (as defined in the Agreement), a group of Non-Litigant Refiners, the Consumers Power Company and various groups of Refiner Cooperatives, Cooperatives, and Airlines (as defined in the Agreement). The original amount governed by the Agreement was more than $63,000,000.00. As of June 2018, approximately $36,200.00 remained in the Airlines escrow account and approximately $23,000.00 remained in the Non-Litigant Refiners escrow account.

    The Agreement stipulates that funds remaining in the Non-Litigant Refiners escrow account after proper distribution to that group must be transferred to the Refiner-Litigants. It also stipulates that funds remaining in the Airlines escrow account after proper distribution to that group are to be distributed in the following proportions:

    • 2/7 to the United States Treasury;

    • 2/7 to the States in proportions listed in Exhibit L of the Settlement Agreement and detailed below;

    • 2/7 to the Refiner-Litigants; and

    • 1/7 to the End-Users

    The Agreement requires that the funds remaining in the End-Users account be transferred to the Subpart V Crude Oil Proceeding. However, the Subpart V Crude Oil Proceeding closed in 2016, with all remaining funds being distributed equally between the United States Treasury and the States (in pro-rata proportions defined by that refund proceeding). See 69 FR 29300 (May 21, 2004).

    I. Proposed Procedure for Final Distribution of Citronelle Settlement Agreement Funds

    The Citronelle Settlement Agreement funds will be distributed according to the following plan. Any funds remaining after the final distributions made in accordance with this plan will be considered unclaimed and will be transferred to the U.S. Treasury. Final distribution amounts will be calculated using the distribution percentages listed in an appendix to this Notice on the day the final Notice is published in the Federal Register.

    The Non-Litigant Refiners Account

    The Agreement requires that the balance of the Non-Litigant Refiners account be distributed to the Refiner-Litigants through an escrow account established for that purpose for the initial distribution of Citronelle funds and managed by the law firm Miller & Chevalier. Miller & Chevalier no longer represents the Refiner-Litigants. Further, DOE has not been able to obtain documentation regarding how previous Citronelle distributions were made among the various firms comprising the Refiner-Litigants. In light of these facts and because the Citronelle distribution proportions agreed to by the Refiner-Litigants were not a part of the Agreement and thus not binding on DOE, we propose that the Refiner-Litigant portion of the funds be divided in equal proportions for the firms, or successor firms, listed in Exhibit A of the Agreement. A list of these firms is included as an appendix to this Notice. If a listed firm, or successor firm, does not submit the Required Information described below by the specified deadline, the funds will be considered unclaimed and will be transferred to the U.S. Treasury.

    The Airlines Account

    The Airlines account remaining funds will be split according to the percentages prescribed in the Settlement Agreement. Two sevenths of the Airlines account funds will be distributed to the United States Treasury. Two sevenths of the Airlines account funds will be distributed to the Refiner-Litigants Escrow Account. Two sevenths of the Airlines account funds will be distributed to the States in the proportions listed in Exhibit L of the Agreement.

    One seventh of the Airlines account funds will be allocated to the End-Users account, which will be distributed in the same proportions as the residual Subpart V funds were distributed pursuant to our notice in 72 FR 46461, 46462 (August 14, 2007). The funds will be split equally, with half distributed to the United States Treasury and half distributed to the States. The funds distributed to the States will be divided in the proportions used for the final distribution of the Subpart V funds, which are identical to those listed in Exhibit L of the Agreement. All funds distributed to the States are subject to the same restricted uses as those received by that State as a result of the settlement of the case known as In Re: Stripper Well Litigation, M.D.L. No. 378. A list of distribution percentages is included as an appendix to this Notice. If a State does not submit the Required Information described below by the specified deadline, the funds will be considered unclaimed and will be transferred to the U.S. Treasury.

    Required Information

    In order to receive its allotted funds, each Recipient, including State Recipients, must submit the following no later than the 90th calendar day following publication of the Final Plan in the Federal Register:

    • Statement of Intent: The Statement should be brief and include the Recipient's name and the representative's authority to claim the Recipient's funds.

    • Information Required by the Agreement: The Agreement requires that certain Releases of Claims be executed and submitted to DOE before Recipients may receive distributions.

    ○ If a Recipient has not ever submitted the relevant Release of Claims, it should contact DOE at the below address to obtain a copy of the release, and should submit the executed release with the other required information described in this section.

    ○ If a Recipient has previously submitted the relevant Release of Claims, it should submit to DOE a notarized statement certifying that it has submitted the release. The notarized statement should be submitted with the other required information described in this section.

    • Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) Information: Each Recipient must submit all information necessary for DOE to make an electronic distribution of funds, including the name and contact information (phone number, email address, and mailing address) of a person designated to be the Point of Contact, banking information, and Tax ID number. DOE will not contact Recipients regarding problems, discrepancies, or other issues with EFT information. DOE will notify the designated Point of Contact when the EFT is initiated. If an EFT is unsuccessful and the Recipient does not contact DOE to correct the error by the 14th day following the EFT initiation, the amount not distributed will be considered unclaimed and will be transferred to the United States Treasury.

    Submissions should in PDF format and must be submitted by email to [email protected] The subject line should include “Citronelle Settlement Agreement Recipient Documents” and the name of the State or other Recipient. The Releases of Claims contained in the Agreement's Exhibits may be obtained by contacting Kristin L. Martin, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Hearings and Appeals, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 287-1550.

    II. Appendix A—Proposed Distribution Percentages and List of Refiner-Litigants Citronelle Airline Account Funds Refiner-Litigants 28.57142857142860000%

    • Each Refiner-Litigant Entity is entitled to 0.865800865800867% of the total Airline Account Funds.

    United States Treasury 35.71428571428570000% Alabama 0.54804016064259400% Alaska 0.13818786523157600% American Samoa 0.00636083244822057% Arizona 0.36634454245826900% Arkansas 0.45449277491405100% California 3.26944016176838000% Colorado 0.38401187480512000% Connecticut 0.60652108584973400% Delaware 0.16956338168467300% District of Columbia 0.08531354824083700% Florida 1.65010975432690000% Georgia 0.79531816470797200% Guam 0.05263184468083650% Hawaii 0.24538846523323400% Idaho 0.14657787754978300% Illinois 1.64040323767528000% Indiana 0.87972416423889800% Iowa 0.46535022190036900% Kansas 0.40036549196707900% Kentucky 0.45780595111052400% Louisiana 0.84950225360465700% Maine 0.26254694847105300% Maryland 0.63946084248035600% Massachusetts 1.22259929840854000% Michigan 1.21688372104464000% Minnesota 0.61974582045967800% Mississippi 0.48769574322855100% Missouri 0.70516872255815100% Montana 0.16165040119813900% Nebraska 0.26336705431455200% Nevada 0.14466342873599700% New Hampshire 0.16645300019308600% New Jersey 1.31838653652643000% New Mexico 0.23395138247190300% New York 2.76553651908726000% No. Mariana Islands 0.00329014604847478% North Carolina 0.80159665169915200% North Dakota 0.13090382462201500% Ohio 1.34202999992372000% Oklahoma 0.44109500817469100% Oregon 0.35401620870755400% Pennsylvania 1.66287802161090000% Puerto Rico 0.34023415151078600% Rhode Island 0.14160268359603600% South Carolina 0.42578568669101500% South Dakota 0.12770074547322300% Tennessee 0.57787034891897200% Texas 2.63486674686911000% Utah 0.21069728945457100% Vermont 0.08547809926032230% Virgin Islands 0.16520939843142600% Virginia 0.91659346391607800% Washington 0.54540262288818800% West Virginia 0.21344547509163300% Wisconsin 0.62838735451951800% Wyoming 0.14563871266099600% Total 35.71428571428570000% Non-Litigant Refiners Account Funds Refiner-Litigants 100%

    • Each Refiner-Litigant Entity is entitled to 3.03% of the Non-Litigant Refiners Account Funds.

