Federal Register Vol. 83, No.190,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 190 (October 1, 2018)

Page Range49265-49458
FR Document

83_FR_190
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 49295 - Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical SubstancesPDF
83 FR 49432 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49434 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49302 - Technical, Organizational and Conforming AmendmentsPDF
83 FR 49380 - Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application From Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.PDF
83 FR 49382 - Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Air and Energy Subcommittee Meeting-November 2018PDF
83 FR 49383 - Human Studies Review Board; Notification of Public MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49379 - Notice of Tentative Approval and Opportunity for Public Comment and Public Hearing for Public Water System Supervision Program Revision for MarylandPDF
83 FR 49330 - Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Ozone NAAQS UpdatePDF
83 FR 49355 - Codex Alimentarius Commission: Meeting of the Codex Committee on Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance (TFAMR)PDF
83 FR 49360 - Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017PDF
83 FR 49356 - Foreign-Trade Zone 267-Fargo, North Dakota; Application for Subzone; Digi-Key Corporation; Fargo, North DakotaPDF
83 FR 49356 - Foreign-Trade Zone 122-Corpus Christi, Texas; Application for Subzone; Gulf Coast Growth Ventures LLC; San Patricio County, TexasPDF
83 FR 49405 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Standard Flood Hazard Determination FormPDF
83 FR 49407 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; National Urban Search and Rescue Response SystemPDF
83 FR 49457 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Annual Certification and Data Collection ReportPDF
83 FR 49391 - Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, President's Committee for People With Intellectual DisabilitiesPDF
83 FR 49406 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; FEMA Preparedness Grants: Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP)PDF
83 FR 49400 - Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials of Drugs and Biologics; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 49398 - Master Protocols: Efficient Clinical Trial Design Strategies To Expedite Development of Oncology Drugs and Biologics; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 49377 - Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization; Potter Road Powerhouse LLCPDF
83 FR 49378 - Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order; Sunrun, Inc.PDF
83 FR 49376 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 49279 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough, Everett and Marysville, WAPDF
83 FR 49379 - Notice of Filing; Western Area Power AdministrationPDF
83 FR 49376 - Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization; Federal Way Powerhouse LLCPDF
83 FR 49429 - 2018 Second Call for Nominations for Resource Advisory CouncilsPDF
83 FR 49428 - Notice of realty action: Classification for Lease and/or Conveyance for Recreation and Public Purposes of Public Lands (N-93733) for a Park in the Southwest Portion of the Las Vegas Valley, Clark County, NevadaPDF
83 FR 49364 - Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49368 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49369 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49434 - Use of Listserv for Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Site CorrespondencePDF
83 FR 49371 - Notice of Availability of Government-Owned Inventions; Available for LicensingPDF
83 FR 49358 - Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative ReviewPDF
83 FR 49363 - Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset ReviewPDF
83 FR 49374 - Adjustment of Indemnification Amount for InflationPDF
83 FR 49456 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 461PDF
83 FR 49457 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
83 FR 49453 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
83 FR 49455 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
83 FR 49298 - Approval of Missouri Air Quality Implementation Plans; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5PDF
83 FR 49300 - Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Approval of the State Implementation Plan and the Operating Permits ProgramPDF
83 FR 49454 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
83 FR 49453 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request on Information Collection for Treasury Decision 8396PDF
83 FR 49357 - Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 49377 - Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing Process; City of NashuaPDF
83 FR 49378 - Notice of Amended Complaint; Louisiana Public Service Commission v. System Energy Resources, Inc.; Entergy Services, Inc.PDF
83 FR 49378 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment; Great Lakes Hydro America, LLCPDF
83 FR 49281 - Safety Zone; Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NCPDF
83 FR 49384 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Proposed Collection; Comment Request for a Modified OGE Form 450 Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure ReportPDF
83 FR 49370 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49372 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49430 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
83 FR 49356 - Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 49385 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Proposed Collection; Comment Request for a Modified OGE Form 278e Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure ReportPDF
83 FR 49373 - Cheniere Marketing, LLC and Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; Application for Blanket Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Countries on a Short-Term BasisPDF
83 FR 49362 - Membership of the International Trade Administration Performance Review BoardPDF
83 FR 49370 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49314 - Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order; Change in MembershipPDF
83 FR 49353 - Designation for the Topeka, Kansas; Minot, North Dakota; Cincinnati, Ohio; Pocatello, Idaho; Evansville, Indiana; Salt Lake City, Utah; West Sacramento, California; Richmond, Virginia; and Savage, Minnesota AreasPDF
83 FR 49312 - Kiwifruit Grown California; Decreased Assessment RatePDF
83 FR 49452 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
83 FR 49357 - Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 49381 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 49410 - Notice of Regulatory Waiver Requests Granted for the Second Quarter of Calendar Year 2018PDF
83 FR 49368 - Limitations of Duty- and Quota-Free Imports of Apparel Articles Assembled in Beneficiary Sub-Saharan African Countries From Regional and Third-Country FabricPDF
83 FR 49388 - Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus Compressed Breathing Gas Containers; Request for InformationPDF
83 FR 49421 - Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Eighteenth Regular Meeting: Taxa Being Considered for Amendments to the CITES Appendices and Proposed Resolutions, Decisions, and Agenda Items Being Considered; Observer InformationPDF
83 FR 49280 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Swinomish Channel, Whitmarsh, WAPDF
83 FR 49403 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49404 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49451 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of North CarolinaPDF
83 FR 49452 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board (PRB) and Executive Resources Board (ERB) MembershipPDF
83 FR 49286 - Periodic Reporting RequirementsPDF
83 FR 49451 - Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for the State of South CarolinaPDF
83 FR 49363 - Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results; 2015-2016PDF
83 FR 49361 - Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results; 2013-2014PDF
83 FR 49272 - Airworthiness Directives; CFM International S.A. Turbofan EnginesPDF
83 FR 49391 - Contents of a Complete Submission for Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to Drug and Biologic Applications; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 49386 - Supplemental Evidence and Data Request on Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic ReviewPDF
83 FR 49409 - Office for Interoperability and Compatibility Seeks Nominations for the Project 25 Compliance Assessment Program (P25 CAP) Advisory PanelPDF
83 FR 49353 - Notice of Request for Approval of a Renewal Information CollectionPDF
83 FR 49407 - Seminole Tribe of Florida; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49407 - Seminole Tribe of Florida; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of an Emergency DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49408 - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49440 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Relocate the Exchange's Schedule of FeesPDF
83 FR 49445 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Correct Certain References and Provide Transparency to Existing Processes in the Mortgage-Backed Securities Division Electronic Pool Notification RulesPDF
83 FR 49437 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(6) Relating to Equity Index-Linked Securities Listing Standards Set Forth in NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-E(j)(6)(B)(I)PDF
83 FR 49449 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Rule 961 Regarding the Give Up of a Clearing Member by ATP Holders and Conforming Changes to Rule 933NYPDF
83 FR 49442 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend a Representation Relating to the Redemption Procedures Applicable to the Sprott Physical Gold and Silver TrustPDF
83 FR 49434 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Modify Rule 6.15-O Regarding the Give Up of a Clearing Member by OTP Holders and OTP Firms and Conforming Changes to Rule 6.46-OPDF
83 FR 49433 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49431 - Records Schedules; Availability and Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 49390 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49372 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Case Service Report (RSA-911)PDF
83 FR 49452 - Data Collection Available for Public CommentsPDF
83 FR 49431 - Certain Jump Rope Systems; Notice of Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order Against Respondent Found in Default; Termination of InvestigationPDF
83 FR 49433 - Advisory Committee for Engineering; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 49322 - Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska-Cook Inlet Area RegulationsPDF
83 FR 49395 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Antimicrobial Animal Drug Distribution Reports and RecordkeepingPDF
83 FR 49393 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices, Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and RecordsPDF
83 FR 49344 - Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Program Technical AmendmentsPDF
83 FR 49384 - Federal Travel Regulation: Calculating Actual Expense ReimbursementPDF
83 FR 49297 - Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Plan Submittals for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality StandardPDF
83 FR 49295 - Air Plan Approval; Maine; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5PDF
83 FR 49283 - Regulated Navigation Area; Straits of MackinacPDF
83 FR 49265 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS AirplanesPDF
83 FR 49275 - Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation AirplanesPDF
83 FR 49277 - Amendment of Class E Airspace; Burlington, WIPDF
83 FR 49332 - Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Revisions to the Refrigerant Management Program's Extension to SubstitutesPDF
83 FR 49389 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49278 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark River, Astoria, ORPDF
83 FR 49317 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., AirplanesPDF
83 FR 49269 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS AirplanesPDF
83 FR 49302 - VA Acquisition Regulation: Describing Agency Needs; Contract FinancingPDF

Issue

83 190 Monday, October 1, 2018 Contents Agency Health Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality NOTICES Supplemental Evidence and Data Requests: Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic Review, 49386-49388 2018-21242 Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Change in Membership: Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order, 49314-49317 2018-21266 Decreased Assessment Rates: Kiwifruit Grown California, 49312-49314 2018-21264 Agriculture Department, Office of the Chief Financial Officer Agriculture Department, Office of the Chief Financial Officer NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49353-49354 2018-21240 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Agriculture Department, Office of the Chief Financial Officer

See

Forest Service

See

The U.S. Codex Office

NOTICES Designation Areas: Topeka, KS; Minot, ND; Cincinnati, OH; Pocatello, ID; Evansville, IN; Salt Lake City, UT; West Sacramento, CA; Richmond, VA; and Savage, MN, 49353 2018-21265
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49368-49370 2018-21267 2018-21300 2018-21301 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Requests for Information: Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus Compressed Breathing Gas Containers, 49388-49389 2018-21256 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49389-49390 2018-20995 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49390-49391 2018-21226 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough, Everett and Marysville, WA, 49279-49280 2018-21309 Swinomish Channel, Whitmarsh, WA, 49280-49281 2018-21254 Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark River, Astoria, OR, 49278-49279 2018-20985 Regulated Navigation Areas: Straits of Mackinac, 49283-49286 2018-21132 Safety Zones: Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NC, 49281-49283 2018-21276 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Committee Implementation Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements NOTICES Caps on Duty- and Quota-Free Imports: Apparel Articles Assembled in Beneficiary Sub-Saharan African Countries from Regional and Third-Country Fabric, 49368 2018-21259 Community Living Administration Community Living Administration NOTICES Meetings: Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, President's Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities, 49391 2018-21319 Defense Department Defense Department See

Navy Department

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49370-49371 2018-21274
Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Case Service Report, 49372-49373 2018-21225 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Adjustment of Indemnification Amount for Inflation, 49374-49375 2018-21293 Applications: Cheniere Marketing, LLC and Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; Blanket Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Countries on a Short-Term Basis, 49373-49374 2018-21269
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Connecticut; Plan Submittals for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 49297-49298 2018-21150 Iowa; Approval of the State Implementation Plan and the Operating Permits Program, 49300-49302 2018-21285 Maine; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2012 Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 49295-49297 2018-21149 Missouri; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standard Interstate Transport, 49298-49300 2018-21286 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances, 49295 C1--2018--19950 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: North Carolina; Ozone NAAQS Update, 49330-49332 2018-21328 Light-duty Vehicle GHG Program Technical Amendments, 49344-49352 2018-21195 Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Revisions to the Refrigerant Management Program's Extension to Substitutes, 49332-49344 2018-21084 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources, 49381-49382 2018-21261 Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits under the Light-duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application from Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., 49380-49381 2018-21333 Hearings: Public Water System Supervision Program Revision for Maryland, 49379-49380 2018-21330 Meetings: Board of Scientific Counselors Air and Energy Subcommittee, 49382-49383 2018-21332 Human Studies Review Board, 49383-49384 2018-21331 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus SAS Airplanes, 49265-49272 2018-20932 2018-21100 CFM International S.A. Turbofan Engines, 49272-49275 2018-21245 Dassault Aviation Airplanes, 49275-49277 2018-21099 Amendment of Class E Airspace: Burlington, WI, 49277-49278 2018-21097 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes, 49317-49322 2018-20950 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency RULES Technical, Organizational and Conforming Amendments; CFR Correction, 49302 2018-21367 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: FEMA Preparedness Grants: Transit Security Grant Program, 49406-49407 2018-21315 National Urban Search and Rescue Response System, 49407-49408 2018-21321 Standard Flood Hazard Determination Form, 49405-49406 2018-21322 Emergency Declarations: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Amendment No. 1, 49408-49409 2018-21237 Seminole Tribe of Florida; Amendment No. 4, 49407 2018-21238 Major Disaster Declarations: Seminole Tribe of Florida; Amendment No. 4, 49407 2018-21239 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 49376 2018-21310 Complaints: Louisiana Public Service Commission v. System Energy Resources, Inc.; Entergy Services, Inc., 49378 2018-21278 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC, 49378 2018-21277 Filings: Western Area Power Administration, 49379 2018-21308 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Federal Way Powerhouse, LLC, 49376-49377 2018-21307 Potter Road Powerhouse, LLC, 49377 2018-21312 License Applications: City of Nashua, 49377-49378 2018-21279 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Sunrun, Inc., 49378-49379 2018-21311 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Petitions for Waivers of Compliance, 49452-49453 2018-21263 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska—Cook Inlet Area Regulations, 49322-49330 2018-21218 NOTICES Meetings: Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; Taxa Being Considered for Amendments to the CITES Appendices and Proposed Resolutions, Decisions, and Agenda Items Being Considered; Observer Information, 49421-49428 2018-21255 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Antimicrobial Animal Drug Distribution Reports and Recordkeeping, 49395-49398 2018-21208 Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices, Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and Records, 49393-49395 2018-21207 Guidance: Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials of Drugs and Biologics, 49400-49403 2018-21314 Contents of a Complete Submission for Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to Drug and Biologic Applications, 49391-49393 2018-21243 Master Protocols: Efficient Clinical Trial Design Strategies to Expedite Development of Oncology Drugs and Biologics, 49398-49400 2018-21313 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Subzone Applications: Digi-Key Corp., Foreign-Trade Zone 267, Fargo, ND, 49356 2018-21324 Gulf Coast Growth Ventures, LLC, Foreign-Trade Zone 122, Corpus Christi, TX, 49356 2018-21323 Forest Forest Service PROPOSED RULES Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska—Cook Inlet Area Regulations, 49322-49330 2018-21218 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Federal Travel Regulations: Calculating Actual Expense Reimbursement, 49384 2018-21156 Government Ethics Government Ethics Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report, 49384-49385 2018-21275 Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report, 49385-49386 2018-21270 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Community Living Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Project 25 Compliance Assessment Program Advisory Panel, 49409-49410 2018-21241
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Regulatory Waiver Requests Granted in the Second Quarter of Calendar Year 2018, 49410-49421 2018-21260 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee, 49356-49357 2018-21271 Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee, 49357-49358 2018-21262 Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee, 49357 2018-21280 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49453-49457 2018-21281 2018-21283 2018-21284 2018-21288 2018-21290 2018-21291 2018-21292 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Advance Notification of Sunset Review, 49363 2018-21294 Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan, 49360-49361 2018-21325 Glycine from the People's Republic of China, 49361-49364 2018-21246 2018-21247 Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 49358-49360 2018-21296 Membership of the Performance Review Board, 49362-49363 2018-21268 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Jump Rope Systems, 49431 2018-21221 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Realty Action: Classification for Lease and/or Conveyance for Recreation and Public Purposes of Public Lands for a Park in the Southwest Portion of the Las Vegas Valley, Clark County, NV, 49428-49429 2018-21304 Requests for Nominations: Resource Advisory Councils; 2018 Second Call, 49429-49430 2018-21306 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Records Schedules, 49431-49432 2018-21228 National Labor National Labor Relations Board NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49432-49433 2018-21443 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Meetings: Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 49364-49368 2018-21302 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places: Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 49430-49431 2018-21272 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49433-49434 2018-21230 Meetings: Advisory Committee for Engineering, 49433 2018-21220 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49372 2018-21273 Government-Owned Inventions; Available for Licensing, 49371 2018-21297 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Use of Listserv for Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Site Correspondence, 49434 2018-21299 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission RULES Periodic Reporting Requirements, 49286-49295 2018-21249 Railroad Retirement Railroad Retirement Board NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49434 2018-21410 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Fixed Income Clearing Corp., 49445-49449 2018-21235 Nasdaq GEMX, LLC, 49440-49442 2018-21236 NYSE American, LLC, 49449-49451 2018-21233 NYSE Arca, Inc., 49434-49440, 49442-49445 2018-21231 2018-21232 2018-21234 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49452 2018-21222 Disaster Declarations: North Carolina; Amendment 2, 49451 2018-21251 Major Disaster Declarations: South Carolina, 49451-49452 2018-21248 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49403-49405 2018-21252 2018-21253 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board and Executive Resources Board Membership, 49452 2018-21250 Codex The U.S. Codex Office NOTICES Meetings: Codex Alimentarius Commission: Committee on Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance, 49355-49356 2018-21326 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Annual Certification and Data Collection Report, 49457-49458 2018-21320
Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department RULES Acquisition Regulations: Describing Agency Needs; Contract Financing, 49302-49311 2018-18984 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.

83 190 Monday, October 1, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0417; Product Identifier 2017-NM-132-AD; Amendment 39-19440; AD 2018-20-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-25-03, which applied to certain Airbus Model A300 F4-600R series airplanes. AD 2016-25-03 required repetitive high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections of the aft lower deck cargo door (LDCD) frame forks; a one-time check of the LDCD clearances; and a one-time detailed visual inspection of hooks, eccentric bushes, and x-stops; and corrective actions if necessary. This AD requires repetitive HFEC inspections of the aft LDCD frame forks; a one-time check of the LDCD clearances; and a one-time detailed visual inspection of hooks, eccentric bushes, and x-stops; and corrective actions if necessary. This AD was prompted by a report of two adjacent frame forks that were found cracked on the aft LDCD of two airplanes during scheduled maintenance, and the introduction of frame fork reinforcement or repair procedures that, when done, allow an extension of repetitive inspection intervals. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective November 5, 2018.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 5, 2018.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of January 26, 2017 (81 FR 93801, December 22, 2016).

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0417.