    List of Refiner-Litigants Amoco Oil Company Ashland Oil, Inc. Atlantic Richfield Company Axel Johnson, Inc. BHP Petroleum Americas Refining, Inc. Castle Oil Corporation Charter International Oil Company Charter Oil Company Chevron U.S.A., Inc. Clark Oil & Refining Corporation The Coastal Corporation Commonwealth Oil Refining Company Conoco, Inc. Crown Central Petroleum Corp. Diamond Shamrock Refining & Marketing Company Exxon Corporation Fina Oil and Chemical Company Gulf States Oil & Refining Co. Kerr-McGee Refining Corporation La Gloria Oil and Gas Company Marathon Oil Company Mobil Oil Corporation New England Petroleum Corporation Oxy USA, Inc. Shell Oil Company Sprague Energy Corporation Tesoro Petroleum Corporation Texaco, Inc. Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc. Tosco Corporation Total Petroleum, Inc. Union Pacific Resources Company Wyatt Energy, Inc.
    Signed in Washington, DC on: August 27, 2018. Poli A. Marmolejos, Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19687 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Nuclear Security Administration Secretarial Determination of a National Security Purpose for the Sale or Transfer of Enriched Uranium AGENCY:

    National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 21, 2018, the Secretary of Energy issued a determination (“Secretarial Determination”) covering the transfer of low enriched uranium in support of the tritium production mission. The Secretarial Determination establishes the national security purpose of these transfers, therefore the transfers will be conducted under the USEC Privatization Act of 1996.

    DATES:

    The Secretary of Energy signed the determination on August 21, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Audrey Beldio, NNSA Domestic Uranium Enrichment Program Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, telephone (202) 586-1963, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Currently, the United States does not possess a fully domestic uranium enrichment capability. The U.S. uranium enrichment market consists of foreign enrichment technologies that cannot be used to meet national security requirements for enriched uranium.

    Acknowledging that it will take time to develop enrichment technologies and allow for thorough analysis to inform an acquisition decision for producing unobligated LEU, NNSA's Domestic Uranium Enrichment strategy includes NNSA Defense Programs down-blending approximately 20 metric tons of HEU to LEU for use as fuel in tritium production reactors. The uranium will be transferred to the NNSA federal partner, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) only for use as fuel in a reactor producing tritium and not for resale or retransfer. TVA will pay for the value of uranium to be received. Use of this material is compliant with long-standing U.S. policy and international commitments that require LEU used for defense purposes to be free of peaceful use restrictions (“unobligated”). TVA is responsible for preserving the unobligated LEU to be used as fuel in tritium production reactors.

    The Department's transfers of uranium are conducted in accordance with its authority under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and consistent with other applicable law. These uranium transfers will be conducted under Section 3112(e)(2) of the USEC Privatization Act of 1996, which provides for transfers of enriched uranium to any person for national security purposes, as determined by the Secretary.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on September 5, 2018. Philip T. Calbos, Acting Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs, National Nuclear Security Administration. Appendix Department of Energy

    Set forth below is the full text of the Secretarial Determination:

    BILLING CODE 6450-01-P EN11SE18.004
    [FR Doc. 2018-19686 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CD18-11-000] Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Fish Hatchery Bureau; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and Motions To Intervene

    On August 30, 2018, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Fish Hatchery Bureau, filed a notice of intent to construct a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, pursuant to section 30 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended by section 4 of the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 (HREA). The proposed Bluewater Fish Hatchery Artesian Well Hydroelectric Project would have an installed capacity of 35 kilowatts (kW), and would be located on a 10-inch diameter pipeline that would take water from an artesian well to the Bluewater Spring, to be used for the fish hatchery. The project would be located near the Town of Bridger in Carbon County, Montana.

    Applicant Contact: Jay Pravecek, Chief, Fish Hatchery Bureau, 1420 E 6th Avenue, Helena, MT 59620-0701.

    FERC Contact: Robert Bell, Phone No. (202) 502-6062; Email: [email protected]

    Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Description: The proposed project would consist of: (1) A ten-inch PVC pipe in the pump house of the artesian well containing a single turbine with a total generating capacity of 35 kW; (2) a 37-foot-long, 10-inch-diameter PVC pipe connected to an existing, abandoned water line that will transport well water to the Bluewater Spring; and (3) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project would have an estimated annual generation of 306.6 megawatt-hours.

    A qualifying conduit hydropower facility is one that is determined or deemed to meet all of the criteria shown in the table below.

    Table 1—Criteria for Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Statutory provision Description Satisfies
  • (Y/N)
  • FPA 30(a)(3)(A), as amended by HREA The conduit the facility uses is a tunnel, canal, pipeline, aqueduct, flume, ditch, or similar manmade water conveyance that is operated for the distribution of water for agricultural, municipal, or industrial consumption and not primarily for the generation of electricity Y FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(i), as amended by HREA The facility is constructed, operated, or maintained for the generation of electric power and uses for such generation only the hydroelectric potential of a non-federally owned conduit Y FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(ii), as amended by HREA The facility has an installed capacity that does not exceed 5 megawatts Y FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(iii), as amended by HREA On or before August 9, 2013, the facility is not licensed, or exempted from the licensing requirements of Part I of the FPA Y

    Preliminary Determination: The proposed hydroelectric project will not interfere with the primary purpose of the conduit, which is to aid the Fish Hatchery Bureau's fish hatchery water supply system. Therefore, based upon the above criteria, Commission staff preliminarily determines that the proposal satisfies the requirements for a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, which is not required to be licensed or exempted from licensing.

    Comments and Motions To Intervene: Deadline for filing comments contesting whether the facility meets the qualifying criteria is 45 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    Deadline for filing motions to intervene is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    Anyone may submit comments or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210 and 385.214. Any motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified deadline date for the particular proceeding.

    Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the “COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR A CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY” or “MOTION TO INTERVENE,” as applicable; (2) state in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) state the name, address, and telephone number of the person filing; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of sections 385.2001 through 385.2005 of the Commission's regulations.1 All comments contesting Commission staff's preliminary determination that the facility meets the qualifying criteria must set forth their evidentiary basis.

    1 18 CFR 385.2001-2005 (2017).

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene and comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (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. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Locations of Notice of Intent: Copies of the notice of intent can be obtained directly from the applicant or such copies can be viewed and reproduced at the Commission in its Public Reference Room, Room 2A, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number (i.e., CD18-11) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected] For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19691 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Docket Numbers: EC18-150-000.

    Applicants: Noble Altona Windpark, LLC, Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC, Noble Chateaugay Windpark, LLC, Noble Clinton Windpark I, LLC, Noble Ellenburg Windpark, LLC, Noble Wethersfield Windpark, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Noble Altona Windpark, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5184.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/25/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1428-003.

    Applicants: Tilton Energy LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Settlement Compliance Filing to be effective 10/12/2017.

    Filed Date: 8/31/18.

    Accession Number: 20180831-5173.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2359-001.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Errata Filing to Second Revised ISA SA No. 2832; Queue No. AC1-181 to be effective 8/8/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/25/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2377-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.

    Description: Application for Waivers and for Approval of Customer Credit Mechanism for Pipeline Refund Amounts of Southwestern Public Service Company.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5193.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/25/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2378-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-09-05_SA 3143 Blazing Star-NSPM E&P (J460) to be effective 9/6/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20180905-5063.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/18.

    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: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19694 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-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: PR18-81-000.

    Applicants: Agua Blanca, LLC.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: compliance to 1 to be effective 7/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 8/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20180830-5199.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET9/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1131-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Terminate Non-conforming Negotiated Rate Gathering Agreement to be effective 8/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5069.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1132-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—Twin Eagle Resource Management, LLC R-7300-08 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5070.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1133-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—Twin Eagle Resource Management, LLC R-7300-09 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1134-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—Twin Eagle Resource Management, LLC R-7300-10 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5073.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1135-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Terminate Negotiated Rate Service Agreement—Hayden Harper to be effective 1/10/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5075.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1136-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Capacity Release Agreements—9/1/2018 to be effective9/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5076.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1137-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Non-Conforming Negotiated Rate Agreement Filing (SoCal Nov 18) to be effective11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5077.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1138-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—DTE Energy Trading, Inc. R-1830-15 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5081.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1139-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—DTE Energy Trading, Inc. R-1830-16 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1140-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—Freepoint Commodities LLC R-7250-22 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5102.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1141-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—Direct Energy Business Marketing, LLC R-7465-07 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5110.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1142-000.