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-2018-0417; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is 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:

Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3225.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2016-25-03, Amendment 39-18729 (81 FR 93801, December 22, 2016) (“AD 2016-25-03”). AD 2016-25-03 applied to certain Airbus Model A300 F4-600R series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 25, 2018 (83 FR 24244). The NPRM was prompted by a report of two adjacent frame forks that were found cracked on the aft LDCD of two airplanes during scheduled maintenance, and the introduction of frame fork reinforcement or repair procedures that, when done, allow an extension of repetitive inspection intervals. The NPRM proposed to continue to require repetitive HFEC inspections of the aft LDCD frame forks; a one-time check of the LDCD clearances; and a one-time detailed visual inspection of hooks, eccentric bushes, and x-stops; and corrective actions if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to require revised corrective actions and compliance times. We are issuing this AD to address cracked or ruptured aft LDCD frames, which could allow loads to be transferred to the remaining structural elements. This condition could lead to the rupture of one or more vertical aft LDCD frames, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the aft LDCD.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0152R1, dated May 23, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A300 F4-600R series airplanes. The MCAI states:

During scheduled maintenance at frames (FR) 61 and FR61A on the aft lower deck cargo door (LDCD) of two A300-600F4 aeroplanes, two adjacent frame forks were found cracked. Subsequent analysis determined that, in case of cracked or ruptured aft cargo door frame(s), loads will be transferred to the remaining structural elements. However, these secondary load paths will be able to sustain the loads for a limited number of flight cycles only.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to the rupture of one or more vertical aft cargo door frame(s), resulting in reduced structural integrity of the aft cargo door.

To address this unsafe condition, Airbus issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A52W011-15 to provide inspection instructions, and, consequently, EASA issued AD 2015-0152 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2016-25-03] to require repetitive inspections of the aft LDCD frame forks and, depending on findings, the accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Airbus published Service Bulletin (SB) SB A300-52-6085 which provides frame fork reinforcement instruction and SB A300-52-6086 which provides instruction to inspect the cargo door for cracks as well as frame fork replacement instructions having the inspection interval extended from 600 flight cycles (FC) to 1,200 FC.

For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD is revised to introduce frame forks replacement or repair [or reinforcement] as an allowance to extend the inspection interval.

Required actions include repetitive HFEC inspections of the aft LDCD frame forks and repair, reinforcement, or replacement if necessary; a one-time check of the LDCD clearances and adjustment if necessary; and a one-time detailed visual inspection of hooks, eccentric bushes, and x-stops for wear, and corrective actions if necessary. Corrective actions include blend-out, adjustment, and replacement of hooks, bushes and x-stops. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0417.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to the comment.

Request To Incorporate Revised Service Bulletins

FedEx Express requested that we revise the proposed AD to incorporate Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018. FedEx Express also requested that we update table 1 to paragraph (g) of the proposed AD with the revised compliance times specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018.

We partially agree with the commenter's requested changes. We agree to incorporate Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018; because the changes to the procedures in those documents are not significant. The changes include updating reference documents and figures and do not result in any additional work for airplanes modified using the previous issue. Therefore, we have revised this AD to refer to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018, as the appropriate sources of service information for certain actions. We have also revised this AD to give credit for certain actions accomplished using Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 00, dated December 22, 2016; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 00, dated December 25, 2016.

The updated compliance times in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018, are substantively different from the compliance times specified in the proposed AD and would increase the scope of this AD without allowing for public notice and comment. Therefore, we have not changed this AD with regard to the compliance times specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086. However, under the provisions of paragraph (n)(1) of this AD, we will consider requests for approval of alternative compliance times if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the extension would provide an acceptable level of safety.

Conclusion

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

We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Airbus has issued the following service information:

• Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, including Appendices 1, 2, 3, and 4, dated July 23, 2015, which describes procedures for a check of the aft LDCD clearances “U” and “V” between the latching hooks and the eccentric bush at frame FR60 through FR64A and an adjustment of the latching hook; a detailed inspection to detect signs of wear of the hooks, eccentric bushes, and x-stops and corrective actions; and an HFEC inspection to detect cracking at all frame fork stations of the aft LDCD and a replacement of the frame fork.

• Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018, which describes procedures for reinforcing frame fork fastener holes, which include related investigative and corrective actions. The related investigative actions include a rotating probe inspection for cracking of the fastener holes and a check to determine the hole diameter. Corrective actions include repair and cold working the fastener holes.

• Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018, which describes procedures for a check of the aft LDCD clearances “U” and “V” between the latching hooks and the eccentric bush at FR60 through FR64A and an adjustment of the latching hook; and HFEC inspection to detect cracking at all frame fork stations of the aft LDCD and a repair of the frame fork.

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.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 58 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs for Required Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • 17 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,445 $0 $1,445 $83,810

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required based on the results of any required actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

    Estimated Costs of On-condition Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Up to 65 work-hours × $85 per hour = $5,525 $10,000 $15,525
    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 transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

    We determined that 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 that 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-25-03, Amendment 39-18729 (81 FR 93801, December 22, 2016), and adding the following new AD: 2018-20-06 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19440; Docket No. FAA-2018-0417; Product Identifier 2017-NM-132-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 5, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2016-25-03, Amendment 39-18729 (81 FR 93801, December 22, 2016) (“AD 2016-25-03”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A300 F4-605R and A300 F4-622R airplanes, certificated in any category, on which Airbus SAS modification 12046 has been embodied in production. Modification 12046 has been embodied in production on manufacturer serial numbers (MSNs) 0805 and above, except MSNs 0836, 0837, and 0838.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 52, Doors.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of two adjacent frame forks that were found cracked on the aft lower deck cargo door (LDCD) of two airplanes during scheduled maintenance, and the introduction of frame fork reinforcement or repair procedures that, when done, allow an extension of repetitive inspection intervals. We are issuing this AD to address cracked or ruptured aft LDCD frames, which could allow loads to be transferred to the remaining structural elements. This condition could lead to the rupture of one or more vertical aft LDCD frames, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the aft LDCD.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Inspection Requirements and On-Condition Actions, With Revised Compliance Times and New Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD 2016-25-03, with revised compliance times and new service information. At the applicable time specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, or before exceeding the threshold defined in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, whichever occurs later: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD. Repeat the high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed the applicable times specified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (1) A one-time check of the aft LDCD clearances “U” and “V” between the latching hooks and the eccentric bush at FR60 through FR64A, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015; or the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018. If any value outside tolerance is found, adjust the latching hook before further flight, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015; or the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018.

    (2) A one-time detailed inspection to detect signs of wear of the hooks, eccentric bushes, and x-stops, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015. If any wear is found, do all applicable corrective actions before further flight, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015.

    (3) An HFEC inspection to detect cracking at all frame fork stations of the aft LDCD, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015; or the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018, 2016. If any crack is found, before further flight, replace the cracked frame fork, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015; repair the cracked frame fork, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018; or reinforce the cracked frame fork, including doing all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018, except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD.

    ER01OC18.004 (h) Retained Compliance Times, With No Changes

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, do the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (1) Before the accumulation of 4,500 total flight cycles.

    (2) At the applicable time specified by paragraph (h)(2)(i) or (h)(2)(ii) of this AD.

    (i) For airplanes that have accumulated 8,000 or more total flight cycles as of January 26, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2016-25-03): Within 100 flight cycles after January 26, 2017.

    (ii) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 8,000 total flight cycles as of January 26, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2016-25-03): Within 400 flight cycles after January 26, 2017.

    (i) Service Information Exception

    Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action: Before further flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(2) of this AD.

    (j) No Terminating Action

    Accomplishment of corrective actions on an airplane as required by paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, or repair, reinforcement, or replacement of a frame fork as required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, on the aft LDCD of an airplane does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive HFEC inspections required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD for that airplane.

    (k) Compliance Time Clarification

    After replacement, repair, or reinforcement of any frame fork on the aft LDCD of an airplane, as specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, the next HFEC inspection as required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD can be deferred for any frame fork that is replaced, repaired, or reinforced, but must be accomplished before exceeding 6,800 flight cycles after the replacement, repair, or reinforcement of that frame fork.

    (l) No Reporting

    Although the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018; specify to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

    (m) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(3) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 00, dated December 25, 2016.

    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 00, dated December 22, 2016.

    (n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (o)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] 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.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by paragraph (i) and paragraph (l) of this AD: If any service information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

    (o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2015-0152R1, dated May 23, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the iInternet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0417.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3225.

    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (p)(5) and (p)(6) of this AD.

    (p) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.

    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on November 5, 2018.

    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6085, Revision 01, dated May 2, 2018.

    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-52-6086, Revision 01, dated May 29, 2018.

    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on January 26, 2017 (81 FR 93801, December 22, 2016).

    (i) Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015, including the following appendices:

    (A) Appendix 1—Flowchart, undated.

    (B) Appendix 2—Reporting Sheet, undated. (The pages of Appendix 2 are not numbered.)

    (C) Appendix 3—titled “Technical Disposition,” Ref. TD/K12/L3/02978/2015, Issue B, dated July 21, 2015. (Appendix 3 is identified with an appendix number only on page 1 of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A52W011-15, Revision 00, dated July 23, 2015.)

    (D) Appendix 4—Part number identification for frame forks and bushings, undated.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com.

    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    (7) 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 Des Moines, Washington, on September 21, 2018. John P. Piccola, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21100 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0395; Product Identifier 2017-NM-136-AD; Amendment 39-19430; AD 2018-19-29] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus SAS Model A330-200 Freighter, -200, and -300 series airplanes; and Airbus SAS Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of deficient fatigue performance of high strength steel used in forgings. Components made from the affected high strength steel are installed on the main landing gear (MLG), nose landing gear (NLG), and center landing gear (CLG). This AD requires identifying the part number and serial number of certain components installed on the MLG, NLG, and CLG; replacing affected parts; identifying the airplane's weight variant; and determining the applicable life limit for certain components installed on the MLG, NLG, and CLG. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective November 5, 2018.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0395.

    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 2018-0395; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198-6547; telephone and fax 206-231-3229.

    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 all Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes, Model A330-200 series airplanes, Model A330-300 series airplanes, Model A340-200 series airplanes, Model A340-300 series airplanes, Model A340-500 series airplanes, and Model A340-600 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 9, 2018 (83 FR 21196). The NPRM was prompted by a report of deficient fatigue performance of high strength steel used in forgings. Components made from the affected high strength steel are installed on the MLG, NLG, and CLG. The NPRM proposed to require identifying the part number and serial number of certain components installed on the MLG, NLG, and CLG; replacing affected parts; identifying the airplane's weight variant; and determining the applicable life limit for certain components installed on the MLG, NLG, and CLG.

    We are issuing this AD to address certain parts made from 300M high strength steel, which if uncorrected, could lead to structural failure of the landing gear, and possible loss of control of the airplane during take-off or landing.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2017-0185, dated September 22, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes, Model A330-200 series airplanes, Model A330-300 series airplanes, Model A340-200 series airplanes, Model A340-300 series airplanes, Model A340-500 series airplanes, and Model A340-600 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    In 2006, Messier-Dowty identified a deficiency in the fatigue performance of 300M high strength steel used in forgings. The root cause for this fatigue deficiency was the processing during preparation of the material. After investigation, it was determined that the following material sources (S) were affected by this fatigue deficiency: Electralloy (S1), RSM (S2A, S2B or S2C), Latrobe (S3) and Aubert et Duval (S4).

    Consequently, reduced lives were calculated for certain landing gear main fittings, bogie beams and sliding pistons, determined to be affected by the 300M material properties quality issue. These components are installed on Main, Nose and Centre Landing Gears (MLG, NLG, CLG) of A330 and A340 aeroplanes.

    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to structural failure of a landing gear, possibly resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane during take-off or landing.

    To initially address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus published reduced life limits for the affected parts from material sources S1, S2 and S3 in the applicable Airworthiness Limitation Section (ALS) Part 1. Later, it was determined that ALS Part 1 was an inappropriate place for recording the reduced lives and Airbus published Service Bulletin (SB) A330-32-3281, SB A340-32-4310, and SB A340-32-5119, as applicable, to provide identification and replacement instructions for affected parts made of all material sources S1, S2, S3 and S4. This action was also accomplished to simplify Airbus ALS Part 1.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires [identification of the part numbers and serial numbers of the main fitting, bogie beam and sliding piston of the MLG, NLG, and CLG, and the airplane's weight variant], and implementation of the reduced life limits for the affected parts and replacement of any parts that are close to, or have exceeded the applicable reduced life limit.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0395.

    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. We have determined that these minor 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

    Airbus SAS has issued the following service information.

    • Service Bulletin A330-32-3281, Revision 02, including Appendixes 01 through 06, dated June 16, 2017; and Service Bulletin A340-32-4310, Revision 02, including Appendixes 01 through 06, dated June 16, 2017. This service information includes procedures for inspections to identify the part numbers and serial numbers of the main fittings, bogie beams, and sliding pistons of the MLG; and procedures for determining the airplane's weight variant. This service information also describes the reduced life limits for affected parts. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.

    • Service Bulletin A340-32-5119, Revision 01, including Appendixes 01 through 07, dated January 31, 2017. This service information includes procedures for inspections to identify the part numbers and serial numbers of the main fittings and bogie beams of the MLG, NLG, and CLG; and procedures for determining the airplane's weight variant. This service information also describes the reduced life limits for affected parts.

    In addition, Airbus has issued the following service information, which describes life limits for affected parts. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models and different life limited parts.

    • A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Revision 09, dated September 18, 2017.

    • A330 ALS Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Variation 9.2, dated November 28, 2017.

    • A340 ALS Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Revision 09, dated September 18, 2017.

    • A340 ALS Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Variation 9.2, dated November 28, 2017.

    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.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 103 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
  • Inspection 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 $0 $340 $35,020

    We have received no definitive data that will enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition part replacements specified in this AD.

    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 transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight 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 that 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): 2018-19-29 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19430; Docket No. FAA-2018-0395; Product Identifier 2017-NM-136-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 5, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus SAS airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(7) of this AD, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.

    (1) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.

    (2) Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes.

    (3) Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes.

    (4) Model A340-211, -212, and -213 airplanes.

    (5) Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes.

    (6) Model A340-541 airplanes.

    (7) Model A340-642 airplanes.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of deficient fatigue performance of 300M high strength steel used in forgings. Components made of 300M high strength steel are installed on the main landing gear (MLG), nose landing gear (NLG), and center landing gear (CLG). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct certain parts made from 300M high strength steel, which if uncorrected, could lead to structural failure of the landing gear, and possible loss of control of the airplane during take-off or landing.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Definitions

    (1) For the purpose of this AD, an affected part is any main fitting, bogie beam, or sliding piston of the MLG, NLG, or CLG installed on the airplane, having a part number and serial number combination specified in the applicable service information identified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD.

    (2) For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable part is any main fitting, bogie beam, or sliding piston of the MLG, NLG, or CLG that has not exceeded the applicable life limit specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i), (g)(2)(ii), or (g)(2)(iii) of this AD, since first installation on an airplane.

    (i) The life limit specified in the applicable service information identified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD.

    (ii) The life limit specified in Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Revision 09, dated September 18, 2017; and A330 ALS Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Variation 9.2, dated November 28, 2017.

    (iii) The life limit specified in Airbus A340 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Revision 09, dated September 18, 2017; and A340 ALS Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Variation 9.2, dated November 28, 2017.

    (h) Identification of Part Number, Serial Number, Weight Variant, and Reduced Life Limit

    Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD: Identify the part number and serial number of each main fitting, bogie beam, and sliding piston of the MLG, NLG, and CLG installed on the airplane; identify the airplane's weight variant; and determine the applicable reduced life limit; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information identified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable for identification of the installed main fittings, bogie beams, and sliding pistons of the MLG, NLG, and CLG, provided the part number and serial number of each component can be conclusively identified by that review.

    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3281, Revision 02, including Appendixes 01 through 06, dated June 16, 2017.

    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4310, Revision 02, including Appendixes 01 through 06, dated June 16, 2017.

    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-5119, Revision 01, including Appendixes 01 through 07, dated January 31, 2017.

    (i) Replacement of Affected Parts

    Prior to exceeding the applicable life limit, as specified in the applicable service information identified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD, or within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Replace each affected part (as defined in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD) with a serviceable part (as defined in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD).

    (j) Parts Installation Specification

    As of the effective date of this AD, any affected part (as defined in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD) may be used as a replacement part, provided the affected part is also a serviceable part (as defined in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD), and following installation, the affected part is replaced prior to exceeding the applicable life limit as specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] 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.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): If any service information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0185, dated September 22, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0395.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198-6547; telephone and fax 206-231-3229.

    (m) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.

    (i) Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Revision 09, dated September 18, 2017.

    (ii) Airbus A330 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Variation 9.2, dated November 28, 2017.

    (iii) Airbus A340 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Revision 09, dated September 18, 2017.

    (iv) Airbus A340 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 1, “Safe Life Airworthiness Limitation Items (SL-ALI),” Variation 9.2, dated November 28, 2017.

    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3281, Revision 02, including Appendixes 01 through 06, dated June 16, 2017.

    (vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4310, Revision 02, including Appendixes 01 through 06, dated June 16, 2017.

    (vii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-5119, Revision 01, including Appendixes 01 through 07, dated January 31, 2017.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com.

    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    (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 Des Moines, Washington, on September 14, 2018. John P. Piccola, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-20932 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0785; Product Identifier 2018-NE-14-AD; Amendment 39-19380; AD 2018-18-01] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; CFM International S.A. Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2018-10-11 for all CFM International S.A. (CFM) Model CFM56-7B engines. AD 2018-10-11 required initial and repetitive inspections of certain fan blades and, if they fail the inspection, their replacement with parts eligible for installation. This superseding AD requires the same initial and repetitive inspections but revises the compliance time for the repetitive inspections. This AD was prompted by further analysis by the manufacturer that indicated a need to reduce the repetitive fan blade inspection interval based on ongoing root cause investigation of an April 2018 engine failure. The agency is 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.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of May 14, 2018 (83 FR 19176, May 2, 2018).

    The FAA must receive any comments on this AD by November 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

    Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, 20590.

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact CFM International Inc., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone: 877-432-3272; fax: 877-432-3329; email: [email protected] You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine and 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-2018-0785.

    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-2018-0785; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher McGuire, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7120; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2018-10-11, Amendment 39-19286 (83 FR 22836, May 17, 2018), (“AD 2018-10-11”), for all CFM model CFM56-7B engines. AD 2018-10-11 required initial and repetitive ultrasonic inspections (USI) or eddy current inspection (ECI) of certain fan blades and, if they fail the inspection, their replacement with parts eligible for installation. AD 2018-10-11 resulted from an April 2018 event involving an engine failure due to a fractured fan blade leading to the engine inlet cowl disintegrating and debris penetrating the fuselage, causing a loss of pressurization and prompting an emergency descent. One passenger fatality occurred as a result. The agency issued AD 2018-10-11 to prevent failure of the fan blade due to cracking, which could lead to an engine in-flight shutdown, uncontained release of debris, damage to the airplane, and possible airplane decompression.