    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate PAL Agreements—Wisconsin Public Service Corporation to be effective 9/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5120.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1143-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 090418 Negotiated Rates—Macquarie Energy LLC R-4090-17 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5121.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1144-000.

    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Horizon Delivery Point to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5124.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1145-000.

    Applicants: NEXUS Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: NEXUS Non-Conforming Agreements Filing to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/4/18.

    Accession Number: 20180904-5148.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/17/18.

    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: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19695 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP18-1130-000] KMC Thermo, LLC v. Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on August 31, 2018, pursuant to section 5 of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717d and Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 (2018), KMC Thermo, LLC (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP, (Respondent) alleging that Respondent unlawfully imposed a General System Commodity Electric Surcharge on certain customers, including the Complainant, under its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, all as more fully explained in the complaint.

    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served on Respondent's corporate representatives designated on the Commission's Corporate Officials List.

    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. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants.

    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 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.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 20, 2018.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19693 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL18-196-000] RTO Insider LLC v. New England Power Pool Participants Committee; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on August 31, 2018, pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e and 825e and Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206, RTO Insider LLC (Complainant) filed a complaint against New England Power Pool Participants Committee (NEPOOL or Respondent) requesting that the Commission find NEPOOL's unique press ban (and public) to be unlawful, unjust and unreasonable, unduly discriminatory and contrary to the public interest, and direct NEPOOL to cease and desist from imposing such a ban, all as more fully explained in the complaint.

    Complainant certifies that a copy of the complaint has been served on NEPOOL.

    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 and 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. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainant.

    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.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 20, 2018.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19692 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. IC18-13-000 (FERC-537)] Errata Notice

    On August 14, 2018, the Commission issued a 30-day public notice regarding the extension of the FERC-537 information collection. That same 30-day notice also responded to comments received on FERC-537 (Gas Pipeline Certificates: Construction, Acquisition and Abandonment, OMB Control No. 1902-0060) in response to a previous 60-day notice (issued on May, 14, 2018). This Errata Notice corrects the 30-day notice and the presentation and responses to the two public comments.

    In reference to the 30-day notice issued on August 14, 2018, the section labeled “Response to public comments” should be corrected to read as follows:

    On 5/30/2018, Ms. Joanne Collins submitted the following comment:

    I am in favor of the collection of all information necessary for the proper performance of the function of the Commission. I am not in favor of deciding to collect less information because it is a burden. Using automated collection techniques or other form of technology is fine as long as it is not required for collection.

    To the comment received from Ms. Joanne Collins, FERC responds:

    Commenter concurs in the collection of information necessary for the Commission to make an informed decision and take appropriate action is appropriate, but does not want less information that is needed to not be collected solely because it is a burden on those seeking authorizations. We confirm that all the information required by FERC-537 continues to be necessary and that no data collections have been revised in this current review on FERC-537. Commenter notes that automated ways to collect information, such as eFiling are good, as long as they are not ultimately required of all fliers.

    On 6/4/2018, Ms. Laurie Lubsen submitted the following comment:

    I oppose the above proposal because it minimizes the input from the citizenry that will be directly affected by energy projects. We the PEOPLE are the most important voices to be heard from a functioning democracy, especially those directly affected by the FERC activities.

    To the comment received from Ms. Laurie Lubsen, FERC responds:

    Commenter points out that the collection of data and information from applicants requesting authorization to construct and operate natural gas pipelines can create a secondary burden on the general citizenry to learn about the Commission's rules and process; and further to perhaps take costly and time consuming efforts to participate in the Commission's proceedings. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 was not intended to measure this type of secondary burden; only the primary burden on those applicant entities to collect and compile the information necessary for the Government to make an informed decision and take appropriate action. The Commission has multiple ways, times, and methods for the general citizenry to appropriately input their views on the Commission's rules and process, or its individual proceedings.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19696 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. OR18-36-000] Ohio River Pipe Line LLC; Notice of Request for Temporary Waiver

    Take notice that on August 31, 2018, pursuant to Rule 204 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.204, Ohio River Pipe Line LLC filed a petition for temporary waiver of the tariff filing and reporting requirements of sections 6 and 20 of the Interstate Commerce Act and parts 341 and 357 of the Commission's regulations for the portion of its refined petroleum products system that currently operates between West Virginia and Ohio (The Kenova-Columbus Pipeline), as more fully explained in the petition.

    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 (8 CFR 385.211 and 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 protest must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protest 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 Commissions, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at the http://www.ferc.gov “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscripton” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on September 21, 2018.

    Dated: September 5, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19697 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0103; FRL-9983-58-OAR] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Rebate Program; EPA ICR No. 2461.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0686 Renewal AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Rebate Program” (EPA ICR No. 2461.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0686 Renewal) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 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.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0103, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jason Wilcox, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, (Mail Code: 6406A), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9571; fax number: 202-343-2803; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) 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. 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. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: This is an extension of the current Information Collection Request (ICR) for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act program (DERA) authorized by Title VII, Subtitle G (Sections 791 to 797) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-58), as amended by the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-364), codified at 42 U.S.C. 16131 et seq. DERA provides the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the authority to award grants, rebates or low-cost revolving loans on a competitive basis to eligible entities to fund the costs of projects that significantly reduce diesel emissions from mobile sources through implementation of a certified engine configuration, verified technology, or emerging technology. Eligible mobile sources include buses (including school buses), medium heavy-duty or heavy heavy-duty diesel trucks, marine engines, locomotives, or nonroad engines or diesel vehicles or equipment used in construction, handling of cargo (including at ports or airports), agriculture, mining, or energy production. In addition, eligible entities may also use funds awarded for programs or projects to reduce long-duration idling using verified technology involving a vehicle or equipment described above. The objective of the assistance under this program is to achieve significant reductions in diesel emissions in terms of tons of pollution produced and reductions in diesel emissions exposure, particularly from fleets operating in areas designated by the Administrator as poor air quality areas.

    EPA uses approved procedures and forms to collect necessary information to operate its grant and rebate programs. EPA has been providing rebates under DERA since Fiscal Year 2012. EPA is requesting an extension of the current ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2019, for forms needed to collect necessary information to operate a rebate program as authorized by Congress under the DERA program.

    EPA collects information from applicants to the DERA rebate program. Information collected is used to ensure eligibility of applicants and engines to receive funds under DERA, and to calculate estimated and actual emissions benefits that result from activities funded with rebates as required in DERA's authorizing legislation.

    Form numbers: 2060-0686.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are those interested in applying for a rebate under EPA's Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) Rebate Program and include but are not limited to the following NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) codes: 23 Construction; 482 Rail Transportation; 483 Water Transportation; 484 Truck Transportation; 485 Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation; 4854 School and Employee Bus Transportation; 48831 Port and Harbor Operations; 61111 Elementary and Secondary Schools; 61131 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools; 9211 Executive, Legislative, and Other Government Support; and 9221 Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.

    Estimated number of respondents: 500-1000 (total).

    Frequency of response: Voluntary as needed.

    Total estimated burden: 2,945 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $103,197.33 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.

    Changes in estimates: There is an increase of 118 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to a higher reported burden by the two responses to consultation outreach. The higher burden reported by these past respondents was weighted against previous estimates for the latest burden estimate.

    Dated: August 29, 2018. Karl Simon, Director, Transportation and Climate Division, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19762 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0015; FRL-9983-60-OAR] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Part 70 State Operating Permit Program (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Part 70 State Operating Permit Program (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1587.14, OMB Control No. 2060.0243) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). Before doing so, the EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 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.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0015, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dylan C. Mataway-Novak, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, C504-05, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC; telephone number: (919) 541-5795; fax number: (919) 541-5509; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202) 566-1744. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The 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. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: Title V of the Clean Air Act (Act) requires states to develop and implement a program for issuing operating permits to all sources that fall under any Act definition of “major” and certain other non-major sources that are subject to federal air quality regulations. The Act further requires the EPA to develop regulations that establish the minimum requirements for those state operating permits programs and to oversee implementation of the state programs. The EPA regulations setting forth requirements for the state operating permit program are found at 40 CFR part 70. The part 70 program is designed to be implemented primarily by state, local and tribal permitting authorities in all areas where they have jurisdiction.

    In order to receive an operating permit for a major or other source subject to the permitting program, the applicant must conduct the necessary research, perform the appropriate analyses and prepare the permit application with documentation to demonstrate that its facility meets all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Specific activities and requirements are listed and described in the Supporting Statement for the 40 CFR part 70 ICR.

    Under 40 CFR part 70, state, local and tribal permitting authorities review permit applications, provide for public review of proposed permits, issue permits based on consideration of all technical factors and public input and review information submittals required of sources during the term of the permit. Also, under 40 CFR part 70, the EPA reviews certain actions of the permitting authorities and provides oversight of the programs to ensure that they are being adequately implemented and enforced. Consequently, information prepared and submitted by sources is essential for sources to receive permits, and for federal, state, local and tribal permitting authorities to adequately review the permit applications and thereby properly administer and manage the program.

    Information that is collected is handled according to the EPA's policies set forth in title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B—Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR part 2). See also section 114(c) of the Act.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Industrial plants (sources); state, local and tribal permitting authorities.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: mandatory (see 40 CFR part 70).

    Estimated number of respondents: 13,712 sources and 117 state, local and tribal permitting authorities.

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 4,738,925 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $321,878,589 (per year). There are no annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in Estimates: There is a decrease of 429,890 hours per year for the estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease is due to updated estimates of the number of sources and permits subject to the part 70 program, rather than any change in federal mandates.

    Dated: August 29, 2018. Anna Marie Wood, Director, Air Quality Policy Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19771 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0150; FRL-9983-56-OW] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Establishing No-Discharge Zones (NDZs) Under Clean Water Act Section 312 (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency plans to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Establishing No-Discharge Zones (NDZs) Under Clean Water Act section 312 (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1791.08, OMB Control No. 2040-0187) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). Before doing so, the EPA solicits public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 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.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0150, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.

    All comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Virginia Fox-Norse, Oceans, Wetlands and Communities Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, (4504T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-566-1266; fax number: 202-566-1337; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA solicits comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and, (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses). The 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. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: (A) Sewage No-Discharge Zones: CWA section 312(f) and the implementing regulations in 40 CFR part 140 provide that information must be submitted to the EPA to establish a no-discharge zone (NDZ) for vessel sewage in state waters. No-discharge zones can be established to provide greater environmental protection of specified state waters from treated and untreated vessel sewage. This ICR addresses the information requirements associated with the establishment of NDZs for vessel sewage. The information collection activities discussed in this ICR do not require the submission of any confidential information.

    (B) Uniform National Discharge Standards (UNDS) No-Discharge Zones and Discharge Determination or Standard Review: CWA section 312(n)(7) and the implementing regulations in 40 CFR part 1700 provide that information should be submitted to the EPA to establish a no-discharge zone in state waters for a particular discharge from a vessel of the Armed Forces. In addition, CWA section 312(n)(5) provides that that the Governor of any state may petition the EPA and the DoD to review any discharge determination or standard promulgated under CWA section 312 for vessels of the Armed forces if there is significant new information that could reasonably result in a change to the discharge determination or standard. This ICR addresses the information requirements associated with the establishment of an UNDS NDZ for a particular discharge from a vessel of the Armed Forces in addition to the information requirements associated with a request to the EPA and DoD to review a discharge determination or standard. UNDS NDZs for a particular discharge from a vessel of the Armed Forces cannot be requested or established until after the EPA and DoD promulgate vessel discharge performance standards for marine pollution control devices for that particular discharge and DoD promulgates the corresponding regulations governing the design, construction, installation and use of marine pollution control devices for that particular discharge. The information collection activities discussed in this ICR do not require the submission of any confidential information.

    Form numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: States.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: The responses to this collection of information are required to obtain the benefit of a sewage NDZ (CWA section 312(f)). The responses to this collection of information are required to obtain the benefit of an UNDS NDZ or a review of an UNDS discharge determination or standard (CWA section 312(n)).

    Estimated number of respondents: 16 (total).

    Frequency of response: One time.

    Total estimated burden: 1,083 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $54,938 (per year), includes $998 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in estimates: It is anticipated that the burden hours will stay the same as the current estimate or decrease due to changes in respondent universe when we revise them for this ICR extension. Cost estimates will likely remain the same or rise at the time of revision because of changes in the state and federal labor costs.

    Dated: August 31, 2018. John Goodin, Acting Director, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19763 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0052; FRL—9982-93-OLEM] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Risk Management Program Requirements and Petitions To Modify the List of Regulated Substances Under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (CAA); EPA ICR Number 1656.16, OMB Control Number 2050-0114 AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Risk Management Program Requirements and Petitions to Modify the List of Regulated Substances under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)”, EPA ICR No. 1656.16, OMB Control No. 2050-0144 to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through January 31, 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.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0052, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected] or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wendy Hoffman, Office of Emergency Management, Mail Code 5104A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-8794; fax number: (202) 564-2625; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) 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. 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. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. Abstract: The authority for these requirements is section 112(r) of the 1990 CAA Amendments, which provides for the prevention and mitigation of accidental releases. Section 112(r) mandates that EPA promulgate a list of “regulated substances” with threshold quantities and establish procedures for the addition and deletion of substances from the list of regulated substances. Processes at stationary sources that contain more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance are subject to accidental release prevention regulations promulgated under CAA section 112(r)(7). These two rules are codified as 40 CFR part 68.

    Part 68 requires that sources with more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance in a process develop and implement a risk management program and submit a risk management plan (RMP) to EPA. EPA uses RMPs to conduct oversight of regulated sources, and to communicate information concerning them to federal, state, and local agencies and the public, as appropriate.

    The compliance schedule for the part 68 requirements was established by rule on June 20, 1996. The burden to sources that are currently covered by part 68, for initial rule compliance, including rule familiarization and program implementation was accounted for in previous ICRs. Sources submitted their first RMPs by June 21, 1999. For most sources, the next compliance deadlines occurred (and will occur) thereafter at five-year intervals—in 2004, 2009, 2014 and 2019. Therefore, resubmissions tend to occur in “waves” peaking each fifth year. A source submitting an RMP update to comply with its five-year compliance deadline will often submit its updated RMP several days or weeks early to ensure it is received by EPA before its deadline, and other sources revised and resubmitted their RMPs between the five-year deadlines because of changes occurring at the source that triggered an earlier resubmission. These sources were then assigned a new five-year compliance deadline based on the date of their most recent revised plan submission. However, because most sources are not required to resubmit earlier than their five-year compliance deadline, the next RMP submission deadline for most sources occurs in 2019. The remaining sources have been assigned a different deadline in 2020, 2021, 2022 or 2023, based on the date of their most recent submission. Only the first three years are within the period covered by this ICR.

    In this ICR, EPA has accounted for burden for new sources that may become subject to the regulations, currently covered sources with compliance deadlines in this ICR period (2019 to 2021), sources that are out of compliance since the last regulatory deadline but are expected to comply during this ICR period, and sources that have deadlines beyond this ICR period but are required to comply with certain prevention program documentation requirements during this ICR period.