    Actions Since AD 2018-10-11 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2018-10-11, CFM gained a better understanding of the fan blade failures based on the inspections and further analysis of the detected cracks and the April 2018 event. As a result, CFM reduced the repetitive inspection interval to prevent a fan blade failure. CFM has published Service Bulletin (SB) CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2018, to reduce the repetitive inspection interval from 3,000 cycles to 1,600 cycles. The FAA expects that all affected engines will have completed the initial inspection based on the previously issued ADs.

    The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    Revision to Cost Estimate

    The FAA has determined that, in AD 2018-10-11, it underestimated the cost per fan blade to be $8,500. However, based on CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2018, and earlier versions the estimated cost per fan blade should be $51,400. The FAA erroneously assumed the cost in the service bulletin represented the cost for a set of 24 fan blades when it actually represented the cost for two fan blades. In this final rule, the agency has updated the on-condition costs to reflect the correct cost of the fan blade.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2018, and Subtask 72-21-01-220-091, of Task 72-21-01-200-001, from the CFM56-7B Engine Shop Manual (ESM), Revision 57, dated January 15, 2018. CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, describes procedures for performing a USI of the affected fan blades. Subtask 72-21-01-220-091, of Task 72-21-01-200-001, from the CFM56-7B ESM, describes procedures for performing an ECI of the affected fan blades. 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

    The FAA also reviewed CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1019, dated March 24, 2017, CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1019, Revision 1, dated June 13, 2017, CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1024, dated July 26, 2017, CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, dated April 20, 2018, and General Electric Field Support Technology (FST) Procedure 2370, dated December 9, 2016. These SBs and the FST provide information on performing the USI.

    FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency has evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

    AD Requirements

    This AD requires initial and repetitive USI or ECI of certain fan blades and, if they fail the inspection, their replacement with parts eligible for installation.

    FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule. Due to the reduction in the repetitive inspection interval, some fan blades have reached or exceeded the revised repetitive inspection threshold. Because of this, the compliance time for the required action is shorter than the time necessary for the public to comment and for the FAA to issue the final rule to ensure the unsafe condition is addressed. Therefore, the agency finds good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable. In addition, for the reasons stated in this paragraph, the FAA finds that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

    Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and the FAA did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, the agency invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2018-0785 and product identifier 2018-NE-14-AD at the beginning of your comments. The agency specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this final rule. The agency will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.

    The FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact the agency receives about this final rule.

    Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 3,716 engines installed on 1,858 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Inspection Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • inspection
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Inspect engine fan blade 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 $0 $170 $631,720

    The FAA estimates the following costs to complete any necessary replacement of a single fan blade that would be required based on the results of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of engines that might need fan blades to be replaced:

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Replace fan blade 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $51,400 $51,485
    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.

    The FAA is 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 within the Aircraft Certification Service, 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 that this AD:

    (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),

    (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 part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2018-10-11, Amendment 39-19286 (83 FR 22836, May 17, 2018) and adding the following new AD: 2018-18-01 CFM International S.A.: Amendment 39-19380; Docket No. FAA-2018-0785; Product Identifier 2018-NE-14-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 16, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-10-11, Amendment 39-19286 (83 FR 22836, May 17, 2018).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to CFM International S.A.(CFM) CFM56-7B20, CFM56-7B22, CFM56-7B22/B1, CFM56-7B24, CFM56-7B24/B1, CFM56-7B26, CFM56-7B26/B2, CFM56-7B27, CFM56-7B27A, CFM56-7B26/B1, CFM56-7B27/B1, CFM56-7B27/B3, CFM56-7B20/2, CFM56-7B22/2, CFM56-7B24/2, CFM56-7B26/2, CFM56-7B27/2, CFM56-7B20/3, CFM56-7B22/3, CFM56-7B22/3B1, CFM56-7B24/3, CFM56-7B24/3B1, CFM56-7B26/3, CFM56-7B26/3B1, CFM56-7B26/3B2, CFM56-7B27/3, CFM56-7B27/3B1, CFM56-7B27/3B3, CFM56-7B27A/3, CFM56-7B26/3F, CFM56-7B26/3B2F, CFM56-7B27/3F, CFM56-7B27/3B1F, CFM56-7B20E, CFM56-7B22E, CFM56-7B22E/B1, CFM56-7B24E, CFM56-7B24E/B1, CFM56-7B26E, CFM56-7B26E/B1, CFM56-7B26E/B2, CFM56-7B27AE, CFM56-7B27E, CFM56-7B27E/B1, CFM56-7B27E/B3, CFM56-7B26E/F, CFM56-7B26E/B2F, CFM56-7B27E/F, and CFM56-7B27E/B1F engine models.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by further analysis by the manufacturer that indicated a need to reduce the repetitive fan blade inspection interval based on ongoing root cause investigation of an April 2018 engine failure that resulted in one fatality. The FAA is issuing this AD to reduce the repetitive fan blade inspection interval to prevent failure of the fan blade. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the fan blade, the engine inlet cowl disintegrating and debris penetrating the fuselage, causing a loss of pressurization, and prompting an emergency descent.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Required Actions

    (1) Perform an ultrasonic inspection (USI) or eddy current inspection (ECI) of the concave and convex sides of the fan blade dovetail as follows:

    (i) Before further flight, perform an initial inspection of the fan blade using the criteria in Planning Information, either paragraph 1.C.(2)(a), 1.C.(2)(b), or 1.C.(2)(c), of CFM Service Bulletin (SB) CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2018.

    (ii) For all fan blades not inspected in accordance with (g)(1)(i) of this AD, perform an initial inspection prior to accumulating 20,000 flight cycles on the fan blade or before further flight, whichever occurs later.

    (iii) Thereafter, repeat this inspection no later than 1,600 cycles since the last inspection or within 450 cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (iv) Use the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.A.(3)(a) through (i), of CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2018, to perform a USI or use the instructions in subtask 72-21-01-220-091, of task 72-21-01-200-001, from CFM CFM56-7B Engine Shop Manual (ESM), Revision 57, dated January 15, 2018, to perform an ECI.

    (2) If any unserviceable indication, as specified in the applicable service information in paragraph (g)(1)(iv) of this AD, is found during the inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD, replace the fan blade before further flight with a part eligible for installation.

    (h) Installation Prohibition

    Do not install any replacement fan blade unless it meets one of the following criteria:

    (1) The replacement fan blade has fewer than 20,000 cycles since new, or;

    (2) The replacement fan blade has been inspected in accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (i) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, a “replacement fan blade” is a fan blade that is being installed into an engine from which it was not previously removed. Removing and reinstalling a fan blade for the purpose of relubrication is not subject to the Installation Prohibition of this AD.

    (j) Credit for Previous Actions

    You may take credit for the actions that are required by paragraph (g) of this AD if you performed the actions before the effective date of this AD using CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1019, dated March 24, 2017; CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1019, Revision 1, dated June 13, 2017; CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1024, dated July 26, 2017; CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, dated April 20, 2018; CFM SB CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 1, dated May 9, 2018; or an ECI using the instructions in task 72-21-01-200-001, subtask 72-21-01-220-091 of CFM56-7B ESM, earlier than Revision 57, dated January 15, 2018.

    (k) 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 certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) 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.

    (3) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(3)(i) and (k)(3)(ii) of this AD apply.

    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.

    (4) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2018-10-11 (83 FR 22836, May 17, 2018) are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

    (l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Christopher McGuire, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7120; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

    (m) 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.

    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on October 16, 2018.

    (i) CFM International S.A. (CFM) Service Bulletin CFM56-7B S/B 72-1033, Revision 2, dated July 27, 2018.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on May 14, 2018 (83 FR 19176, May 2, 2018).

    (i) Subtask 72-21-01-220-091, of Task 72-21-01-200-001, from the CFM CFM56-7B Engine Shop Manual, Revision 57, dated January 15, 2018.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (5) For CFM service information identified in this AD, contact CFM International Inc., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone: 877-432-3272; fax: 877-432-3329; email: [email protected]

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

    (7) 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 September 26, 2018. Karen M. Grant, Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21245 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0549; Product Identifier 2018-NM-014-AD; Amendment 39-19427; AD 2018-19-26] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 200 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are necessary. This AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective November 5, 2018.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201-440-6700; internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0549.

    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-2018-0549; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is 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:

    Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3226.

    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 all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 200 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2018 (83 FR 29056). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are necessary. The NPRM proposed to require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations.

    We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0009, dated January 15, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 200 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    The airworthiness limitations for Dassault Mystère Falcon 200 aeroplanes, which are approved by EASA, are currently defined and published in AMM [aircraft maintenance manual] ALS [airworthiness limitations section] Chapter 5-40. These instructions have been identified as mandatory for continued airworthiness.

    Failure to accomplish these instructions could result in an unsafe condition.

    EASA previously issued AD 2008-0221 (later corrected), requiring the actions described in Dassault Mystère Falcon 200 AMM Chapter 5-40 (DMD 18740A) at Revision 14. Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Dassault published the ALS, containing new and/or more restrictive maintenance tasks.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD takes over the requirements for Mystère Falcon 200 aeroplanes from EASA AD 2008-0221 and requires accomplishment of the actions specified in the ALS.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0549.

    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. We have determined that these minor 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

    Dassault Aviation has issued Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 17, dated December 20, 2017, of the Dassult Falcon 200 Maintenance Manual. The service information describes mandatory maintenance tasks that operators must perform at specified intervals. 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.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 9 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

    We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).

    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 transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight 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 that 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): 2018-19-26 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-19427; Docket No. FAA-2018-0549; Product Identifier 2018-NM-014-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 5, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 200 airplanes, certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations are necessary. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 17, dated December 20, 2017, of the Dassault Falcon 200 Maintenance Manual. The initial compliance time for accomplishing the actions is at the applicable time specified in Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 17, dated December 20, 2017, of the Dassault Falcon 200 Maintenance Manual; or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD; whichever occurs later.

    (h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

    (i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards 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 International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] 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.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0009, dated January 15, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0549.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3226.

    (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 this AD specifies otherwise.

    (i) Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 17, dated December 20, 2017, of the Dassault Falcon 200 Maintenance Manual.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201-440-6700; internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.

    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    (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 Des Moines, Washington, on September 14, 2018. John P. Piccola, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21099 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0145; Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-4] Amendment of Class E Airspace; Burlington, WI AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Burlington Municipal Airport, Burlington, WI. This action is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Burbun VHF omnidirectional range (VOR), cancellation of the VOR approach procedure, and implementation of new area navigation (RNAV) procedures for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action adjusts the geographic coordinates of the Burlington Municipal Airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    DATES:

    Effective 0901 UTC, January 3, 2019. 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 7400.11C, 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 7400.11C 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 amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Burlington Municipal Airport, Burlington, WI, to support IFR operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (82 FR 40080; August 24, 2017) for Docket No. FAA-2017-0145 to modify Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Burlington Municipal Airport, Burlington, WI. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. Two comments were received in support of the proposal.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 amends Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 6.4-mile radius (reduced from a 7.4-mile) radius of Burlington Municipal Airport, Burlington, WI. Airspace redesign is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Burbun VOR, and cancellation of the VOR approach, while implementing more efficient area navigation routes within the national airspace system for the safety and management of standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport. This action also updates the geographic coordinates of the airport 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, 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 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AGL WI E5 Burlington, WI [Amended] Burlington Municipal Airport, WI (Lat. 42°41′27″ N, long. 88°18′17″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of Burlington Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 20, 2018. Walter Tweedy, Manager (A), Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21097 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0770] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark River, Astoria, OR 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 three bridges at Astoria, OR; they include the US 101 highway bridge (Youngs Bay Bridge) across Youngs Bay, mile 0.7, the Oregon State highway bridge (Old Youngs Bay Bridge) across Youngs Bay, mile 2.4, foot of Fifth Street, and the Oregon State highway bridge (Lewis and Clark River Bridge) across the Lewis and Clark River, mile 1.0. The deviation allows the three subject bridges' owner to remove the bridge operator during the late evening and early morning hours. This deviation allows the bridge to open during weekends and nighttime hours after receiving a 2 hour advance notice.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective without actual notice from October 1, 2018 to 7 a.m. on March 19, 2019. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 7 a.m. on September 22, 2018, until October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0770 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 Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7282, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) owns the Youngs Bay Bridge across Youngs Bay, mile 0.7, Old Youngs Bay Bridge across Youngs Bay, mile 2.4, foot of Fifth Street, and the Lewis and Clark River Bridge across the Lewis and Clark River, mile 1.0. ODOT has requested this temporary deviation from the operating schedule while a rule change is being reviewed for approval. The three subject bridges are within one mile of each other, and currently open on signal for the passage of vessels with one half-hour notice by marine radio, telephone, or other suitable means. These three bridges are operated by the Lewis and Clark River bridge operator in accordance with 33 CFR 117.899.

    This deviation will allow ODOT to operate without a bridge operator attending the three subject bridges until an opening request has been received. This deviation authorizes ODOT's bridge operator to open the subject bridges within two hours after receiving a request for an opening from 5 p.m. on Friday to 7 a.m. on Monday, including all Federal holidays, starting at 7 a.m. on September 22, 2018, through 7 a.m. on March 19, 2019. The Youngs Bay Bridge provides a vertical clearance approximately 37 feet above mean high water when in the closed-to-navigation position. The Old Youngs Bay Bridge provides a vertical clearance approximately 19 feet above mean high water when in the closed-to-navigation position. The Lewis and Clark River Bridge provides a vertical clearance of 17 feet above mean high water when in the closed-to-navigation position. Vessels operating on Youngs Bay and the Lewis and Clark River range from small recreational vessels, sailboats, tribal fishing boats and small commercial fishing vessels.

    Vessels able to pass through the subject bridges in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridges will not be able to open for emergencies from 5 p.m. on Friday to 7 a.m. on Monday unless a two hour notice is given, and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will 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 drawbridges must return to their 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 21, 2018. Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-20985 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0428] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough, Everett and Marysville, WA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation; modification.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has modified a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the SR 529 Highway Bridge, north bound, across Steamboat Slough, mile 1.2, near Marysville, WA. The deviation is necessary to accommodate painting and preservation. This modified deviation changes the period the subject bridge is authorized to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2018 to 11:59 p.m. on October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0428 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 Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7282, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 7, 2018, we published a temporary deviation entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough, Everett and Marysville, WA, in the Federal Register (83 FR 26365). That temporary deviation allowed the SR 529 Highway Bridge, north bound, to not open to marine vessels from 12:01 a.m. on July 2, 2018 to 11:59 p.m. on September 30, 2018. While performing initial repairs, the bridge owner, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), discovered additional damage and corrosion. This modification is required so that WSDOT can perform repairs, painting, and preservation related to the newly discovered damage and corrosion. WSDOT has requested an extension to the current published temporary deviation to make required repairs.

    The SR 529 Highway Bridge, north bound, across Steamboat Slough, mile 1.2, provides 10 feet of vertical clearance above mean high water elevation while in the closed-to-navigation position; and this bridge operates in accordance with 33 CFR 117.1059(f). The subject bridge is authorized to remain in the closed-to navigation position, and need not open for maritime traffic from 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2018 to 11:59 p.m. on October 31, 2018. The subject bridge's lift span vertical clearance is also authorized to be reduced from ten feet to seven feet except for a 50 foot wide section that shall not be reduced for maritime passage. The bridge shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.1059(f) at all other times.

    Waterway usage on this part of the Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough includes vessels ranging from commercial tug and barge to small pleasure craft. Vessels able to pass under the subject bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The subject bridge will not be able to open for vessels engaged in emergency response during the closure period. An alternate route for vessels to pass is available through Ebey Slough and Union Slough near the entrance of Steamboat Slough at high tide. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridges so that vessels 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 the 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 25, 2018. Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21309 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0852] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Swinomish Channel, Whitmarsh, WA 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 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Company (BNSF) Railroad Swing Span Drawbridge 7.6 (Bridge 7.6) across Swinomish Channel, mile 8.4, near Whitmarsh, WA. This deviation is necessary to accommodate replacement of the bridge deck ties and installation of new rail joints. The deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective without actual notice from October 1, 2018 through 3 p.m. on October 5, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 7 a.m. on September 23, 2018, until October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0852 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 Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7282, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    BNSF (bridge owner) has requested for Bridge 7.6 be allowed to close the span, and need not open to marine traffic to replace bridge deck ties and install new rail joints. BNSF's Bridge 7.6 crosses the Swinomish channel, mile 8.4, near Whitmarsh, WA. The subject bridge provides 8 feet of vertical clearance in the closed-to-navigation position, and 100 feet of horizontal clearance in the open-to-navigation position. Bridge 7.6 provides unlimited vertical clearance in the open-to-navigation position. Vertical and horizontal clearances are referenced to mean high-water elevation.

    BNSF work requires the swing span to be in the closed-to-navigation position. The deviation period allows the subject bridge to be in the closed-to-navigation position from 7 a.m. on September 23, 2018 to 3 p.m. on October 05, 2018. During the closure times, the swing span may be opened if at least a two hour notice has been given to the bridge operator. The span will open for emergencies and tribal fishing vessels with a one hour notice to the bridge operator. The deviation period and span operation is described in the table below:

    Start time/date End time/date Action 7 a.m. Sep 23, 18 11 p.m. Sep 23, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Sep 24, 18 3 p.m. Sep, 24, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Sep 25, 18 3 p.m. Sep 25, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Sep 26, 18 3 p.m. Sep 26, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Sep 27, 18 3 p.m. Sep 27, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Sep 28, 18 3 p.m. Sep 28, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 7 a.m. Sep 30, 18 11 p.m. Sep 30, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Oct 01, 18 3 p.m. Oct 01, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Oct 02, 18 3 p.m. Oct 02, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Oct 03, 18 3 p.m. Oct 03, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Oct 04, 18 3 p.m. Oct 04, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position. 9 a.m. Oct 05, 18 3 p.m. Oct 05, 18 Span in the closed-to-navigation position.

    Bridge 7.6 normally operates in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, and is normally maintained in the open-to-navigation position. The bridge shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.5 at all other times. Waterway usage on the Swinomish Channel includes commercial tugs and barges, U.S. Coast Guard vessels, and large to small pleasure craft. BNSF coordinated with tribal leaders to open Bridge 7.6 during the closure period herein to tribal fishing vessels with an hour notice. BNSF also coordinated with marinas on Swinomish Channel to open the subject bridge, with at least a two hour notice, during the closure period herein.

    Vessels able to pass through the subject bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. An alternate route is via the southern Swinomish Channel using Skagit Bay. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels 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 24, 2018. Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21254 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0920] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NC AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the Cape Fear River to minimize risks caused by vessels transiting near vessels and divers conducting post-Hurricane Florence recovery operations. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless a vessel meets the stated requirements or is specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port North Carolina (COTP).

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from October 1, 2018, through October 17, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from September 26, 2018, through October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2018-0920 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Chief Petty Officer Joshua O'Rourke, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North Carolina, Wilmington, NC; telephone 910-772-2227, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations COTP Captain of the Port CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    After Hurricane Florence passed over the Cape Fear River, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducted surveys of the navigable channel to identify obstructions that may have collected on the river bottom and pose risks to shipping traffic. The surveys identified a number of potential obstructions that require further investigation and possible removal. Operations are scheduled to begin on September 26, 2018. These operations involve diving in murky water with strong currents, using heavy-lift equipment on floating platforms, and other inherently risky activities that require strict safety procedures. Vessels that pass too close or too quickly increase the risk of these operations. To mitigate such risks, the COTP is establishing a safety zone around the vessels conducting diving and salvage operations. This safety zone will move with the vessels as they transit the river to investigate and remove obstructions.

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because to do so would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Waiting to return the waterway to conditions that accommodate the safe, full resumption of commercial shipping is contrary to the public interest. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because recovery assets will be on scene on or about September 26, 2018, and the safety zone needs to be in place at that time to protect vessels and persons in the vicinity of salvage operations.

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Immediate action is needed to protect vessels and persons conducting diving and salvage operations, as well as vessels transiting nearby, from the potential hazards associated with these operations.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port North Carolina (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with salvage operations starting on or about September 26, 2018, will be a safety concern when anyone approaches within 100 yards of salvage vessels and divers. This rule is needed to protect personnel and vessels in the navigable waters within and transiting near the safety zone.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a moving safety zone that protects vessels and affiliated divers engaged in post-Hurricane Florence salvage operations on the navigable waters of the Cape Fear River. The safety zone includes all navigable waters within 100 yards of vessels actively engaged in salvage and dive support vessels being used to conduct salvage operations on the Cape Fear River. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. Vessels requesting to enter or transit the safety zone may contact the Sector North Carolina Command Center via VHF-FM channel 16 or telephone at 910-362-4015.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and flexibility of the safety zone. Because of its size, vessels will typically be able to safely transit around the zone. In cases where the location of salvage operations don't allow safe passage without transiting through the zone, the regulation is written to give the opportunity for transiting through after coordinating with salvage operators and the COTP. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone updating mariners of the location of current salvage operations.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone that is active only during salvage operations that will prohibit entry within 100 yards of salvage vessels, machinery, and divers being used to investigate and remove obstructions from the Cape Fear River. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

    PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add § 165.T05-0920 to read as follows:
    § 165.T05-0920 Safety Zone, Cape Fear River, Wilmington, NC.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters of the Cape Fear River, from surface to bottom, within 100 yards of:

    (1) Any salvage vessel exhibiting visual signals for vessels restricted in ability to maneuver in accordance with 33 CFR 83.27(b); and

    (2) Any diving vessel exhibiting visual signals for vessels engaged in diving operations in accordance with 33 CFR 83.27(e).

    (b) Definitions. As used in this section—

    Captain of the Port means the Commander, Sector North Carolina.

    Designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer designated by the Captain of the Port North Carolina (COTP) for the enforcement of the safety zone.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or designated representative.

    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or designated representative via VHF-FM channel 16 or telephone at 910-362-4015 and comply with all lawful orders or directions given.

    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.

    (e) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced any time salvage vessels are exhibiting visual signals for vessels restricted in ability to maneuver in accordance with 33 CFR 83.27(b) or any time diving vessels are exhibiting visual signals for vessels engaged in diving operations in accordance with 33 CFR 83.27(e). The exact timeframe that will be required to complete diving and salvage operations is unknown, but the Coast Guard estimates that it may take 21 days from beginning of salvage operations until the channel is returned to pre-Hurricane Florence conditions.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Bion B. Stewart, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port North Carolina.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21276 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0563] RIN 1625-AA11 Regulated Navigation Area; Straits of Mackinac AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) for certain waters of the Straits of Mackinac. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life and protection of property on these navigable waters near Mackinaw City, MI. This rule prohibits persons and vessels from anchoring or loitering within the RNA unless authorized by the Captain of the Port of Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2018-0563 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Jason Radcliffe, Ninth District Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 216-902-6060, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations RNA Regulated Navigation Area COTP Captain of the Port DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking RNA Regulated Navigation Area § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The northwest part of Lake Huron forms the approach to, and the east part of the, Straits of Mackinac. At the extreme northwest end, the lake narrows abruptly to a width of 4 miles. Spanning this divide is the Mackinac Bridge. Two main shipping lanes lead north and south of Bois Blanc Island and pass under the bridge. Numerous shoals and several islands obstruct the Straits Area. Located approximately a mile west of the Mackinac Bridge are submerged electrical cables and the Enbridge Line 5 Pipeline. Posted on NOAAs navigation charts are cautionary notes advising mariners of the cable and pipeline area. There is no prohibition nor is there an enforcement mechanism to discourage anchoring in this area. The Captain of the Port (COTP) of Sault Sainte Marie has determined that the high volume of vessel transits and the potential for damage to submerged infrastructure warrants the creation of a regulatory measure to specifically outline an area of regulated navigation that establishes transit and communication expectations through the Straits.

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to better enhance the safety of vessels and protection of sub-surface cables and pipelines within the navigable waters of the Straits of Mackinac. The Coast Guard publishes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    On the behalf of COTP Sector Sault Sainte Marie, the Ninth Coast Guard District is creating a Regulated Navigation Area that mandates transiting vessels make a direct passage with no anchoring or loitering, unless expressly granted permission from the COTP or designated representative. Vessels that are required to comply with this RNA include vessels of 40 meters or more in length, towing vessels of 20 meters or more in length while engaged in towing another vessel, vessels certificated to carry 50 or more passengers for hire, when engaged in trade, or any dredge or floating plant.

    Within the RNA, the District Commander or COTP may establish temporary traffic rules that include but are not limited to channel obstructions, winter navigation, unusual weather conditions, or unusual water levels. This rule will ensure transiting mariners are fully aware of existing and emergent hazards to navigation on or below the navigable waterways and provide the Coast Guard with greater situational awareness and oversight. The regulatory text appears at the end of this document.

    IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    In total, we received 21 comments on the proposed regulated navigation area (RNA) for the Straits of Mackinac published on August 2, 2018 (83 FR 37780). In consideration of the comments received, we have amended the regulatory text in this final rule.

    We received seven comments expressing support for proceeding with the rulemaking.

    One comment did not address the proposed rule, nor offer any support for or criticism against the rulemaking.

    One commenter suggested that pipelines and cables could be protected with a smaller than proposed RNA. The Coast Guard believes that requiring ships to seek permission from the COTP to anchor in any part of the regulated area, coupled with the requirement to notify the COTP 15 minutes prior to getting underway, will reduce the likelihood of an accidental anchor deployment through areas with pipes and cables below.

    Another commenter expressed disapproval of the proposed rule, saying it would not prevent accidents in the future. The comment did not offer any suggestions for how to improve the regulations. For the same reasons given above, the Coast Guard believes that there will be fewer accidental anchor deployments causing damage to the pipes and cables below the surface.

    One commenter suggested that we should remove the pipelines. The purpose of this RNA, however, is to protect all of the submerged pipes and cables in the Straits of Mackinac and to prevent accidental anchor deployment through them.

    One comment from NOAA's charting team requested clarification of the horizontal datum type used. In this final rule, we include the horizontal datum type, NAD 83, in the regulatory text after the latitude coordinates.

    We received four comments from commercial vessel owners and operators concerned that the rulemaking would prohibit large vessels from anchoring to safely endure foul weather. Other commenters expressed similar concern on having to anchor within the RNA, away from submerged cables and pipelines, in adverse weather with little or no notice. To address these safety concerns, we have added clarification that in emergency cases, regulated vessels may anchor in the RNA without one hour notice to the COTP, but they must give notice of anchoring as soon as practical. Nothing in this rule prohibits vessel masters from safely navigating their vessels and/or anchoring when necessary while in extremis and/or to preserve safety of life at sea. Communicating the need and requesting permission to anchor with an hour's notice, or as soon as practicable, gives the COTP the situational awareness and ability to respond to mariner needs.

    Six comments were received from sight-seeing, ferry, and tourism related waterway users concerned with this rule prohibiting their ability to linger, loiter, stop, etc. to observe specific areas of interest. The Coast Guard does not intend to overly burden businesses engaged in these activities. Therefore, we amended this final rule's definition of loiter to explicitly exclude brief stops for sightseeing, ferrying and tourism. Thus, operations that require stopping by passenger ships for sightseeing, ferrying, and tourism purposes do not require expressed permission from the COTP under this rule because we do not think these brief stops reduce the safety goals of this RNA. However, this rule requires that vessels engaged in sightseeing, ferrying, and tourism contact the COTP within one hour of their intent to anchor within the RNA.

    The regulatory text in this final rule differs from the NPRM in that we added the ability for operators of vessels engaged in activities, such as tourism, ferrying, or sightseeing, to request a waiver from the COTP to anchor within the RNA, but not within charted submerged cables and/or pipelines areas. The sightseeing, ferry, and tourism waivers are intended for frequent vessel operations and configurations that are reasonably determined by the COTP to not pose a threat to sensitive submerged infrastructure.

    Lastly, this rule differs from the NPRM in that we added language to § 165.944(c)(4) that states even when one (1) hour notice is given to the COTP, anchoring in the charted submerged cable and pipeline areas is prohibited. This additional language is necessary to achieve our goal of promoting safe transit through the RNA now that we have added waivers and permission to anchor with little to no notice in emergencies.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that no part of this rulemaking and its stipulations will require any additional equipment purchases or create an undue burden to marine operations. This rule will increase communication and situational awareness of the specified area.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. The majority of this rule applies to vessels typically larger than those operated by small entities. The size and operational applicability of this rule is found at the end of this document.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves creating a permanent Regulated Navigation Area detailing how mariners shall transit through the Straits of Mackinac. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

    PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add § 165.944 to read as follows:
    § 165.944 Regulated Navigation Area; Straits of Mackinac.

    (a) Location. All navigable waters of the Straits of Mackinac bounded by longitudes 084°20′ W and 085°10′ W and latitudes 045°39′ N and 045°54′ N (NAD 83), including Grays Reef Passage, the South Channel between Bois Blanc Island and Cheboygan, MI, and the waters between Mackinac Island and St. Ignace, MI.

    (b) Applicability. Unless otherwise stated, the provisions of this regulated navigation area (RNA) apply to the following vessels:

    (1) Vessels of 40 meters (approx. 131 feet) or more in length, while navigating;

    (2) Towing vessels of 20 meters (approx. 65 feet) or more in length, while engaged in towing another vessel astern, alongside or by pushing ahead; or

    (3) Vessels certificated to carry 50 or more passengers for hire, when engaged in trade; or

    (4) Each dredge or floating plant.

    (c) Regulations. The general regulations contained in §§ 165.10, 165.11, and 165.13 apply within this RNA.

    (1) Nothing in this regulation relieves any vessel, owner, operator, charterer, master, or person directing the movement of a vessel, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with this part or any other applicable law or regulation (i.e. the International Regulations for Prevention of Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS) or the Inland Navigation Rules) or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

    (2) Vessels transiting through the RNA must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP, or a designated representative. The “designated representative” of the COTP is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who is designated by the COTP to act on their behalf. The designated representative may be on a Coast Guard vessel; or other designated craft; or on shore and communicating via VHF-16 or telephone, 906-635-3319.

    (3) Vessels transiting through the RNA must make a direct passage. No vessel may anchor or loiter within the RNA at any time without the expressed permission of the COTP or a designated representative.

    (4) Vessels are prohibited from anchoring in any charted submerged cable and/or pipeline areas; except when expressly permitted by the COTP. Vessels desiring to anchor within the confines of the RNA, but outside a charted submerged cable and/or pipeline area, must contact the COTP or a designated representative one (1) hour in advance of anchoring via VHF-16 or telephone 906-635-3319. The person directing the movement of the vessel desiring to anchor shall provide the time, purpose and location for the proposed anchoring. Vessels who receive permission to anchor, shall notify the COTP or a designated representative no less than 15 minutes prior to getting underway via VHF-16 or telephone 906-635-3319.

    (5) In an emergency, any vessel may deviate from this regulation to the extent necessary to avoid endangering the safety of persons, the environment, and/or property. If deviation from the regulation is necessary, the master or his designee shall inform the Coast Guard as soon as it is practicable to do so.

    (6) The owner, operator, charterer, master or person directing the movement of a vessel desiring to anchor within the prescribed RNA for the purposes of work, dredging, or survey must receive permission from the COTP or a designated representative a minimum of 72 hours in advance of the desired activity. Vessels engaged in activities, such as tourism, ferrying, or sightseeing, which require anchoring, within the RNA boundaries, but not within charted submerged cables and/or pipelines areas, may request a waiver from the COTP.

    (7) In the RNA, the District Commander or COTP may establish temporary traffic rules for reasons that include but are not limited to channel obstructions, winter navigation, unusual weather conditions, or unusual water levels.

    (8) There may be times that the Ninth District Commander or the COTP finds it necessary to close the RNA to vessel traffic. During times of limited closure, persons and vessels may request permission to enter the RNA by contacting the COTP or a designated representative via VHF-16 or telephone 906-635-3319.

    (d) Definitions. As used in this RNA:

    (1) Captain of the Port means the United States Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) of Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan.

    (2) Straits of Mackinac means the navigable waters of the Great Lakes connecting Lake Huron to Lake Michigan passing between the upper and lower peninsulas of Michigan.

    (3) Loiter means to linger aimlessly in or about a place making purposeless stops in the course of a trip, journey, or errand. Loitering does not include brief stops for sight-seeing, ferry, or tourism purposes.

    (e) Notification. The Coast Guard will rely on the methods described in § 165.7 to notify the public of the time and duration of any closure of the RNA. Reports of violations of this RNA should go to COTP Sault Sainte Marie at 906-635-3319 or on VHF-Channel 16.

    (f) Waiver. For any vessel, the COTP or a designated representative may waive any of the requirements of this section, upon finding that circumstances are such that application of this section is unnecessary or impractical for the purposes of safety or environmental safety.

    Dated: September 24, 2018. J.M. Nunan, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21132 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 39 CFR Part 3050 [Docket No. RM2018-2; Order No. 4836] Periodic Reporting Requirements AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission adopts final rules revising periodic reporting requirements codified in our regulations. The final rules amend several existing sections of our regulations, and add several subsections to our regulations.

    DATES:

    Effective: October 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory History 83 FR 33879 (Jul. 18, 2018) 83 FR 1320 (Jan. 11, 2018) Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Background III. Comments IV. Commission Analysis V. Changes to the Proposed Rules VI. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    In this Order, the Commission adopts final rules revising periodic reporting requirements codified in 39 CFR part 3050. The final rules adopted by this Order amend existing rules by adjusting the deadlines of certain quarterly and monthly reports, modifying the format of the Monthly Summary Financial Report, and adding or removing certain reporting requirements. The final rules amend several existing sections of 39 CFR part 3050, and add several subsections to § 3050.21.

    II. Background

    On December 27, 2017, the Postal Service requested that the Commission initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider revisions to the periodic reporting requirements codified in 39 CFR part 3050.1 On January 5, 2018, the Commission established this docket and invited comments and reply comments regarding the Postal Service's proposed revisions.2 The Commission received comments from the Public Representative 3 and the United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS).4 The Commission received reply comments from the Postal Service 5 and the Parcel Shippers Association (PSA).6

    1 United States Postal Service Petition for Rulemaking on Periodic Reporting, December 27, 2017 (Petition).

    2 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise Periodic Reporting Requirements, January 5, 2018 (Order No. 4374). The Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise Periodic Reporting Requirements was published in the Federal Register on January 11, 2018. See 83 FR 1320 (January 11, 2018).

    3 Public Representative Comments on Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise Periodic Reporting Requirements, March 7, 2018 (March 7 PR Comments).

    4 Comments of United Parcel Service, Inc. on Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise Periodic Reporting Requirements, March 7, 2018 (March 7 UPS Comments).

    5 Reply Comments of the United States Postal Service, April 6, 2018 (Postal Service Reply Comments).

    6 Reply Comments of the Parcel Shippers Association (PSA), April 6, 2018.

    The Postal Service's petition contained three requests. First, the Postal Service requested that the Commission adjust deadlines for the quarterly Revenue, Pieces, and Weight (RPW) report; the Quarterly Statistics Report (QSR); the quarterly Billing Determinants report; and the monthly National Consolidated Trial Balance and Revenue and Expense Summary (Trial Balance) report to align the deadlines with other financial reporting deadlines. Petition at 1. The Postal Service stated that aligning the deadlines would be more effective, as the current rules require the reports to be submitted before key information is available. Id. at 3-5.

    Second, the Postal Service requested that the Commission change the format of the Monthly Summary Financial Report. Id. at 6. The Postal Service sought to revise § 3050.28(b)(1), Table 1 and Table 2. For Table 1, the Postal Service requested a change of the term “Operating Revenue” to “Revenue,” and to remove a breakdown of types of operating revenue. Id. at 6-8. For Table 2, the Postal Service requested to update the product name for USPS Marketing Mail, as the previous format used the old product name of Standard Mail. Id. at 8.

    Third, the Postal Service requested that the Commission remove any requirements deemed unnecessary to the Commission's evaluation of compliance with title 39. Id. at 9-10.

    The Commission considered the comments it received in response to Order No. 4706 and reviewed its periodic reporting rules to determine if updates were warranted, and as a result proposed revisions to the rules.7 The revisions incorporated the Postal Service's proposal to adjust the filing date for the RPW, QSR, Billing Determinants, and Trial Balance reports.8

    7 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise the Periodic Reporting Requirements, July 12, 2018 (Order No. 4706). The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise the Periodic Reporting Requirements was published in the Federal Register on July 18, 2018. See 83 FR 33879 (July 18, 2018).

    8See Order No. 4706 at 8-10, part IV.B, proposed sections 3050.25(c)-(e), 3050.28(c).