    Form Numbers: Risk Management Plan Form: EPA Form 8700-25; CBI Substantiation Form: EPA Form 8700-27; CBI Unsanitized Data Element Form: EPA Form 8700-28.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are chemical manufacturers, petroleum refineries, water treatment systems, agricultural chemical distributors, refrigerated warehouses, chemical distributors, non-chemical manufacturers, wholesale fuel distributors, energy generation facilities, etc.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 68).

    Estimated number of respondents: 12,500 (total). This figure will be updated as needed during the 60-day OMB review period.

    Frequency of response: Sources must resubmit RMPs at least every five years and update certain on-site documentation more frequently.

    Total estimated burden: 80,546 hours (per year). This figure will be updated as needed during the 60-day OMB review period. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $6,736,212 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation maintenance costs. This figure will be updated with most recent available wage rates from BLS and to account for any changes in O&M costs, burden and number of respondents.

    Changes in estimates: The above burden estimates are based on the current approved ICR. In the final notice for the renewed ICR, EPA will publish revised burden estimates based on updates to respondent data and unit costs. The revised burden estimates may increase from the current ICR, because the new ICR period will include a five-year reporting cycle year, whereas the current approved ICR period did not include a five-year reporting cycle year. Any change in burden will be described and explained in this section when the updated ICR Supporting Statement is completed during the 60-day OMB review period.

    Dated: August 20, 2018. Reggie Cheatham, Director, Office of Emergency Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19770 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0439; EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0442; EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0443; FRL-9983-54-OW] Proposed Information Collection Requests; Comment Request: Microbial Rules Renewal Information Collection Request; Public Water System Supervision Program Renewal Information Collection Request; Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical and Radionuclides Rules Renewal Information Collection Request AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be submitting renewals of information collection requests (ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The ICRs included in this renewal are the Microbial Rules Renewal Information Collection Request, EPA ICR No. 1895.10, OMB Control No. 2040-0205, which expires on April 30, 2019; the Public Water System Supervision Program Renewal Information Collection Request, EPA ICR No. 0270-47, OMB Control No. 2040-0090, which expires on March 31, 2019; and the Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical and Radionuclides Rules Renewal Information Collection Request (ICR), EPA ICR No. 1896.11, OMB Control No. 2040-0204, which expires on August 31, 2019. The EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collections as described in this renewal notice. 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.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing the Docket ID numbers provided for each item in the text, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.

    The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kevin Roland, Drinking Water Protection Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, (4606M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-4588: fax number: 202-564-3755; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public dockets for these ICRs. The dockets can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICRs as appropriate. The final ICR packages will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal Register document to announce the submission of the ICRs to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Microbial Rules Renewal Information Collection Request (EPA ICR No. 1895.10, EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0442)

    Abstract: The Microbial Rules Renewal ICR examines public water system and primacy agency burden and costs for recordkeeping and reporting requirements in support of the microbial drinking water regulations. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142. The following microbial regulations are included: The Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), the Total Coliform Rule (TCR), the Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR), the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR), the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (FBRR), the Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR), the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR), the Ground Water Rule (GWR) and the Aircraft Drinking Water Rule (ADWR). Future microbial-related rulemakings will be added to this consolidated ICR after the regulations are promulgated and the initial, rule-specific, ICRs are due to expire.

    Form numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are public water systems and primacy agencies.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142.

    Estimated number of respondents: 149,864 (total).

    Frequency of response: Varies by requirement (i.e., on occasion, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, and annually).

    Total estimated burden: 14,683,598 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $652,507,000 (per year), includes $110,017,000 annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.

    Changes in estimates: There is no estimated increase or decrease of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared to what was identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB.

    Public Water System Supervision Program Renewal Information Collection Request (EPA ICR No. 0270.47, EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0443)

    Abstract: The Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Program Renewal ICR examines the burden to public water systems, primacy agencies, and tribal operator certification providers and costs for “cross-cutting” recordkeeping and reporting requirements (i.e., the burden and costs for complying with drinking water information requirements that are not associated with contaminant-specific rulemakings). The following activities have recordkeeping and reporting requirements that are mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142: the Consumer Confidence Report Rule (CCRs), the Variance and Exemption Rule (V/E Rule), General State Primacy Activities, the Public Notification Rule (PN), and Proficiency Testing Studies for Drinking Water Laboratories. The information collection activities for both the Operator Certification and the Capacity Development Program are driven by the grant withholding and reporting provisions under Sections 1419 and 1420, respectively, of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Although the Tribal Operator Certification Program is voluntary, the information collection is driven by grant eligibility requirements outlined in the Drinking Water Infrastructure Grant Tribal Set-Aside Program Final Guidelines and the Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification Program Guidelines.

    Form numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are new and existing public water systems and primacy agencies.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142.

    Estimated number of respondents: 151,724 (total).

    Frequency of response: Varies by requirement (i.e., on occasion, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, and annually).

    Total estimated burden: 3,769,213 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $187,603,000 (per year), includes $42,103,000 annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.

    Changes in estimates: There is an expected decrease of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared to what was identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB, due to use of centralized software for data entry and rule compliance calculations. The updated, estimated burden will be incorporated into a revised supporting statement (which will be available in the docket) and in a second Federal Register document (for public comment) at a later date, to be determined, before the ICR package is sent to OMB for approval.

    The Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical and Radionuclides Rules Renewal Information Collection Request (EPA ICR No. 1896.11, EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0439)

    Abstract: The Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical and Radionuclides Rules ICR examines burden to public water systems and primacy agencies and costs for recordkeeping and reporting requirements in support of the chemical drinking water regulations. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142. The following chemical regulations are included: The Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR), the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 2 DBPR), the Chemical Phase Rules (Phases II/IIB/V), the Radionuclides Rule, the Total Trihalomethanes (TTHM) Rule, Disinfectant Residual Monitoring and Associated Activities under the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR), the Arsenic Rule, the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR), and the Lead and Copper Rule Short Term Revisions Rule. Future chemical-related rulemakings will be added to this consolidated ICR after the regulations are promulgated and the initial, rule-specific, ICRs are due to expire.

    Form numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are new and existing public water systems primacy agencies.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory for compliance with 40 CFR parts 141 and 142.

    Estimated number of respondents: 149,822 (total).

    Frequency of response: Varies by requirement (i.e., on occasion, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, and annually).

    Total estimated burden: 5,305,696 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $464,896,000 (per year), includes $258,937,000 annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.

    Changes in estimates: There is no estimated increase or decrease of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared to what was identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB.

    Dated: August 31, 2018. Peter Grevatt, Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19761 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0016; FRL-9983-61-OAR] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Part 71 Federal Operating Permit Program (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Part 71 Federal Operating Permit Program (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1713.12, OMB Control No. 2060.0336) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). Before doing so, the EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 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.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0016, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joanna W. Gmyr, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, C504-05, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC; telephone number: (919) 541-9782; fax number: (919) 541-5509; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202) 566-1744. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The 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. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: Title V of the Clean Air Act (Act) requires the EPA to operate a federal operating permits program in areas not subject to an approved state program. The EPA regulations setting forth the requirements for the federal (EPA) operating permit program are at 40 CFR part 71. The part 71 program is designed to be implemented primarily by the EPA in all areas where state and local agencies do not have jurisdiction, such as Indian country and offshore, beyond states' seaward boundaries. The EPA may also delegate authority to implement the part 71 program on its behalf to a state, local or tribal agency, if the agency requests delegation and makes certain showings regarding its authority and ability to implement the program. One such delegate agency for the part 71 program exists at present.

    In order to receive an operating permit for a major or other source subject to the permitting program, the applicant must conduct the necessary research, perform the appropriate analyses, and prepare the permit application with documentation to demonstrate that its facility meets all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Specific activities and requirements are listed and described in the Supporting Statement for the part 71 ICR.