    The proposed rules also changed the format of the Monthly Summary Financial Report. In § 3050.28(b)(1), Table 1, the existing input for “Operating Revenue” remains, but component inputs “Mail and Services Revenue” and “Government Appropriations” were removed. A new heading, “Revenue,” contains an input for “Operating Revenue,” a new input for “Other Revenue,” and an input for their combined “Total Revenue.”  9 Proposed changes to Table 2 included a replacement of the current input “Standard Mail” to “USPS Marketing Mail,” and the replacement of the “Total All Mail” input and its components with distinct inputs for “Total Volume” and “Total Operating Revenue.” 10

    9Id. at 10-11, part IV.C. Although Order No. 4706 explained this change, the proposed Table 1 inadvertently failed to reflect the change, omitting the new “Total Revenue” input.

    10Id. at 12, proposed section 3050.28(b)(1), Table 2.

    In Order No. 4706, the Commission also explained several modifications to the existing rules that the Commission deemed necessary to increase the efficiency and decrease the administrative burden, for both the Postal Service and the Commission, of the Annual Compliance Determination (ACD) process. Id. at 13. The proposed rules added a requirement that the Postal Service file documentation with its Annual Compliance Report (ACR) showing that non-compensatory market dominant negotiated service agreements (NSAs) improve the Postal Service's net financial position or enhance the performance of mail preparation, processing, transportation, or other functions.11

    11Id. at 13-14, proposed § 3050.21(f)(6).

    Proposed § 3050.21(j) replaced the existing section requiring the Postal Service to provide any information it believes will assist the Commission in evaluating compliance with title 39. The Commission's proposed rules renumbered that requirement as § 3050.21(n), and revised § 3050.21(j) to require that the Postal Service provide a distribution breakdown of mail fees for market dominant and competitive products.12

    12Id. at 14, proposed § 3050.21(j).

    Proposed § 3050.21(k) added a requirement that the Postal Service provide in its annual filing any third-party service performance results where a financial penalty or bonus is applied, and to provide the amount of any forfeited revenue.13

    13Id. at 15, proposed § 3050.21(k).

    Proposed § 3050.21(l) added a requirement that the Postal Service provide all total workhour data and data sources, showing workhour measurements by Labor Distribution Code.14

    14Id. at 15-16, proposed § 3050.21(l).

    In proposed § 3050.21(m), the Commission added a requirement that the Postal Service provide with its ACR Inbound Letter Post 15 revenue, volume, attributable cost, and contribution data aggregated by Universal Postal Union (UPU) country group and by shape for the preceding five fiscal years.16

    15 “Inbound Letter Post” as defined in the Mail Classification Schedule (MCS) section 1130.

    16Id. at 16-18, proposed § 3050.21(m).

    The Commission's proposed rules also removed a requirement from § 3050.60. Id. at 19. The current § 3050.60(c) requires the Postal Service to provide hard and electronic copies of any publications or handbooks, data collection forms, and training handbooks whenever they are changed. The Commission, finding that providing a hard-copy form might create unnecessary administrative effort, proposed to remove the requirement of providing those publications in hard-copy form.17

    17Id. at 19, proposed § 3050.60(c).

    In Order No. 4706, the Commission invited comments on the proposal from interested parties. Id.

    III. Comments

    In response to Order No. 4706, the Commission received comments from the Postal Service,18 UPS,19 the Public Representative,20 the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,21 and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM).22

    18 United States Postal Service Comments Regarding Order No. 4706, August 17, 2018 (Postal Service Comments).

    19 Comments of United Parcel Service, Inc. on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise the Periodic Reporting Requirements, August 17, 2018 (August 17 UPS Comments).

    20 Public Representative Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Revise Periodic Reporting Requirements, August 17, 2018 (August 17 PR Comments).

    21 Comments of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, August 17, 2018 (Chamber of Commerce Comments).

    22 Comments of National Association of Manufacturers, August 17, 2018 (NAM Comments).

    Postal Service Comments. The Postal Service supports the proposed rules regarding deadlines for periodic reports, the format of the Monthly Summary Financial Report, and the removal of the requirement that the Postal Service produce hard copies of updated publications or handbooks.23

    23 Postal Service Comments at 3-4. The Postal Service identifies two minor issues with proposed § 3050.28(b)(1), Table 1. In Order No. 4706, the Commission indicated it would include an input for “Total Revenue” but the input is not in the proposed Table 1. Also, existing input “Net Operating Income” appears as “New Operating Income” in the proposed Table 1. The Postal Service recommends correcting Table 1 consistent with the explanation in Order No. 4706. Id. at 4.

    The Postal Service agrees in theory that including in the initial ACR filing certain information it routinely provides in response to information requests would improve efficiency. Id. at 4. The Postal Service notes that for information regarding non-compensatory bilateral agreements, international product third-party service performance, and total workhour and related data by Labor Distribution Code, the Postal Service has provided the reports as additional components of existing ACR folders. Id. at 4-5. However, for fee distribution information required by proposed § 3050.21(j), the Postal Service notes that in Docket Nos. ACR2015, ACR2016, and ACR2017, the format of the information varied. Id. at 5. The Postal Service states that the format varied due to foreseeable changes in circumstances, including new products, new product names, price adjustments, and transfers. Id. The Postal Service suggests that if the Commission desires to specify the format for fee distribution report each year, the existing Chairman's Information Request procedure would be most appropriate. Id. at 6. Alternatively, the Postal Service suggests that under the proposed rule, it could make a good-faith effort to make appropriate adjustments to the report's format. Id.

    The Postal Service states that the Commission should exclude proposed § 3050.21(m), requiring Inbound Letter Post revenue, volume, attributable cost, and contribution data by UPU country group and by shape. Id. at 7. The Postal Service contends that the rule seeks information that is “unrelated to the Commission's performance of its annual compliance determination, would encourage an incomplete and misleading analysis of the financial performance of [inbound letter post,24 ] and create a risk of significant harm from disclosure of commercially sensitive data.” Id.

    24 The Postal Service appears to distinguish the product, Inbound Letter Post, from a group of related products comprising “inbound letter post.” For clarity, this Order capitalizes the name of the product, and does not capitalize when referring to the Postal Service's group of related products.

    The Postal Service states that there is no justification for separation of information by UPU country group or by shape for ACR purposes. Id. The Postal Service states that the Commission's observations in previous ACR dockets on Inbound Letter Post are “inapplicable to the current and future financial performance of Inbound Letter Post,” and do not justify the proposed reporting requirements. Id. at 8. The Postal Service states that the proposed rule's 5-year reporting period is inappropriate because of the year-to-year changes in UPU country groups, and the limited availability of shape-based data. Id. at 9.

    The Postal Service also argues that the information sought will not present all revenue sources for inbound letter post. Id. The Postal Service states that it receives inbound letter post revenue from a number of other sources, including NSAs, supplemental UPU remuneration for signature confirmation and tracking, PRIME multilateral agreements, negotiated rates under bilateral agreements, air conveyance dues, and base terminal dues. Id. at 9-10. The Postal Service argues that proposed § 3050.21(m) relies only on the MCS section 1130 Inbound Letter Post revenue from base terminal dues and air conveyance dues, without taking into account these other sources of revenue for inbound letter post. Id. at 10.

    The Postal Service suggests revising proposed § 3050.21(m) to include inbound revenue and costs for other MCS products including the Inbound Registered Mail, the PRIME Exprés Service Agreement, the PRIME Tracked Service Agreement, the Inbound Market Dominant Multi-Service Agreements with Foreign Postal Operators 1, and the PRIME Registered Service Agreement. Id. at 10-11.

    Finally, the Postal Service suggests that producing the Inbound Letter Post information would put sensitive non-public material at risk. Id. at 11-12.

    UPS Comments. UPS supports the proposed modifications to reporting deadlines, noting that the deadlines are reasonable and should relieve the reporting burden on the Postal Service, ultimately allowing it to provide better data. August 17 UPS Comments at 2.

    Regarding changes to the Monthly Summary Financial Report, UPS urges the Commission to require the Postal Service to produce two versions of the affected tables for the next 12 months (alternatively 6 months if 12 months were found burdensome). Id. at 4. UPS requests that the Commission confirm that the only permitted departures from the current de facto reporting format of Table 2 are those described in Order No. 4607. Id. at 5. UPS states that any future changes to the reporting format should include a reproduction of past monthly reports using new definitions, or the production of both new and old versions of the reports for a period. Id.

    UPS supports all of the additional requirements in the proposed rules. Id. at 5-8. UPS asks the Commission to clarify that the Postal Service should report Inbound Letter Post information according to proposed § 3050.21(m) in a public filing or library reference. Id. at 8. UPS renews its request for the Commission to consider requiring segment-level reporting for competitive products in order to promote transparency. Id.

    Public Representative Comments. The Public Representative supports the proposed changes to reporting deadlines, and does not object to changes to the format of the Monthly Summary Financial Report.25 She notes, as the Postal Service does, that the input for “Total Revenue” mentioned in Order No. 4706 is not in the proposed regulatory text. August 17 PR Comments at 4. She also notes that the proposed regulatory text replaces the input “Other Expenses” with “Other Services” without explanation. Id.

    25 August 17 PR Comments at 1-2; March 7 PR Comments at 5, 6 (incorporating prior comments).

    Regarding proposed § 3050.21(f)(6), and (j) through (m), the Public Representative supports the Commission's efforts to improve and streamline ACR dockets by requiring certain reports be included in an initial filing. See id. at 1. However, she suggests that the Commission can improve the proposed rules by using clearer, consistent, and precise terminology. Id. She provides line-by-line revisions with suggested terminology and minor reorganization. Id. at 5-6; Attachment A.

    The Public Representative proposes that because both proposed § 3050.21(j) and (k) apply to “all market dominant and competitive products,” both requirements are better nested as subparagraphs, below a paragraph stating that both requirements apply to all market dominant and competitive products. Id. at 2-3 (emphasis in original). She notes, for example, that the proposed rules unnecessarily include the phrase “including all negotiated service agreements” for proposed paragraph (k) of this section, but not for proposed paragraph (j) of this section, despite both requirements being applicable to NSAs. Id. at 2.

    The Public Representative also recommends clarifying proposed § 3050.21(m), which requires Inbound Letter Post data for “the preceding five fiscal years.” Id. at 3. She notes that, as written, the rule appears to require data for the five years preceding the year of the ACR filing, without including the year of the filing. Id. at 3-4 (emphasis added). She also states that the proposed rule was unclear as to whether the rule requires the Postal Service to provide data for each of the five years, or the five years in aggregate. Id. at 4. Therefore, she suggests changing the language of the rule to require data “for the fiscal year subject to review and each of the preceding four fiscal years.” Id. at 4, 6.

    The Public Representative includes a list of line-by-line revisions to the proposed rules, and a redlined version of the regulatory text. Id. at 5-6; Attachment A.

    U.S. Chamber of Commerce Comments. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports requiring the reporting of Inbound Letter Post data. The Chamber of Commerce suggests that the Postal Service should provide public data “so long as delivery rates for inbound letter post are established by intergovernmental agreement and not equally available to domestic mailers and private international carriers.” Chamber of Commerce Comments.

    National Association of Manufacturers Comments. NAM supports requiring data on Inbound Letter Post, stating that such data would “allow the Commission to draw meaningful inferences from trends in global postal traffic and to spot the nature and severity of problems with regard to net-losses incurred by the [Postal Service].” NAM Comments at 1. NAM suggests that the UPU terminal dues system is “prime for abuse.” Id. NAM states that there is a compelling public interest in requiring the data and that the burden on the Postal Service is “non-existent.” Id. NAM suggests that the Commission require the Postal Service to “disclose more granular and useful data over time.” Id. at 1-2.

    IV. Commission Analysis A. Deadlines for Certain Periodic Reports

    No commenter objects to the proposed deadlines for the filing of quarterly RPW, QSR, and Billing Determinants reports. Neither does any commenter object to the proposed deadlines for the Monthly Summary Financial Report or the Trial Balance.

    Accordingly, the Commission makes no changes to the deadlines set forth at proposed §§ 3050.25(c)-(e), and 3050.28(b), (c). The Commission adopts those rules as set forth in Order No. 4706.

    B. Format of Monthly Summary Financial Report

    The proposed revisions to the Monthly Summary Financial Report utilize a definition of “operating revenue” that is consistent with the definition used for Form 10-K reporting.26

    26 United States Postal Service, 2017 Report on Form 10-K, November 14, 2017, at 19.

    While no commenter objects to the format changes as proposed, UPS requests that the Commission require the Postal Service to either: (1) Reproduce figures in past monthly reports using the new proposed definitions; or (2) produce monthly reports using both the old and new versions of the affected tables. August 17 UPS Comments at 3-4. UPS states that without a device enabling direct comparison of reports completed under the old format to reports completed under the new format, “it will be difficult for the Commission and interested parties to compare certain data across different time periods.” Id. at 4. UPS argues that there is “negligible burden on the Postal Service” in producing the comparable data, and that in the interest of transparency the Commission should require its production for 12 months. Id. Alternatively, to the extent that the Commission finds such production to be too burdensome, UPS suggests that the Commission require production of both versions for only six months. Id.

    In its reply comments, the Postal Service avers that requiring parallel reporting of the Monthly Summary Financial Report, “would be unwarranted given the modest nature of the proposed changes.” Postal Service Reply Comments at 5. The Postal Service also noted that the Public Representative identified alternative sources of the data in the removed sub-inputs.27 UPS states that although “Government Appropriation” data are available, it is unclear whether the corresponding “Mail and Service Revenue” data are available from other sources. August 17 UPS Comments at 4.

    27See id. at 1-4; March 7 PR Comments at 6-7.

    The Commission finds that the revised format, as proposed, will improve the quality, accuracy, and completeness of the Postal Service data pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3652(e)(2). While the Commission recognizes the minimal burden on the Postal Service in producing duplicate tables under the current format and under the new format, it also finds that the proposal represents only a modest format change, and that the itemized data remain available. The “Government Appropriations” data, which refers to amounts incurred in providing free and reduced rate mail, are available in the Monthly Trial Balance. The former “Mail Services Revenue” line input represents the remainder of the new line input “Operating Revenue” on Table 1 and “Total Operating Revenue” on Table 2, and is now included in “Operating Revenue” combined with the “Government Appropriations” amount. The Commission declines to order that the Postal Service provide the Tables of the Monthly Summary Financial Report in both formats as the change itself is minor, and the data are available by other means.

    Both the Postal Service and the Public Representative note that the Commission's proposed rules do not precisely match the explanations set forth in Order No. 4706. Postal Service Comments at 3-4; August 17 PR Comments at 4-5. Both the Postal Service and Public Representative note the omission of the line input for “Total Revenue” in proposed § 3050.28(b)(1), Table 1. Id.; August 17 PR Comments at 4-6.

    The Public Representative also notes that the proposed Table 1 also replaces the existing line input for “Other Expenses” with “Other Services.” August 17 PR Comments at 4. She also notes a duplicative heading row in proposed Table 1, and an underlined heading, “Total Volume” in proposed Table 2. Id. at 6.

    The Postal Service notes that the line input for “Net Operating Income” in existing Table 1 appears to have changed to “New Operating Income.” Postal Service Comments at 4. The Postal Service suggests that the Commission correct the change. Id.

    The Commission acknowledges the errors identified by the Postal Service and the Public Representative, and makes appropriate corrections in the final rules.

    C. Additional Requirements—Proposed § 3050.21(f)(6), (j)-(m) 1. Public Representative's Clarification Recommendations

    The Public Representative identifies that proposed § 3050.21(j) and (k) both apply to all market dominant products. August 17 PR Comments at 2-3. She proposes revising paragraph (j) of this section to include both requirements set forth in proposed paragraphs (j) and (k) of this section, with the requirements—the distribution breakdown of fee revenues and third-party performance results and forfeited revenue—as subparagraphs (1) and (2). Id.

    The Public Representative suggests revising the requirement in proposed § 3050.21(j) of “a distribution breakdown of mail fees” with “a distribution breakdown of fee revenues” stating that her suggestion is more precise and inclusive of non-mail products. Id. at 3.

    The Public Representative suggests a number of other changes, including those reflecting her proposed renumbering. Id. at 5-6. She suggests hyphenating the word “non-compensatory” in paragraph (f)(6) of this section. Id. at 5. She suggests revising the 5-year reporting requirement in paragraph (m) of this section, replacing “the preceding five fiscal years” with “for the fiscal year subject to review and each of the preceding four fiscal years.” Id. at 6.

    The Commission acknowledges that the Public Representative's suggested revisions are a more concise and effective alternative to achieving the intent of the proposed rules. The Commission finds that adopting the minor changes creates more precise requirements and will improve the quality, accuracy, and completeness of the Postal Service's reporting. Accordingly, the Commission adopts the Public Representative's suggested reorganization and rewording in its final rules.

    2. Comments Regarding Proposed § 3050.21(m)

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, NAM, and UPS, each support proposed § 3050.21(m), requiring the Postal Service to provide Inbound Letter Post revenue, volume, attributable cost, and contribution data by UPU country group and shape.28 Those commenters note the importance of transparency and public access to Inbound Letter Post data, and identify particular public interest in the Inbound Letter Post product.

    28 Chamber of Commerce Comments; NAM Comments at 1-2; August 17 UPS Comments at 8.

    The Postal Service opposes the proposed reporting requirement, arguing that information sought: (1) Is unrelated to the Commission's performance of its annual compliance determination; (2) would encourage incomplete and misleading analysis of Inbound Letter Post performance; and (3) would create a risk of harm from disclosure of commercially sensitive data of third parties. Postal Service Comments at 7. For the reasons set forth below, the Commission declines to make any additional modifications to proposed § 3050.21(m).

    a. The Requirement Is Related to the Commission's ACD

    The Postal Service suggests that the Commission's conclusions on the Inbound Letter Post product are “inapplicable to the current and future performance” of the product. Id. at 8. The Postal Service also states that those conclusions provide no justification for the disaggregation of Inbound Letter Post data by UPU country group and shape. Id.

    As noted in Order No. 4706, it is not uncommon for the Commission to seek enhanced information about products of particular concern. For example, in the FY 2017 ACD report, the Commission chose to analyze Periodicals volume, revenue, attributable cost, and contribution, as well as unit revenue, unit attributable cost, and unit contribution for fiscal years 2007 through 2017.29 The Commission, noting a year-after-year trend for the Periodicals class, requested this enhanced disaggregated data in order to address ongoing issues with the class. The past performance of the Periodicals class, while not directly at issue in the ACD, showed a trend of insufficient Periodicals revenues to cover attributable costs.

    29 Order No. 4706 at 17; Docket No. ACR2017, Annual Compliance Determination Report, Fiscal Year 2017, March 29, 2018, at 44-45 (FY 2017 ACD).

    When the Commission determines the noncompliance of a product, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3653(c), it must order that the Postal Service “take such action as the Commission considers appropriate in order to achieve compliance.” 39 U.S.C. 3662(c). Conducting a trend analysis, as done for the Periodicals class during the FY 2017 annual compliance review, best allows the Commission to determine the appropriate remedial actions. Past performance of the product, particularly where it shows a trend of continued failure to cover its attributable costs, is relevant when determining the appropriate corrective action in an ACD.

    As noted in Order No. 4706, there is a well-documented history of concern about Inbound Letter Post's ongoing negative contribution, both in Commission orders and in stakeholder comments.30 Additionally, a recent Presidential Memorandum directed the executive branch to seek reforms within the UPU's terminal dues system that provides: (1) Fair and nondiscriminatory terminal dues that promote unrestricted and undistorted competition; (2) terminal dues that cover the costs of delivering Inbound Letter Post mailpieces; (3) and terminal dues that avoid favoring foreign mailers over domestic mailers or favoring postal operators over private sector entities.31 This Presidential Memorandum highlights the Administration's focus on the Inbound Letter Post product. Accordingly, the Commission finds that providing enhanced data for the purposes of conducting a trend analysis across a period of years is appropriate, particularly where the prices for a product or products have routinely been non-compensatory.

    30 Order No. 4706 at 18 n.35. See Docket No. IM2016-1, Congressional Letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Postmaster General Megan Brennan, November 8, 2017; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of James Smaldone, Founder & CEO, Mighty Mug, Inc., January 25, 2018, at 1-2; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of National Association of Manufacturers on Order No. 4377, January 24, 2018, at 2; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of United Parcel Service, Inc. in Response to Notice of Preliminary Determination to Unseal the Material Filed in Response to Chairman's Information Request No. 1, Question 1, January 24, 2018, at 2-3; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of the Honorable Kenny Marchant on Determination to Unseal the Material Filed in Response to Chairman's Information Request No. 1, Question 1, January 25, 2018, at 1-2; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of U.S. Chamber of Commerce, January 25, 2018, at 1-2; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of SBE Council Related to Inbound Letter Post, February 20, 2018, at 1-2; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of United Parcel Service, Inc. in Response to Notice of Preliminary Determination to Unseal the Postal Service's Response to Chairman's Information Request No. 15, February 23, 2018, at 3-4; Docket No. ACR2017, Reply Comments of United Parcel Service, Inc. on United States Postal Service Motion for Reconsideration of Order No. 4551, April 13, 2018, at 4; Docket No. ACR2017, Comments of U.S. Chamber of Commerce, April 13, 2018, at 1; Docket No. IM2018-1, Comments Received from U.S. Representatives Kenny Marchant and Ralph Abraham, July 3, 2018, at 1; Docket No. IM2018-1, Comment Received from U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D., July 3, 2018, at 1.

    31See Presidential Memorandum for the Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Homeland Security, Postmaster General, and Chairman of the Postal Regulatory Commission, August 23, 2018, available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-memorandum-secretary-state-secretary-treasury-secretary-homeland-security-postmaster-general-chairman-postal-regulatory-commission/.

    The Postal Service notes that a new terminal dues system that charges higher prices for bulky letters and small packets than for letters and flats may improve the Inbound Letter Post product's financial performance. Postal Service Comments at 8. The Postal Service avers that the past performance of Inbound Letter Post under the former terminal dues rate structure is not relevant to the Commission ACD dockets under a new rate structure. Id. at 7-8.

    The revenue, volume, attributable cost, and contribution data—even for past years under a different terminal dues rate structure—are of significant value in the Commission's ACD. The Commission's analysis of these data assists in identifying the cause or causes of the product's negative contribution. If for example, under the new rate structure, the product continues to display similar trends, the Commission might identify problems with the product unrelated to price structure. Price structure is not singularly determinative of a product's financial performance. Other factors might contribute to the product's performance. For example, in its trend analysis on the Periodicals class, the Commission identified declining productivity of mail processing operations as a reason for the negative trend. See FY 2017 ACD at 50. The data required by proposed § 3050.21(m) will assist the Commission's efforts to identify the challenges facing the product, and to make appropriate recommendations.

    The new rate structure has separate rates for letters/flats and bulky letters/small packets, which vary by UPU country group.32 The Commission's ability to identify which rates account for what portion of the product's contribution is critical to assessing how to improve overall product cost coverage. To the extent that a new price structure does improve Inbound Letter Post performance, such improvement will be reflected in the data reporting, and more easily attributed to the changes in price structure, due to the fuller picture provided by the enhanced reporting.

    32See Universal Postal Union, Decisions of the 2016 Istanbul Conference, Universal Postal Convention, Final Protocol, Section VII, Article 29, October 6, 2016.

    Given the public interest and the Commission's recurring findings that Inbound Letter Post revenue fails to cover the product's costs, the Commission finds that it is necessary and appropriate to require reporting at this additional level of aggregation. The Postal Service's current reporting format does not disaggregate by shape and UPU country group so it is difficult to determine what particular aspect or aspects of the terminal dues system are responsible for most of the negative contribution. Providing this disaggregated information will aid the Commission in determining the appropriate remedial action to prescribe.

    Furthermore, the legislative history underlying the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) indicates that enhanced transparency was a key motivation in the enactment of the PAEA.33 The Commission, consistent with this goal, aims to be transparent in its issuance of regulatory decisions and encourages public participation in its dockets.34 In fact, the PAEA requires the Commission to consider whether the public has access to “timely, adequate information” when prescribing the content and form of the ACR. 39 U.S.C. 3652(e)(1)(A). The additional Inbound Letter Post data required under proposed § 3050.21(m) will not only improve the completeness of information available to the Commission for its determination, but will also enhance public participation by presenting more comprehensive and understandable data for a product of substantial public interest.

    33 Public Law 109-435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006). Both the committee report accompanying S. 2468, the Senate's 2004 postal reform bill, and the committee report accompanying H.R. 22, the House of Representatives' 2005 postal reform bill, noted that enhanced transparency and accountability were essential aspects of postal reform. S. Rep. No. 108-318 at 5 (2004), H.R. Rep. No. 109-66, pt. 1 at 43 (2005).

    34See Postal Regulatory Commission, Guiding Principles, Openness, available at: www.prc.gov/mission.

    The Postal Service also states that the proposed rule's 5-year reporting period is inappropriate because of the year-to-year changes in the composition of UPU country groups, and that data limitations may reduce the Postal Service's ability to produce shape-based data for previous years. Postal Service Comments at 9.

    The Commission acknowledges that changes to the composition of UPU country groups create year-to-year comparison challenges. However, the Commission has experience in analyzing changes within and among products. For example, the Commission has been able to account for previous changes to the composition of UPU country groups in previous ACDs.35 Thus, the Commission is prepared to address these challenges. To the extent that the Postal Service lacks a full 5-year accounting of shape-based data, the Commission notes that the Postal Service is able to request the exclusion or partial exclusion of that component of the reporting requirement until such time that shape-based data becomes available for an entire 5-year period. See 39 CFR 3055.3(a).

    35See Docket No. ACR2016, Annual Compliance Determination Report, Fiscal Year 2016, March 28, 2017, at 63-64.

    b. The Requirement Does Not Encourage Incomplete or Misleading Analysis of Inbound Letter Post Performance

    The Postal Service states that proposed § 3050.21(m), if implemented, will “encourage the use of data that support an incomplete and inaccurate evaluation of the financial performance of inbound letter post.” Postal Service Comments at 9. The Postal Service's concern is that because proposed § 3050.21(m) requires reporting on the Inbound Letter Post product 36 it will not reflect the financial performance of other products the Postal Service classifies as “inbound letter post.” 37 The Postal Service suggests that for an accurate assessment of the financial performance of “inbound letter post,” the Commission should consider volume and supplemental revenue derived from those other products. The Postal Service proposes an alternative reporting requirement for inbound revenues and costs for MCS sections 1130, 1510.2, and 1602. Postal Service Comments at 10-11. Notably, the Postal Service's proposal does not require that the Postal Service report the alternative data by UPU country group and shape. See id.

    36 MCS section 1130.

    37 The Postal Service identifies these products as MCS sections 1510.2.2 (International Ancillary Services, Inbound International Registered Mail), 1602.5 (Negotiated Service Agreements, International, Inbound Market Dominant Registered Service Agreement 1), 1602.4 (Negotiated Service Agreements, International, Inbound Market Dominant Exprés Service Agreement 1), 1602.6 (Negotiated Service Agreements, International, Inbound Market Dominant PRIME Tracked Service Agreement, 1602.3 (Negotiated Service Agreements, International, Inbound Market Dominant Multi-Service Agreements with Foreign Postal Operators 1), July 15, 2018. Postal Service Comments at 10-11.

    The Commission finds the Postal Service's concerns about misleading data unpersuasive. The Postal Service made a similar argument during the FY 2017 ACD proceeding.38 In Docket No. ACR2017, the Postal Service asserted that the analysis for the Inbound Letter Post product should include analysis of “the volume and revenue for supplemental UPU remuneration for signature confirmation and tracking on registered items as well as for bilateral market dominant NSAs and the PRIME multilateral market dominant NSAs.” FY 2017 ACD at 66. The Postal Service stated that the Public Representative's analysis of the Inbound Letter Post product was incomplete because it was limited to the volume and revenue for the Inbound Letter Post product. Id. In the FY 2017 ACD report, the Commission rejected the Postal Service's suggested analysis and stated that “[t]he Commission has consistently evaluated compliance at the product level because products, by definition, reflect distinct cost or market characteristics to which a rate or rates are applied.” Id. at 67.

    38See Docket No. ACR2017, Reply Comments of the United States Postal Service on Inbound Letter Post, February 27, 2018.

    In each ACD, the Commission reviews each product, including those identified by the Postal Service as “inbound letter post,” for cost coverage and compliance. For example, in FY 2017, the Commission found that “International Ancillary Services did not cover its attributable cost due to the failure of International Registered Mail to cover its attributable cost.” Id. at 71. The Commission also reviewed Market Dominant NSA products, finding that Inbound Market Dominant Multi-Service Agreements with Foreign Postal Operators 1, Inbound Market Dominant Exprés Service Agreement 1, and Inbound Market Dominant Registered Service Agreement 1 products satisfied 39 U.S.C. 3622(c)(10), while Inbound Market Dominant PRIME Tracked Service Agreement product did not. Id. at 74.

    The Commission fulfills its mandate to determine whether the rates or fees in effect comply with 39 U.S.C. 3622 at the product level. 39 U.S.C. 3653(b)(1). The Postal Service provides no compelling basis for the Commission to depart from the reasonable practice of evaluating compliance for each market dominant international mail product at the product level. The other products the Postal Service classifies as “inbound letter post” are in fact distinct products from the Inbound Letter Post product, and the performances of those products speak for themselves. The Commission reviews those products for compliance transparently in its ACD. Because the Commission makes a determination of compliance for each of those products individually, increased granularity will not give rise to a misleading representation of Inbound Letter Post performance. In contrast, the Postal Service's suggestion would mask the data by aggregating it with other products' data, which would be less transparent and potentially misleading. Accordingly, the Commission declines to remove the proposed reporting requirement for the Inbound Letter Post product on the basis that the additional data will be incomplete or misleading.

    c. The Potential Risk of Commercial Harm Resulting From Disclosing Commercially Sensitive Data of Third Parties is Outside the Scope of This Rulemaking Proceeding

    The Postal Service states that requiring reporting of additional data by UPU country group and shape would put commercially sensitive third-party information at risk of disclosure.39 The Postal Service acknowledges it would file the Inbound Letter Post data required under proposed § 3050.21(m) under seal, but suggests that a non-public filing would likely be challenged. Id.

    39 Postal Service Comments at 11-12. The Postal Service incorporates by reference its discussion in Docket No. ACR2017. See Docket No. ACR2017, United States Postal Service Motion for Reconsideration of Order No. 4451, April 6, 2018; Docket No. ACR2017, Response of the United States Postal Service to Order No. 4409, February 23, 2018; Docket No. ACR2017, United States Postal Service Notice of Filing Nonpublic Folder USPS-FY17-NP40 and Application for Nonpublic Treatment, February 14, 2018.

    The Postal Service acknowledges that the PAEA and the Commission rules outline a procedure for application for non-public treatment of information. See id. To the extent that the Postal Service believes that public disclosure of Inbound Letter Post data separated by UPU country group and shape would cause a commercial harm, it could file an application for non-public treatment pursuant to §§ 3007.200 and 3007.201 of this chapter. As noted in Order No. 4707, the application must particularly identify “the nature and extent of the harm alleged and the likelihood of each harm.” 40 The Commission's regulations also outlines a procedure for participants or the Commission to seek to unseal material filed non-publicly by the Postal Service. See 39 CFR 3007.103; see also 39 CFR 3007.104. Accordingly, the Commission will address the non-public status of data filed under proposed § 3050.21(m), if and when the Postal Service files the data under seal and if the Commission issues a preliminary determination concerning the appropriate degree of protection, if any, to be accorded to materials filed under seal.

    40 Docket No. ACR2017, Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration of Order No. 4451 as Moot, July 12, 2018, at 15 (Order No. 4707); see 39 CFR 3007.201(b)(4).

    The Commission finds that rules regarding non-public treatment of commercially sensitive information are sufficient in addressing the Postal Service's concerns. The Postal Service's assertion that a challenge to a non-public disclosure would put the information “at risk” is not itself enough reason to support removing the proposed reporting requirement altogether. Accordingly, the Commission declines to remove proposed § 3050.21(m) on the basis of hypothetical risk to commercially sensitive information.

    3. Concerns Regarding Proposed § 3050.21(j)

    The Postal Service states that it agrees, in theory, that including material routinely requested in ACR proceedings in the initial filing is likely to be more efficient. Postal Service Comments at 4. The Postal Service notes, however, that for fee distribution data, the Commission's requests have sought the information in different formats in each of the past three years. Id. at 5. The Postal Service correctly attributes these format changes to continuing adjustments to products lists. Id. The Postal Service, anticipating that those adjustments will continue going forward, offers two suggestions for determining the format of fee distribution data. Id. at 6.

    The Postal Service suggests that the Commission might determine that it is most efficient to continue the current practice of using an information request specifying the format for the fee distribution data. Id. Such a determination would obviate the need to adopt proposed § 3050.21(j) as a final rule. The Postal Service suggests that alternatively, the Commission could allow the Postal Service to make reasonable updates to the format of the report each year, pursuant to the anticipated product adjustments. Id.

    The Commission is satisfied with the Postal Service's proposal to make efforts to make appropriate changes to the format of fee distribution data based on product adjustments. In its annual submission, the Postal Service should identify any such product adjustments and corresponding format changes.

    D. Removal of Unnecessary Requirement in § 3050.60(c)

    No commenter objects to the removal of the requirement that the Postal Service provide hard-copy updates of publications and handbooks. The Postal Service supports the modification. Id. at 3. Accordingly, the Commission does not make any changes to proposed § 3050.60(c).

    E. Other Comments—Segment-Level Data

    UPS requests that the Commission reconsider its position on a proposal to require segment-level reporting for competitive products. August 17 UPS Comments at 8. In Order No. 4706, the Commission explained that it declined to propose such requirements, because the current single segment reporting is adequate for determining compliance. Order No. 4706 at 12-13. The PAEA allows the Commission to consider the adequacy of information provided in determining the lawfulness of rates charged, and can revise the reporting requirements to “improve the quality, accuracy, or completeness of Postal Service data.” 39 U.S.C. 3652(e)(2). UPS states that requiring segment-level reporting “would promote transparency and represent an improvement over the status quo.” August 17 UPS Comments at 8.

    The Commission finds that UPS has not shown that the current single-level reporting practices are inaccurate or inadequate. UPS must show that the data, “ha[ve] become significantly inaccurate or can be significantly improved.” 39 U.S.C. 3652(e)(2)(A) (emphasis added). The proposal for segment-level reporting may be appropriate for review in another docket devoted toward the question. In the instant docket, however, UPS has not demonstrated the inadequacy in the current reporting method or how it would be significantly improved for determining compliance. In fact, the Commission finds that the current single-level reporting is sufficiently accurate and adequate for the purposes of assessing compliance. Accordingly, the Commission declines to adopt rules requiring segment-level reporting for competitive products.

    V. Changes to the Proposed Rules

    The final rules incorporate many of the commenters' suggestions. The final rules contain the correction of some omissions from the proposed rules, adjust the language of proposed rules, and restructure and renumber proposed rules. The substance of the rules initially proposed in Order No. 4706 largely remains the same. Below, the Commission describes the differences between the proposed and final rules.

    A. Section 3050.21

    Proposed § 3050.21(f)(6) is revised to hyphenate the word “non-compensatory” pursuant to the suggestion of the Public Representative. Also, because of the addition of paragraph (f)(6) of this section, the word “and” at the end of paragraph (f)(4) of this section is moved to the end of paragraph (f)(5) of this section. The Commission adopts this revision pursuant to the Public Representative's suggestion.

    Proposed § 3050.21(j) and (k) are revised as paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this section. Paragraph (j) of this section now reads “For all market dominant and competitive products.” Proposed paragraph (j) of this section, now located at paragraph (j)(1) of this section, required the distribution breakdown of mail fees. The final rule replaces “mail fees” with “fee revenues” to more accurately reflect that the requirement applies to some non-mail products. Proposed paragraph (k) of this section, now located at paragraph (j)(2) of this section required the Postal Service to “provide . . . the amount of any forfeited revenue.” Final § 3050.21(j)(2) revises the proposed rule, now requiring that the Postal Service “identify” the amount of forfeited revenue.

    Because the final rules combine proposed paragraphs (j) and (k) of this section, the final rules require a minor restructuring and renumbering. Proposed paragraphs (l) through (n) of this section are revised and renumbered as paragraphs (k) through (m) of this section, respectively.

    The Commission also revises proposed § 3050.21(m), renumbered to § 3050.21(l) in the final rules, pursuant to the Public Representative's suggestion. The proposed rule required Inbound Letter Post Date “for the preceding five fiscal years.” Final § 3050.21(l) more precisely defines this requirement as “the fiscal year subject to review and each of the preceding four fiscal years.”

    Because of the renumbering, the Commission also adopts a revision to proposed § 3050.21(a), listing the required content of the Postal Service's section 3652 report. The proposed rule states that the report shall provide the items listed in paragraphs (b) through (n) of this section. Consistent with the renumbering, the final rule states that the report shall provide the items listed in paragraphs (b) through (m) of this section.