    Under part 71, the permitting authority (the EPA or a delegate agency) reviews permit applications, provides for public review of proposed permits, issues permits based on consideration of all technical factors and public input, and reviews information submittals required of sources during the term of the permit. Under part 71, the EPA reviews certain actions and performs oversight of any delegate agency, consistent with the terms of a delegation agreement. Consequently, information prepared and submitted by sources is essential for sources to receive permits, and for federal and tribal permitting agencies to adequately review the permit applications and issue the permits, oversee implementation of the permits, and properly administer and manage the program.

    Information that is collected is handled according to the EPA's policies set forth in title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B—Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR part 2). See also section 114(c) of the Act.

    Form Numbers: The forms are 5900-01, 5900-02, 5900-03, 5900-04, 5900-05, 5900-06, 5900-79, 5900-80, 5900-81, 5900-82, 5900-83, 5900-84, 5900-85 and 5900-86.

    Respondents/affected entities: Industrial plants (sources) and tribal permitting authorities.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (see 40 CFR part 71).

    Estimated number of respondents: 94 (total); 93 industry sources and one tribal delegate permitting authority (the EPA serves as a permitting authority but is not a respondent).

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 22,702 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $1,587,810 (per year). There are no annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in Estimates: There is a decrease of 2,998 hours per year for the estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease is due to updated estimates of the number of sources and permits subject to the part 71 program, rather than any change in federal mandates.

    Dated: August 29, 2018. Anna Marie Wood, Director, Air Quality Policy Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19786 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [CERCLA-04-2018-3755; FRL-9983-48—Region 4] J.J. Seifert Machine Shop Superfund Site, Sun City, Hillsborough County, Florida; Notice of Settlement AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of settlement.

    SUMMARY:

    Under 122(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency has entered into a settlement concerning the J.J. Seifert Machine Shop Superfund Site located in Sun City, Hillsborough County, Florida with the following parties: U B Corp, the Robert J. Upcavage Family Trust and Lawrence J. Bauer, Jr. The settlement addresses recovery of CERCLA costs for a cleanup action performed by the EPA at the Site.

    DATES:

    The Agency will consider public comments on the settlement until October 11, 2018. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the proposed settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the proposed settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

    ADDRESSES:

    Copies of the settlement are available from the Agency by contacting Ms. Paula V. Painter, Program Analyst, using the contact information provided in this notice. Comments may also be submitted by referencing the Site's name through one of the following methods:

    Internet: https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-epa-region-4-southeast#r4-public-notices.

    U.S. Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund Division, Attn: Paula V. Painter, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.

    Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Paula V. Painter at 404/562-8887.

    Dated: July 30, 2018. Greg Armstrong, Acting Chief, Enforcement and Community Engagement Branch, Superfund Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19768 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION [Docket No. 18-07] Marine Transport Logistics, Inc. v. CMA-CGM (America), LLC; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment

    Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (Commission) by Marine Transport Logistics, Inc., hereinafter “Complainant”, against CMA-CGM (America), LLC, hereinafter “Respondent”. Complainant states that it is a Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier (NVOCC) located in Bayonne, New Jersey and is licensed with the Commission. Complainant asserts that Respondent is a Vessel Operating Common Carrier (VOCC) located in East Rutherford, New Jersey.

    Complainant states that Respondent was contracted to ship nine containers of cars to Yemen in December 2017 and those containers were not delivered.

    Specifically, Complainant alleges that the Respondent violated:

    a. “. . . Section 41102(c) of the Shipping Act in that such respondent failed to establish, observe, and enforce just reasonable regulations and practices relating to or connected with receiving, handling, or delivering of property . . .”;

    b. “. . . Section 41104(9) of the Shipping Act in that, such Respondent imposed undue and unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage . . .”; and

    c. “. . . Section 41104 (10) of the Shipping Act in that, such Respondent unreasonably refused to deal or negotiate . . .”

    Complainant seeks reparations and other relief. The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission's Electronic Reading Room at www.fmc.gov/18-07/. This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judges.

    The initial decision of the presiding officer in this proceeding shall be issued by September 6, 2019, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by March 20, 2020.

    Rachel E. Dickon, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19638 Filed 9-10-18; 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 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) 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 § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. 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 4 of the BHC Act.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than September 25, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Mark A. Rauzi, Vice President), 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291:

    1. FSB Holding Company, Inc., Trimont, Minnesota; to engage de novo in extending credit and servicing loans, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 6, 2018. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19702 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0075; Docket No. 2018-0003; Sequence No. 12] Information Collection; Government Property 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 government property.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally submit a copy to GSA by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for Information Collection 9000-0075—Government Property. Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0075: Government Property”. Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0075; Government Property” on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Mandell/IC 9000-0075.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0075, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check regulations.gov, approximately two-to-three business days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Camara Francis, Procurement Analyst, Office of Acquisition Policy, GSA 202-550-0935 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    Government property, as used in FAR Part 45, means all property owned or leased by the Government. Government property includes both Government-furnished property and contractor-acquired property. Government property includes material, equipment, special tooling, special test equipment, and real property. Government property does not include intellectual property and software.

    This part prescribes policies and procedures for providing Government property to contractors; contractors' management and use of Government property; and reporting, redistributing, and disposing of contractor inventory. This clearance covers the following requirements:

    (a) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(ii) requires contractors to document the receipt of Government property.

    (b) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(ii)(A) requires contractors to submit report if overages, shortages, or damages and/or other discrepancies are discovered upon receipt of Government-furnished property.

    (c) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(iii) requires contractors to create and maintain records of all Government property accountable to the contract.

    (d) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(iv) requires contractors to periodically perform, record, and report physical inventories during contract performance, including upon completion or termination of the contract.

    (e) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(vii)(B) requires contractors to investigate and report all incidents of Government property loss as soon as the facts become known.

    (f) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(viii) requires contractors to promptly disclose and report Government property in its possession that is excess to contract performance.

    (g) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(ix) requires contractors to disclose and report to the Property Administrator the need for replacement and/or capital rehabilitation.

    (h) FAR 52.245-1(f)(1)(x) requires contractors to perform and report to the Property Administrator contract property closeout.

    (i) FAR 52.245-1(f)(2) requires contractors to establish and maintain source data, particularly in the areas of recognition of acquisitions and dispositions of material and equipment.

    (j) FAR 52.245-1(j)(2) requires contractors to submit inventory disposal schedules to the Plant Clearance Officer via the Standard Form 1428, Inventory Disposal Schedule.

    (k) FAR 52.245-9(d) requires a contractor to identify the property for which rental is requested.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Number of Respondents: 11,375.

    Responses per Respondent: 1,057.

    Total Responses: 12,023,375.

    Average Burden Hours Per Response: .3092.

    Total Burden Hours: 3,717,627.

    C. Public Comments

    Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (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 20006, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0075, Government Property, in all correspondence.

    William Clark, Director, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19671 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families [OMB No.: 0970-0466] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Initial Medical Exam Form and Initial Dental Exam Form.

    Description: The Administration for Children and Families' Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) places unaccompanied minors in their custody in licensed care provider facilities until reunification with a qualified sponsor. Care provider facilities are required to provide children with services such as classroom education, mental health services, and health care. Pursuant to Exhibit 1, part A.2 of the Flores Settlement Agreement (Jenny Lisette Flores, et al. v. Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States, et al., Case No. CV 85-4544-RJK (C.D. Cal. 1996), care provider facilities, on behalf of ORR, shall arrange for appropriate routine medical and dental care and emergency health care services, including a complete medical examination and screening for infectious diseases within 48 hours of admission, excluding weekends and holidays, unless the minor was recently examined at another facility; appropriate immunizations in accordance with the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS), Center for Disease Control; administration of prescribed medication and special diets; appropriate mental health interventions when necessary for each minor in their care.

    The forms are to be used as worksheets for clinicians, medical staff, and health departments to compile information that would otherwise have been collected during the initial medical or dental exam. Once completed, the forms will be given to shelter staff for data entry into ORR's secure, electronic data repository known as `The UAC Portal'. Data will be used to record UC health on admission and for case management of any identified illnesses/conditions.