    The Commission also revises the amendatory instructions for the Federal Register, consistent with the revisions made to § 3050.21.

    B. Section 3050.25

    The Commission does not revise § 3050.25 as proposed in Order No. 4706.

    C. Section 3050.28

    In consideration of the comments of the Postal Service and the Public Representative, the Commission makes several revision to proposed § 3050.28(b)(1), Table 1 and Table 2.

    The final rules add the input “Total Revenue” beneath the sub-inputs for “Operating Revenue” and “Other Revenue” and above “Operating Expenses” in Table 1. This revision is consistent with the explanation of changes in Order No. 4706. Pursuant to the Postal Service's suggestion, the Commission revises the input “New Operating Income” in proposed Table 1. The final rules correct the input to “Net Operating Income.” The final rules also remove a duplicative heading row in Table 1 and extraneous underlining within certain cells in Table 2.

    The Commission, pursuant to the Public Representative's suggestion, revises the amendatory instructions preceding final § 3050.28, to indicate that the introductory language in paragraph (b) of this section also contains revisions. The content of the introductory text of paragraph (b) of this section remains unchanged from that proposed in Order No. 4706.

    D. Section 3050.60(c)

    The Commission does not revise § 3050.50(c) as proposed in Order No. 4706.

    VI. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. Part 3050 of title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, is revised as set forth below the signature of this Order, effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

    2. The Postal Service shall make a good-faith effort to make appropriate adjustments to the format of the fee distribution in each year's Annual Compliance Report, as necessary to reflect product changes.

    3. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 3050

    Administrative practice and procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission amends Chapter III of title 39 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    PART 3050—PERIODIC REPORTING 1. The authority citation for part 3050 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    39 U.S.C. 503, 3651, 3652, 3653.

    2. Amend § 3050.21 by: a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (f)(4) and (5), b. Adding paragraph (f)(6), c. Revising paragraph (j), and d. Adding paragraphs (k), (l), and (m).

    The revisions and addtions read as follows:

    § 3050.21 Content of the Postal Service's section 3652 report.

    (a) No later than 90 days after the close of each fiscal year, the Postal Service shall submit a report to the Commission analyzing its costs, volume, revenue, rate, and service information in sufficient detail to demonstrate that all products during such year comply with all applicable provisions of title 39 of the United States Code. The report shall provide the items in paragraphs (b) through (m) of this section.

    (f) * * *

    (4) Analyze the contribution of the agreement to institutional costs for its most recent year of operation. The year analyzed shall end on the anniversary of the negotiated service agreement that falls within the fiscal year covered by the Postal Service's annual periodic reports to the Commission and include the 12 preceding months. The analysis shall show all calculations and fully identify all inputs. Inputs used to estimate the effect on total contribution to the Postal Service, such as unit costs and price elasticities, shall be updated using fiscal year values;

    (5) Analyze the effect of the negotiated service agreement (and other functionally equivalent negotiated service agreements) on the marketplace. If there were harmful effects, explain why those effects were not unreasonable; and

    (6) Provide financial or other supporting documentation that demonstrates that non-compensatory market dominant negotiated service agreements improve the net financial position of the Postal Service over default rates or enhance the performance of mail preparation, processing, transportation, or other functions.

    (j) For all market dominant and competitive products:

    (1) Provide a distribution breakdown of fee revenues, including all underlying calculations and source workpapers; and

    (2) Provide any third-party service performance results upon which any financial penalty or bonus is determined, and identify the amount of any forfeited revenue;

    (k) Provide all total workhour data and data sources showing workhour measurements by Labor Distribution Code;

    (l) For the Inbound Letter Post product, provide revenue, volume, attributable cost, and contribution data by Universal Postal Union country group and by shape for the preceding the fiscal year subject to review and each of the preceding four fiscal years; and

    (m) Provide any other information that the Postal Service believes will help the Commission evaluate the Postal Service's compliance with the applicable provisions of title 39 of the United States Code.

    3. Amend § 3050.25 by revising paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to read as follows:
    § 3050.25 Volume and revenue data.

    (c) Revenue, pieces, and weight by rate category and special service by quarter, within 40 days of the close of Quarters 1, 2, and 3 of the fiscal year and 60 days after Quarter 4, but no later than the filing of reports filed pursuant to section 3050.40(a) or 3050.40(b);

    (d) Quarterly Statistics Report, including estimates by shape, weight, and indicia, within 40 days of the close of Quarters 1, 2, and 3 of the fiscal year and 60 days after Quarter 4 but no later than the filing of reports filed pursuant to section 3050.40(a) or 3050.40(b); and

    (e) Billing determinants within 60 days of the close of Quarters 1, 2, and 3 of the fiscal year and 90 days after Quarter 4.

    4. Amend § 3050.28 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text, tables 1 and 2 in paragraph (b)(1), and paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 3050.28 Monthly and pay period reports.

    (b) Monthly Summary Financial Report on the 24th day of the following month, except that the reports for the last months of Quarters 1, 2, and 3 of the fiscal year shall be provided at the time that the Form 10-Q report is provided and the report for the last month of Quarter 4 of the fiscal year shall be provided at the time that the Form 10-K report is provided;

    (1) * * *

    Table 1—USPS Monthly Financial Statement Month, Fiscal Year [$ millions] Current Period Actual Plan SPLY % Plan Var % SPLY Var Year-to-Date Actual Plan SPLY % Plan Var % SPLY Var Revenue: Operating Revenue Other Revenue Total Revenue Operating Expenses Personnel Compensation and Benefits Transportation Supplies and Services Other Services Total Operating Expenses Net Operating Income Interest Income Interest Expense Total Net Income Other Operating Statistics Mail Volume (Millions) Total Market Dominant Volumes Total Competitive Product Volumes Total Mail Volumes Total Workhours (Millions) Total Career Employees Total Non-Career Employees Table 2—Mail Volume and Mail Revenue Month, Fiscal Year [Thousands] Current Period Actual SPLY % SPLY Var Year-to-Date Actual SPLY % SPLY Var Market Dominant Products: First Class: Volume Revenue Periodicals: Volume Revenue USPS Marketing Mail: Volume Revenue Package Services: Volume Revenue All Other Market Dominant Mail: Volume Revenue Total Market Dominant Products: Volume Revenue Total Competitive Products Volume Revenue Total Operating Revenue: Total Volume

    (c) National Consolidated Trial Balances and the Revenue and Expense Summary on the 24th day of the following month, except that the reports for the last month of Quarters 1, 2, and 3 of the fiscal year shall be provided at the time that the Form 10-Q report is provided and the report for the last month of Quarter 4 of the fiscal year shall be provided at the time that the Form 10-K report is provided;

    5. Amend § 3050.60 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 3050.60 Miscellaneous reports and documents.

    (c) The items listed in paragraph (b) of this section in electronic form;

    [FR Doc. 2018-21249 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 9 and 721 [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0567; FRL-9983-14] RIN 2070-AB27 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances Correction

    In rule document 2018-19950, appearing on pages 47004 through 47025, in the issue of Monday, September 17, 2018, make the following correction:

    § 9.1, §§ 721.11124-11125, §§ 721.11130-11140 [Corrected]
    In the regulatory text for Part 9 and Part 721, beginning on page 47017, remove “14;” and where it appears after the section mark symbol (§ ) in amendatory paragraph instructions 2, 4, 5, and 10-20.
    [FR Doc. C1-2018-19950 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0138; FRL-9984-61—Region 1] Air Plan Approval; Maine; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maine. This revision addresses the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 fine particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is conditionally approving the SIP revision for infrastructure requirements related to State Boards and Conflicts of Interest. The intended effect of this action is to approve the infrastructure requirements of Maine's air quality management program with respect to this NAAQS into the Maine SIP. This action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0138. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (Mail code: OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone number: (617) 918-1684, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. On July 6, 2016, Maine submitted an infrastructure SIP revision for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, including an enclosure to address the “Good Neighbor” (or “transport”) provisions of the Act. See CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). On August 13, 2018 (83 FR 39957), EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), in which EPA proposed full approval of all elements of Maine's infrastructure SIP revision for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, except for requirements regarding State Boards and Conflicts of Interest, which we proposed to conditionally approve. The NPRM includes the rationale for approval, and EPA will not restate it here.

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

    II. Response to Comments

    During the comment period, EPA received one comment, which discusses subjects outside the scope of this SIP action, does not explain (or provide a legal basis for) how the proposed action should differ in any way, and makes no specific mention of the proposed action. As such, the comment is not germane and does not require further response to finalize the action as proposed.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is fully approving Maine's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS as a revision to the Maine SIP, except with respect to CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) regarding State Boards and Conflicts of Interest, which we are conditionally approving.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 30, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 24, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.

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

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart U—Maine 2. Amend § 52.1019 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
    § 52.1019 Identification of plan—conditional approval.

    (f) 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: The 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP submitted on July 6, 2016, is conditionally approved with respect to Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(E) regarding State Boards and Conflicts of Interest. On July 17, 2018, the State of Maine committed to address these requirements.

    3. Amend § 52.1020(e) by adding an entry for “Submittals to meet Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1020 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    Maine Non Regulatory Name of
  • non regulatory
  • SIP provision
  • Applicable
  • geographic or
  • nonattainment
  • area
  • State submittal
  • date/effective
  • date
  • EPA
  • approved
  • date 3
  • Explanations
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Submittals to meet Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Statewide 7/6/2016 10/1/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation] These submittals are approved with respect to the following CAA elements or portions thereof: 110(a)(2) (A), (B), (C), (D), (E)(i), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), and conditionally approved with respect to (E)(ii) regarding State Boards and Conflicts of Interest. 3 In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21149 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2016-0166; FRL-9984-17—Region 1] Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Plan Submittals for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Connecticut. The SIP revisions are for the Greater Connecticut and the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT moderate ozone nonattainment areas. EPA is approving submittals which include 2011 base year emissions inventories, an emissions statement certification, reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstrations, reasonably available control measures (RACM) analyses, motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures. This action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2016-0168. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square-Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bob McConnell, Environmental Engineer, Air Quality Planning Unit, Air Programs Branch (Mail Code OEP05-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, Massachusetts, 02109-3912; (617) 918-1046; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    On August 3, 2018 (83 FR 38104), EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of Connecticut. The NPRM proposed approval of 2011 base year emissions inventories, an emissions statement certification, reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstrations, reasonably available control measures (RACM) analyses, motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures for the Greater Connecticut and the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT moderate ozone nonattainment areas. These submittals were made to meet, in part, requirements for moderate areas for the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Other specific requirements of Connecticut's SIP revisions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPRM and will not be restated here.

    II. Response to Comments

    We received a number of anonymous comments that address subjects outside the scope of our proposed action, do not explain (or provide a legal basis for) how the proposed action should differ in any way, and make no specific mention of the substantive aspects of the proposed action. Consequently, these comments are not germane to this rulemaking and require no further response.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is approving revisions to the Connecticut SIP for the Greater Connecticut and the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT moderate ozone nonattainment areas. EPA is approving submittals which include 2011 base year emissions inventories, an emissions statement certification, reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstrations, reasonably available control measures (RACM) analyses, motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 30, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 24, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.

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

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart H—Connecticut 2. Section 52.377 is amended by adding paragraph (t) to read as follows:
    § 52.377 Control strategy: Ozone.

    (t) Approval. Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection on January 17, 2017, September 5, 2017, and August 8, 2017, to meet, in part, requirements of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. These revisions satisfy the rate of progress requirement of section 182(b) through 2017, the contingency measure requirements of section 182(c)(9), the emission statement requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B), and the reasonably available control measure requirement of section 172(c)(1) for the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT area, and the Greater Connecticut moderate ozone nonattainment areas. The January 17, 2017 revision establishes motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 of 15.9 tons per day of VOC and 22.2 tons per day of NOX to be used in transportation conformity in the Greater Connecticut moderate ozone nonattainment area. The August 8, 2017 revision establishes motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2017 of 17.6 tons per day of VOC and 24.6 tons per day of NOX to be used in transportation conformity in the Connecticut portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT moderate ozone nonattainment area.

    3. Section 52.384 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 52.384 Emission inventories.

    (e) The State of Connecticut submitted base year emission inventories representing emissions for calendar year 2011 from the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT moderate 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and the Greater Connecticut moderate 8-hour ozone nonattainment area on March 9, 2016, as revisions to the State's SIP. The 2011 base year emission inventory requirement of section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, has been satisfied for these areas. The inventories consist of emission estimates of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides, and cover point, area, non-road mobile, on-road mobile and biogenic sources. The inventories were submitted as revisions to the SIP in partial fulfillment of obligations for nonattainment areas under EPA's 2008 8-hour ozone standard.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21150 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261; FRL-9983-77—Region 7] Approval of Missouri Air Quality Implementation Plans; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard Interstate Transport AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing its approval of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) in a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from the State of Missouri for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires the State to prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity within the State from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will contribute significantly to nonattainment (prong 1), or interfere with maintenance (prong 2) in any other State with respect to the NAAQs.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tracey Casburn, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7016, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to the EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following:

    I. Background Information II. Have the Requirements for approval of a SIP submittal been met? III. The EPA's response to comments IV. What Action is EPA taking? V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background Information

    States are required to have a SIP that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. Whenever EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, States are required to make a SIP submission to establish that they have, or are adding, the provisions necessary to address various requirements to address the new or revised NAAQS. These SIPs are commonly referred to as “infrastructure” SIPs. The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural components of each State's air quality management program are adequate to meet the State's responsibilities under the CAA. In this action EPA is approving the prong 1 and prong 2 interstate transportation obligations of the State's 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submittal. On June 5, 2018, the EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register proposing to approve the prong 1 and prong 2 elements of the State of Missouri's 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submittal. See 83 FR 25979. The NPRM, and technical support document (TSD) for the action, included: a summary of existing modeling data; a summary of monitoring data from areas downwind of Missouri; and a summary of annual emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), both of which are precursors of PM2.5. This information showed that local control in Missouri is not necessary to address contribution, with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS any other State. As the EPA's rationale for approving the SIP submission was provided in detail in the NPRM and the TSD for the action, and both documents are included in the docket identified in the ADDRESSES section of this document, the rationale will not be restated in detail in this document.

    II. Have the requirements for approval of the SIP submittal been met?

    The State's submission met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The State held a public comment period from July 27, 2015, to September 3, 2015. The State received no comments during the public comment period. A public hearing was held on August 27, 2015. The submission satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.

    III. The EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period for the NPRM closed on July 5, 2018. The EPA received three sets of comments prior to the close of the comment period; all three sets of comments were not directly related to the action and therefore not considered by the EPA to be adverse to the action being taken. As the EPA only responds to adverse comments, there are no responses required for this final action. The comments can be found in the docket to this action at EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261. No changes were made to the proposal in this final action after consideration of the comments received. All comments on the proposed action are available in the docket identified in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

    IV. What action is EPA taking?

    As described above, the EPA is approving the prong 1 and prong 2 interstate transportation obligations of the State's 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submittal.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not involve technical standards; and

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

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

    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 AA-Missouri 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding the entry “(75)” in numerical order to read as follows:
    § 52.1320 Identification of plan.

    (e)* * *

    EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable
  • geographic or
  • nonattainment area
  • State
  • submittal
  • date
  • EPA
  • approval
  • date
  • Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * (75) Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—significant contribution to nonattainment (prong 1), and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQs (prong 2) (Interstate Transport) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) NAAQS Statewide 10/14/2015 10/1/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation] This action approves the following CAA elements: 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—prongs 1 and 2 [EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261; FRL-9983-77—Region 7.]
    [FR Doc. 2018-21286 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 70 [EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0536; FRL-9983-66—Region 7] Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Approval of the State Implementation Plan and the Operating Permits Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to the Iowa State Implementation Plan (SIP), and the Operating Permits Program to clarify submission requirements for construction and operating permit applications. This action also includes minor grammatical corrections. EPA reviewed these revisions and determined that they will not impact air quality and will ensure consistency between the state and federally approved rules.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0536. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stephanie Doolan, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7719, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following:

    I. What is being addressed in this document? II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP submission and operating permits program been met? III. EPA's Response to Comments IV. What action is EPA taking? V. Incorporation by Reference VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is being addressed in this document?

    This final action approves a revision from the state of Iowa to revise the Iowa SIP and Operating Permits Program. EPA published in the Federal Register the proposed approval of the State's submission on July 26, 2018, at 83 FR 35451. The revisions to the SIP are to clarify the types of mailing services that may be used for submitting construction permit applications to include the U.S. Postal Service, private parcel delivery services, and hand delivery. Construction permit applications are not required to be submitted by certified mail. The revisions also eliminate the requirement for construction permit applications for projects that will not emit greenhouses gases to submit the current three-page form.

    The revisions to the operating permits program clarifies the types of mailing services that may be used for submitting operating permit applications to include the U.S. Postal Service, private parcel delivery services, and hand delivery. Operating permit applications are not required to be submitted by certified mail. This revision to the operating permits program is being made to require only one copy of the operating permit application instead of two.

    This action also includes minor grammatical corrections to the SIP for construction permit rules and minor grammatical corrections to the operating permits program rules.

    II. Have the requirements for approval of the SIP revisions and the operating permits program been met?

    The state submittal met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition, these revisions meet the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations. These revisions are also consistent with applicable EPA requirements of Title V of the CAA and 40 CFR part 70. The submission was sent to EPA on January 4, 2018, and received January 9, 2018.

    III. EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period for EPA's proposed rule opened July 26, 2018, the date of its publication in the Federal Register, and closed on August 27, 2018. During this period, EPA received five comments which are available in the docket; two in support of the proposed rule revisions, and three comments that were outside of the scope of the proposed rule. Therefore, EPA will not provide a specific response to the comments.

    IV. What action is EPA taking?

    This final action approves revisions to the Iowa SIP and the Operating Permits Program. The revisions clarify the types of mailing services that may be used for submitting construction and operating permit applications, and clarifies that applications are not required to be submitted by certified mail. The revisions also eliminate the requirement for construction permit applications or projects that will not emit greenhouse gases (GHG) to submit the current separate three-page GHG form. In addition, a revision to the operating permit program is being made to require only one copy of the permit application instead of two. Finally, this action includes minor grammatical corrections.