    Respondents: Office of Refugee Resettlement Grantee staff.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Initial Medical Exam Form (including Appendix A: Supplemental TB Screening Form) 150 297 0.20 8,910 Initial Dental Exam Form 150 30 0.07 315

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 9,225.

    Estimated Respondent Burden for Recordkeeping Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Initial Medical Exam Form (including Appendix A: Supplemental TB Screening Form) 150 297 0.08 3,564 Initial Dental Exam Form 150 30 0.08 360

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 3,924.

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, Email: [email protected], Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19709 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-45-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3223] Joint Meeting of the Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming public advisory committee meeting of the Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee. The general function of the committees is to provide advice and recommendations to FDA on regulatory issues. The meeting will be open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this document.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on October 17, 2018, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Rd., the Grand Ballroom, Bethesda, MD 20814. The conference center's telephone number is 301-897-9400. Answers to commonly asked questions including information regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm. Information about the Bethesda Marriott can be accessed at: https://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/wasbt-bethesda-marriott/.

    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting. The docket number is FDA-2018-N-3223. The docket will close on October 16, 2018. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public meeting by October 16, 2018. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before October 16, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of October 16, 2018. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Comments received on or before October 9, 2018, will be provided to the committees. Comments received after that date will be taken into consideration by FDA.

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): 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-3223 for “Joint Meeting of the Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see the ADDRESSES section), 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.” FDA 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 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 the 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:

    Jay R. Fajiculay, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9001, Fax: 301-847-8533, email: [email protected], or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda: The committees will discuss supplemental new drug application (sNDA) 021200, supplement 015, for ZELNORM (tegaserod maleate) tablets for oral administration, submitted by Sloan Pharma S.à.r.l, Bertrange, Cham Branch, proposed for the treatment of women with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation who do not have a history of cardiovascular ischemic disease, such as myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or angina, and who do not have more than one risk factor for cardiovascular disease.

    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link.

    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committees. All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see the ADDRESSES section) on or before October 9, 2018, will be provided to the committees. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before October 1, 2018. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by October 2, 2018.

    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that FDA is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at [email protected] or 301-796-4540.

    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please contact Jay Fajiculay (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19669 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-0055] Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming public advisory committee meeting of the Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee. The general function of the committee is to provide advice and recommendations to FDA on regulatory issues. The meeting will be open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this document.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on October 18, 2018, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Rd., the Grand Ballroom, Bethesda, MD 20814. The conference center's telephone number is 301-897-9400. Answers to commonly asked questions including information regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm. Information about the Bethesda Marriott can be accessed at: https://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/wasbt-bethesda-marriott/.

    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting. The docket number is FDA-2018-N-0055. The docket will close on October 16, 2018. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public meeting by October 16, 2018. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before October 16, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of October 16, 2018. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Comments received on or before October 9, 2018, will be provided to the committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into consideration by FDA.

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): 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-0055 for “Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments.” 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.” FDA 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 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 the 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:

    Jay R. Fajiculay, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9001, Fax: 301-847-8533, email: [email protected], or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda: The committee will discuss new drug application (NDA) 210166 for prucalopride tablets for oral administration, submitted by Shire Development, LLC, proposed for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation in adults.

    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link.

    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see ADDRESSES) on or before October 9, 2018, will be provided to the committee. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before October 1, 2018. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by October 2, 2018.

    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that FDA is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at [email protected] or 301-796-4540.

    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please contact Jay Fajiculay (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19670 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3031] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Tobacco Products, User Fees, Requirements for the Submission of Data Needed To Calculate User Fees for Domestic Manufacturers and Importers of Tobacco Products AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection for tobacco product user fees.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before November 13, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of November 13, 2018. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    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-3031 for “Tobacco Products, User Fees, Requirements for the Submission of Data Needed to Calculate User Fees for Domestic Manufacturers and Importers of Tobacco Products.” 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:

    Amber Sanford, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-8867, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Tobacco Products, User Fees, Requirements for the Submission of Data Needed To Calculate User Fees for Domestic Manufacturers and Importers of Tobacco Products OMB Control Number 0910-0749—Extension

    On June 22, 2009, the President signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the Tobacco Control Act) (Pub. L. 111-31) into law. The Tobacco Control Act amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and granted FDA authority to regulate the manufacture, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect public health generally and to reduce tobacco use by minors.

    FDA issued a final rule that requires domestic manufacturers and importers of cigars and pipe tobacco to submit information needed to calculate the amount of user fees assessed under the FD&C Act. FDA expanded its authority over tobacco products by issuing another final rule, “Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act; Restrictions on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products and Required Warning Statements for Tobacco Products” (Deeming rule), deeming all products that meet the statutory definition of “tobacco product,” except accessories of the newly deemed tobacco products, to be subject to the FD&C Act. The Deeming rule, among other things, subjected domestic manufacturers and importers of cigars and pipe tobacco to the FD&C Act's user fee requirements. Consistent with the Deeming rule and the requirements of the FD&C Act, the user fee final rule requires the submission of the information needed to calculate user fee assessments for each manufacturer and importer of cigars and pipe tobacco to FDA.

    As noted, FDA issued a final rule that requires domestic tobacco product manufacturers and importers to submit information needed to calculate the amount of user fees assessed under the FD&C Act. The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had been collecting this information and provided FDA with the data the Agency needed to calculate the amount of user fees assessed to tobacco product manufacturers and importers. USDA ceased collecting this information in fiscal year 2015 (October 2014). USDA's information collection did not require OMB approval, per an exemption by Public Law 108-357, section 642(b)(3). Consistent with the requirements of the FD&C Act, FDA requires the submission of this information to FDA now instead of USDA. FDA took this action to ensure that the Agency continues to have the information needed to calculate, assess, and collect user fees from domestic manufacturers and importers of tobacco products.

    Section 919(a) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387s(a)) requires FDA to “assess user fees on, and collect such fees from, each manufacturer and importer of tobacco products” subject to the tobacco product provisions of the FD&C Act (chapter IX of the FD&C Act). The total amount of user fees to be collected for each fiscal year is specified in section 919(b)(1) of the FD&C Act, and under section 919(a) FDA is to assess and collect a proportionate amount each quarter of the fiscal year. The FD&C Act provides for the total assessment to be allocated among the classes of tobacco products. The class allocation is based on each tobacco product class' volume of tobacco product removed into commerce. Within each class of tobacco products, an individual domestic manufacturer or importer is assessed a user fee based on its share of the market for that tobacco product class.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Hours per
  • response
  • Total
  • hours
  • 1150.5(a), (b)(1) and (2), and Form FDA 3852; General identifying information provided by manufacturers and importers of FDA regulated tobacco products and identification and removal information (monthly) 658 12 7,896 3 23,688 1150.5(b)(3); Certified copies (monthly) 658 12 7,896 1 7,896 1150.13; Submission of user fee information (Identifying information, fee amount, etc. (quarterly) 329 4 1,316 1 1,316 1150.15(a); Submission of user fee dispute (annually) 5 1 5 10 50 1150.15(d); Submission of request for further review of dispute of user fee (annually) 3 1 3 10 30 Total 32,980 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    FDA estimates that 658 entities will submit tobacco product user fees. The entity count was derived from aggregate data provided by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), and reflects that in 2017 there were 192 total permitted manufacturers and 466 permitted importers over all tobacco product types for which TTB collects excise taxes (including cigarettes, cigars, snuff, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco, excluding electronic nicotine delivery systems).

    The estimate of 658 respondents to provide the information requested from § 1150.5(a), (b)(1) and (2) (21 CFR 1150.5(a), (b)(1) and (2)), and Form FDA 3852 reflects both reports of no removal of tobacco products into domestic commerce and reports of removal of tobacco product into domestic commerce. FDA estimates it will take 3 hours for each of these submission types for a total of 23,688 hours. Under § 1150.5(b)(3), these respondents are also expected to provide monthly certified copies of the returns and forms that relate to the removal of tobacco products into domestic commerce and the payment of Federal excise taxes imposed under chapter 52 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to FDA. We estimate that each monthly report will take 1 hour for a total of 7,896 hours. The estimate of 329 respondents to submit payment of user fee information under § 1150.13 reflects an average of half the number of domestic manufacturers and importers who may be subject to fees each fiscal quarter. FDA estimates the quarterly submission will take approximately 1 hour for a total of 1,316 hours.

    FDA estimates that five of those respondents assessed user fees will dispute the amounts under § 1150.15(a), for a total amount of 50 hours. FDA also estimates that three respondents who dispute their user fees will ask for further review by FDA under § 1150.15(d), for a total amount of 30 hours. FDA has only received one dispute submission since fiscal year 2015. Based on this data, the Agency does not believe we will receive more than five disputes and three requests for further reviews in the next 3 years.

    FDA estimates the total annual burden for this collection of information is 32,980 hours. The estimated burden for the information collection reflects an overall increase of 16,058 hours. We attribute this adjustment to an increase in the number of entities submitting tobacco user fee information to FDA.

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19664 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3262] Determination That CEFZIL (Cefprozil) Tablets, 250 Milligrams and 500 Milligrams, and for Oral Suspension, 125 Milligrams/5 Milliliters and 250 Milligrams/5 Milliliters, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) has determined that CEFZIL (cefprozil) tablets, 250 milligrams (mg) and 500 mg and CEFZIL (cefprozil) for oral suspension, 125 mg/5 milliliters (mL) and 250 mg/5 mL were not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination will allow FDA to continue to approve abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) that refer to these drugs as long as they meet relevant legal and regulatory requirements.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Diana J. Pomeranz, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6288, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-4654.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) (the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate versions of drug products under an ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same strength and dosage form as the “listed drug,” which is a version of the drug that was previously approved. ANDA applicants do not have to repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain approval of a new drug application (NDA).

    The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the “Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” which is known generally as the “Orange Book.” Under FDA regulations, drugs are removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).

    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale, but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed drug (§ 314.161 (21 CFR 314.161)). FDA may not approve an ANDA that does not refer to a listed drug.

    Under § 314.161(a)(2), the Agency must also determine whether a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness if ANDAs that referred to the listed drug have already been approved prior to its market withdrawal. If the Agency determines that a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness, and there are approved ANDAs that reference that listed drug, FDA will initiate a proceeding to determine whether the suspension of the ANDAs is also required (21 CFR 314.153(b)).

    CEFZIL (cefprozil) tablets, 250 mg and 500 mg, are the subject of NDA 050664 held by Corden Pharma Latina S.p.A., and initially approved on December 23, 1991. CEFZIL (cefprozil) for oral suspension, 125 mg/5 mL and 250 mg/5 mL, is the subject of NDA 050665 held by Corden Pharma Latina S.p.A., and initially approved on December 23, 1991. CEFZIL is indicated for the treatment of patients with mild to moderate infections caused by susceptible strains of the designated microorganisms in the conditions listed below:

    • Upper respiratory tract: Pharyngitis/tonsillitis caused by Streptococcus pyogenes; otitis media caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae (including β-lactamase-producing strains), and Moraxella (Branhamella) catarrhalis (including β-lactamase-producing strains); and acute sinusitis caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae (including β-lactamase-producing strains), and Moraxella (Branhamella) catarrhalis (including β-lactamase-producing strains);

    • Lower respiratory tract: Acute bacterial exacerbation of chronic bronchitis caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae (including β-lactamase-producing strains), and Moraxella (Branhamella) catarrhalis (including β-lactamase-producing strains); and

    • Skin and skin structure: Uncomplicated skin and skin-structure infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus (including penicillinase-producing strains) and Streptococcus pyogenes. Abscesses usually require surgical drainage.

    In a letter dated September 7, 2010, Bristol-Myers Squibb 1 notified FDA that CEFZIL (cefprozil) tablets, 250 mg and 500 mg and CEFZIL (cefprozil) for oral suspension, 125 mg/5 mL and 250 mg/5 mL, were discontinued from sale, and FDA moved the drug products to the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. Later, Corden Pharma Latina S.p.A. notified the Agency in writing that these drug products were no longer marketed and requested that the approval of the applications be withdrawn. In the Federal Register of June 21, 2017 (82 FR 28322 at 28326), the Agency issued a notice withdrawing approval of the applications, effective July 21, 2017.

    1 On May 26, 2011, Bristol-Myers Squibb transferred ownership of NDA 050664 and NDA 050665 to Corden Pharma Latina S.p.A.

    After reviewing Agency records and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined under § 314.161 that CEFZIL (cefprozil) tablets, 250 mg and 500 mg, and CEFZIL (cefprozil) for oral suspension, 125 mg/5 mL and 250 mg/5 mL, were not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

    We note that CEFZIL (cefprozil) tablets, 250 mg and 500 mg, and CEFZIL (cefprozil) for oral suspension, 125 mg/5 mL and 250 mg/5 mL, previously were approved with an indication for secondary bacterial infection of acute bronchitis (SBIAB). On October 3, 2016, FDA sent Corden Pharma Latina S.p.A. a Prior Approval Supplement Request letter seeking removal of the SBIAB indication from the labeling of these drug products. In response, on October 28, 2016, Corden Pharma Latina S.p.A. submitted supplements proposing to remove the indication. On November 22, 2016, FDA approved these supplements and the indication was removed. The ANDA applicants referencing these NDAs subsequently followed suit and submitted supplements proposing to remove the SBIAB indication from their labeling. The Agency approved these supplements.

    Further, based on a review of relevant information, FDA concluded that the SBIAB indication is not appropriate because most cases of SBIAB are considered to be viral or non-infectious. As an antibacterial drug, CEFZIL (cefprozil) is not considered to be effective to treat SBIAB. Such use of CEFZIL (cefprozil) would likely result in inappropriate antibacterial drug use. Accordingly, the risk benefit balance for the treatment of SBIAB with CEFZIL (cefprozil) is unfavorable and does not support approval of these products (or ANDAs referencing them) for this indication.

    The Agency will continue to list CEFZIL (cefprozil) tablets, 250 mg and 500 mg, and CEFZIL (cefprozil) for oral suspension, 125 mg/5 mL and 250 mg/5 mL, in the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. FDA will continue to accept and, where appropriate, approve ANDAs that refer to these drug products, but does not intend to do so if they propose to include the SBIAB indication (see, e.g., section 505(j)(2)(A)(v) and (j)(4)G) of the FD&C Act and 21 CFR 314.94(a)(8)(iv) and 314.127(a)(7)). If FDA determines that labeling for this drug product should be revised, the Agency will advise ANDA applicants to submit such labeling.

    Dated: September 4, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-19663 Filed 9-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3276] Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming public advisory committee meeting of the Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee. The general function of the committee is to provide advice and recommendations to FDA on regulatory issues. The meeting will be open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this document.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on October 11, 2018, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Answers to commonly asked questions including information regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.

    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting. The docket number is FDA-2018-N-3276. The docket will close on October 10, 2018. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public meeting by October 10, 2018. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before October 10, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of October 10, 2018. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Comments received on or before October 3, 2018, will be provided to the committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into consideration by FDA.

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): 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-3276 for “Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments.” 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.” FDA 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 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 the 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:

    Moon Hee V. Choi, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9001, Fax: 301-847-8533, email: [email protected], or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda: The committee will be asked to discuss new drug application (NDA) 210730, for oliceridine 1 milligram/milliliter injection, submitted by Trevena, Inc., for the management of moderate-to-severe acute pain in adult patients for whom an intravenous opioid is warranted. The committee will also be asked to discuss the efficacy and safety data and benefit-risk considerations.

    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link.

    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see ADDRESSES) on or before October 3, 2018, will be provided to the committee. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before September 25, 2018. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by September 26, 2018.

    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that FDA is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at [email protected] or 301-796-4540.

    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please contact Moon Hee V. Choi (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for proc