    V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, 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 a revision to Iowa's Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 7 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 State implementation plan, 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.1

    1 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not involve technical standards; and

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 30, 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, Intergovernmental relations, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR parts 52 and 70 as set forth below:

    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 Q—Iowa 2. Amend § 52.820(c) by revising the entry “567-22.1” to read as follows:
    § 52.820 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA-Approved Iowa Regulations Iowa citation Title State
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Explanation
    Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission [567] *         *         *         *         *         *         * Chapter 22—Controlling Pollution 567-22.1 Permits Required for New or Existing Stationary Sources 12/13/17 10/1/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation] Electronic submittal referred to in 22.1(3) is not SIP approved. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    PART 70—STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS 3. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    4. Amend appendix A to part 70 by adding paragraph (s) under the heading “Iowa” to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 70—Approval Status of State and Local Operating Permits Programs Iowa

    (s) The Iowa Department of Natural Resources submitted for program approval revisions to rule 567-22.105. Electronic submittal referred to in 22.105 is not approved in the operating permits program. The state effective date is December 13, 2017. This revision is effective November 30, 2018.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21285 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Chapter I Technical, Organizational and Conforming Amendments CFR Correction

    In Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, revised as of October 1, 2017, make the following corrections:

    1. On page 45, in § 7.14, in paragraph (e), remove the word “Director” and add the word “Administrator” in its place. 2. On page 135, in § 59.24, in paragraph (a), and on page 137, in paragraph (f), remove the term “the Administrator” and add the term “Federal Insurance Administrator” in its place. 3. On page 285, in § 151.11, in the introductory text, remove the word “Director” and add the word “Administrator” in its place. 4. On page 286, in § 151.12, in the last sentence of paragraph (b)(2), remove the word “Director” and add the word “Administrator” in its place. 5. On page 319, in § 206.2, in paragraph (a)(11), remove the word “Director” and add the word “Administrator” in its place. 6. On page 371, in § 206.164, in paragraph (b), remove the word “Director” and add the word “Administrator” in its place. 7. On page 505, in § 332.2, in paragraph (e)(2), remove the word “Director” and add the word “Administrator” in its place. 8. On page 516, in § 350.9, in the last sentence of paragraph (c)(3), remove the term “Associate Director” and add the term “Deputy Administrator for the National Preparedness Directorate” in its place. 9. On page 518, in § 350.12 in the introductory text of paragraph (b), remove the term “Regional Director's” and add the term “Regional Administrator's” in its place.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21367 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D
    DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 48 CFR Parts 801, 811, 832, 852, and 870 RIN 2900-AP81 VA Acquisition Regulation: Describing Agency Needs; Contract Financing AGENCY:

    Department of Veterans Affairs.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending and updating its VA Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) in phased increments to revise or remove any policy superseded by changes in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), to remove procedural guidance internal to VA into the VA Acquisition Manual (VAAM), and to incorporate any new agency specific regulations or policies. These changes seek to streamline and align the VAAR with the FAR and remove outdated and duplicative requirements and reduce burden on contractors. The VAAM incorporates portions of the removed VAAR as well as other internal agency acquisition policy. VA will rewrite certain parts of the VAAR and VAAM, and as VAAR parts are rewritten, we will publish them in the Federal Register. In particular, this rulemaking revises VAAR concerning Describing Agency Needs and Contract Financing, as well as affected parts covering the Department of Veterans Affairs Acquisition Regulation System, Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses, and Special Procurement Controls.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on October 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Rafael N. Taylor, Senior Procurement Analyst, Procurement Policy and Warrant Management Services, 003A2A, 425 I Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, (202) 382-2787. (This is not a toll-free number.)

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On March 26, 2018, VA published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (83 FR 12922) which announced VA's intent to amend regulations for VAAR Case RIN 2900-AP81 (parts 811 and 832). In particular, this final rule revises part 811 to remove coverage of what brand name or equal purchase descriptions must include as the FAR provides sufficient coverage; removes coverage pertaining to brand names based on current FAR coverage; removes purchase description clauses; removes VAAR coverage of bid samples; removes the section providing coverage on procedures for negotiated procurements; removes VAAR coverage on “items peculiar to one manufacturer.” It revises part 832 to add policy to implement an OMB memorandum entitled “Accelerating Payments to Small Businesses for Goods and Services,” to encourage making payments to small business contractors within 15 days of receipt of invoice; delegates authority within VA to approve contract terms concerning advance payments; and removes subparts 832.5, Progress Payments Based on Costs and 832.8, Assignment of Claims, as both contain internal procedural guidance not having a significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of VA.

    VA provided a 60-day comment period for the public to respond to the proposed rule. The comment period for the proposed rule ended on May 25, 2018 and VA received no comments. This document adopts as a final rule, the proposed rule published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2018, with minor stylistic and grammatical edits. This final rule has Federal Register administrative format changes in the amendatory text which make no substantive text changes at the affected sections.

    Unfunded Mandates

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal Governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. This final rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal Governments or on the private sector.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule imposes the following amended information collection requirements to two of the six existing information collection approval numbers associated with this rule. Although this action contains provisions constituting collections of information at 48 CFR 852.236-82 and 852.236-83, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), no new proposed collections of information are associated with these clauses. The information collection requirements for 48 CFR 852.236-82 and 852.236-83 are currently approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and have been assigned OMB control number 2900-0422. However, this information collection was submitted to OMB to revise the title and to redesignate and renumber the two clauses currently numbered as sections 852.236-82, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Without NAS), and 852.236-83, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Including NAS). Accordingly, they will reflect the new designation and revised titles as set forth in the amendatory language of the rule to read: 852.232-70, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Without NAS-CPM), and 852.232-71, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Including NAS-CPM), respectively, under the associated OMB control number 2900-0422. The references to the old numbers—852.236-82 and 852.236-83, are accordingly removed. There is no change in the information collection burden that is associated with this action. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (at 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), VA has submitted these information collection amendments to OMB for its review. Notice of OMB approval for this information collection was published on Reginfo.gov on May 15, 2018.

    This final rule imposes the following amended information collection requirements to one of the six existing information collection approval numbers associated with this rule. Although this action contains provisions constituting collections of information at 48 CFR 852.211-70, Service Data Manuals, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), no new proposed information collection is associated with this clause. The information collection requirement for 48 CFR 852.211-70 is currently approved by OMB and has been assigned OMB control number 2900-0587. However, this information collection has been submitted to OMB to revise the title from “Service Data Manuals,” to read, “Equipment Operation and Maintenance Manuals.” The information collection request reflects the revised title for this clause to read: 852.211-70, Equipment Operation and Maintenance Manuals, under the associated OMB control number 2900-0587. By revising the clause and removing the requirement to develop Government-specified service manuals, VA has eliminated an unnecessary burden on the public by making use of commercial operation and maintenance manuals consistent with the general public and established commercial practices, thereby reducing by half the estimated annual hourly burden which is now estimated at 311 hours, a reduction of 310 annual hours. Notice of OMB approval for this information collection will be published in a future Federal Register document.

    This final rule removes two of the six existing information collection requirements associated with this action at 48 CFR 852.211-71, Special Notice, and 48 CFR 852.211-73, Brand Name or Equal. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), it discontinues the associated corresponding approved OMB control numbers, 2900-0588 and 2900-0585, respectively. For 48 CFR 852.211-71, Special Notice, and its corresponding OMB control number 2900-0588, this results in a removal of 875 estimated annual burden hours. For 48 CFR 852.211-73, Brand Name or Equal, and its corresponding OMB control number 2900-0585, this results in a removal of 1,125 estimated annual burden hours. Notice of OMB approval for the information collection requests will be published in a future Federal Register document.

    This final rule also contains two other provisions constituting a collection of information at 48 CFR 852.211-72, Technical Industry Standards, and 48 CFR 832.202-4, Security for Government financing, which remain unchanged. Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), no new or proposed revised collection of information is associated with these provisions as a part of this rule. The information collection requests for 48 CFR 852.211-72 and 48 CFR 832.202-4 are currently approved by OMB and have been assigned OMB control numbers 2900-0586 and 2900-0688, respectively. The burden of these information collections remains unchanged. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), OMB has approved the reporting or recordkeeping provisions that are included in the clause and the text under section 832.202-4 cited above and has given the VA the following approval numbers: OMB 2900-0586 and OMB 2900-0688, respectively.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612. This final rule will generally be small business neutral. The rule text does not change VA's policy regarding small businesses. Therefore, the rule does not have a significant economic impact on substantial number of small entities. There are no increased and/or decreased costs to small entities. The overall impact of this final rule will be of benefit to small businesses owned by Veterans or service-disabled Veterans as the VAAR is being updated to remove extraneous procedural information that applies only to VA's internal operating procedures. VA is merely adding existing and current regulatory requirements to the VAAR and removing any guidance that is applicable only to VA's internal operation processes or procedures. VA estimates no cost impact to individual business resulting from these rule updates. This rulemaking does not change VA's policy regarding small businesses, does not have an economic impact to individual businesses, and there are no increased or decreased costs to small business entities. On this basis, this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604.

    Executive Orders 12866, 13563 and 13771

    Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review defines “significant regulatory action” to mean any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may: “(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive order.”

    VA has examined the economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this regulatory action, and it has been determined not to be a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866 because it does not raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order.

    VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at http://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of the rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's website at http://www.va.gov/orpm by following the link for VA Regulations Published from FY 2004 Through Fiscal Year to Date. This final rule is considered an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this final rule can be found in the rule's economic analysis.

    List of Subjects 48 CFR Part 801

    Administrative practice and procedure, Government procurement, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    48 CFR Parts 811 and 832

    Government procurement.

    48 CFR Part 852

    Government procurement, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    48 CFR Part 870

    Asbestos, Frozen foods, Government procurement, Telecommunications.

    Signing Authority

    The Secretary of Veterans Affairs approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Robert L. Wilkie, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on August 24, 2018, for publication.

    Dated: August 28, 2018. Consuela Benjamin, Regulations Development Coordinator, Office of Regulation Policy & Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, VA amends 48 CFR parts 801, 811, 832, 852, and 870 as follows:

    PART 801—DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS ACQUISITION REGULATION SYSTEM 1. The authority citation for part 801 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 41 U.S.C. 1121; 41 U.S.C. 1303; 41 U.S.C. 1702; and 48 CFR 1.301-1.304.

    2. In section 801.106, table columns titled “48 CFR part or section where identified and described” and “Current OMB control number” are amended by— a. Removing the reference to section 832.006-4 and OMB Control Number 2900-0668. b. Removing the reference to section 852.211-71 and OMB Control Number 2900-0588. c. Removing the reference to section 852.211-73 and OMB Control Number 2900-0585. d. Removing “852.236-82 through.” e. Adding an entry for sections 852.232-70 and 852.232-71 in numerical order.

    The addition reads as follows:

    801.106 OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 48 CFR part or section
  • where identified and
  • described
  • Current OMB
  • control No.
  • *    *    *    *    * 852.232-70 and 852.232-71 2900-0422 *    *    *    *    *
    3. Under the authority of 48 CFR 1.301 through 1.304, the heading of subchapter B is revised to read as follows: SUBCHAPTER B—ACQUISITION PLANNING PART 811—DESCRIBING AGENCY NEEDS 4. The authority citation for part 811 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 41 U.S.C. 1303; 41 U.S.C. 1702; and 48 CFR 1.301-1.304.

    811.001 [Removed]
    5. Section 811.001 is removed. 6. Revise subpart 811.1 to read as follows: Subpart 811.1—Selecting and Developing Requirements Documents
    811.107-70 Contract clause.

    The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 852.211-70, Equipment Operation and Maintenance Manuals, in solicitations and contracts for technical medical equipment, and other technical and mechanical equipment and devices where the requiring activity determines manuals are a necessary requirement for operation and maintenance of the equipment.

    7. Revise subpart 811.2 to read as follows: Subpart 811.2—Using and Maintaining Requirements Documents
    811.204-70 Contract clause.

    The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 852.211-72, Technical Industry Standards, in solicitations and contracts requiring conformance to technical industry standards, federal specifications, standards and commercial item descriptions unless comparable coverage is included in the item specification.

    Subpart 811.4—[Removed and Reserved] 8. Subpart 811.4 is removed and reserved. Subpart 811.5—[Removed and Reserved] 9. Subpart 811.5 is removed and reserved. Subpart 811.6—[Removed and Reserved] 10. Subpart 811.6 is removed and reserved. PART 832—CONTRACT FINANCING 11. The authority citation for part 832 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 41 U.S.C. 1303; 41 U.S.C. 1702; and 48 CFR 1.301-1.304.

    12. Section 832.001 is added to read as follows:
    832.001 Definitions.

    As used in this part:

    (a) Designated agency office means the office designated by the purchase order, agreement, or contract to first receive and review invoices. This office can be contractually designated as the receiving entity. This office may be different from the office issuing the payment.

    (b) Electronic form means an automated system transmitting information electronically according to the accepted electronic data transmission methods identified in 832.7002-1. Facsimile, email, and scanned documents are not acceptable electronic forms for submission of payment requests.

    (c) Payment request means any request for contract financing payment or invoice payment submitted by a contractor under a contract.

    13. Revise section 832.006-1 to read as follows:
    832.006-1 General.

    (b) The Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) is authorized to make determinations that there is substantial evidence that contractors' requests for advance, partial, or progress payments are based on fraud and may direct that further payments to the contractors be reduced or suspended, as provided in FAR 32.006.

    832.006-2 and 832.006-3 [Removed]
    14. Remove sections 832.006-2 and 832.006-3. 15. Section 832.006-4 is revised to read as follows:
    832.006-4 Procedures.

    (b) The Remedy Coordination Official (RCO) for VA is the Deputy Senior Procurement Executive (DSPE) who shall carry out the responsibilities of the Secretary or designee in FAR 32.006-4(b).

    (e) The RCO shall carry out the responsibilities of the agency head in FAR 32.006-4(e) to notify the contractor of the reasons for the recommended action and of its right to submit information within a reasonable period of time in response to the proposed action under FAR 32.006.

    (1) The notice of proposed action will be sent to the last known address of the contractor, the contractor's counsel, or agent for service of process, by certified mail, return receipt requested, or any other method that provides signed evidence of receipt. In the case of a business, the notice of proposed action may be sent to any partner, principal, officer, director, owner or co-owner, or joint venture. The contractor will be afforded an opportunity to appear before the RCO to present information or argument in person or through a representative and may supplement the oral presentation with written information and argument.

    (2) The contractor may supplement the oral presentation with written information and argument. The proceedings will be conducted in an informal manner and without the requirement for a transcript. If the RCO does not receive a reply from the contractor within 30 calendar days, the RCO will base his or her recommendations on the information available. Any recommendation of the RCO under FAR 31.006-4(a) and paragraph (b) of this section, must address the results of this notification and the information, if any, provided by the contractor. After reviewing all the information, the RCO shall make a recommendation to the SPE whether or not substantial evidence of fraud exists.

    (g) In addition to following the procedures in FAR 32.006-4, the SPE shall provide a copy of each final determination and the supporting documentation to the contractor, the RCO, the contracting officer, and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). The contracting officer will place a copy of the determination and the supporting documentation in the contract file.

    Subpart 832.1—Non-Commercial Item Purchase Financing
    16. Section 832.111 is revised to read as follows:
    832.111 Contract clauses for non-commercial purchases.
    17. Section 832.111-70 is added to read as follows:
    832.111-70 VA contract clauses for non-commercial purchases.

    (a)(1) Insert the clause at 852.232-70, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Without NAS-CPM) in solicitations and contracts that contain the FAR clause at 52.232-5, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts, and if the solicitation or contract does not require use of the “Network Analysis System—Critical Path Method (NAS-CPM).”

    (2) If the solicitation or contract includes guarantee period services, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.

    (b)(1) Insert the clause at 852.232-71, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Including NAS-CPM), in solicitations and contracts that contain the FAR clause at 52.232-5, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts, and if the solicitation or contract requires use of the “Network Analysis System—Critical Path Method (NAS-CPM).”

    (2) If the solicitation or contract includes guarantee period services, the contracting officer shall use the clause with its Alternate I.

    Subpart 832.2—Commercial Item Purchase Financing
    832.201 [Removed]
    18. Section 832.201 is removed. 19. Section 832.202-1 is revised to read as follows:
    832.202-1 Policy.

    (d) HCAs shall report, no later than December 31st of each calendar year, to the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) and the DSPE, on the number of contracts for commercial items with unusual contract financing or with commercial interim or advance payments approved for the previous fiscal year. The report shall include the contract number and amount, the amount of the unusual contract financing or with commercial interim or advance payments approved, and the kind and amount of security obtained for the advance.

    20. Section 832.202-4 is revised to read as follows:
    832.202-4 Security for Government financing.

    (a)(2) An offeror's financial condition may be considered adequate security to protect the Government's interest when the Government provides contract financing. In assessing the offeror's financial condition, the contracting officer may obtain, to the extent required, the following information—

    (i) A current year interim balance sheet and income statement and balance sheets and income statements for the two preceding fiscal years. The statements should be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and must be audited and certified by an independent public accountant or an appropriate officer of the firm;

    (ii) A cash flow forecast for the remainder of the contract term showing the planned origin and use of cash within the firm or branch performing the contract;

    (iii) Information on financing arrangements disclosing the availability of cash to finance contract performance, the contractor's exposure to financial risk, and credit arrangements;

    (iv) A statement of the status of all State, local, and Federal tax accounts, including any special mandatory contributions;

    (v) A description and explanation of the financial effects of any leases, deferred purchase arrangements, patent or royalty arrangements, insurance, planned capital expenditures, pending claims, contingent liabilities, and other financial aspects of the business; and

    (vi) Any other financial information deemed necessary.

    Subpart 832.4—Advance Payments for Non-Commercial Items 21. Section 832.402 is revised to read as follows:
    832.402 General.

    (c)(1)(iii) The authority to make the determination required by FAR 32.402(c)(1)(iii) and to approve contract terms is delegated to the head of the contracting activity (HCA). The request for approval shall include the information required by FAR 32.409-1 and shall address the standards for advance payment in FAR 32.402(c)(2). HCAs shall report, no later than December 31st of each calendar year, to the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) and the DSPE, on number of contracts for non-commercial items with advance payments approved in the previous fiscal year. The report shall include the contract number and amount, the amount of the advance payment, and the kind and amount of security obtained for the advance.

    22. Section 832.404 is revised to read as follows:
    832.404 Exclusions.

    (b)(1) As permitted by 31 U.S.C. 3324(d)(2), VA allows advance payment for subscriptions or other charges for newspapers, magazines, periodicals, and other publications for official use, notwithstanding the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 3324(a). The term “other publications” includes any publication printed, microfilmed, photocopied or magnetically or otherwise recorded for auditory or visual use.

    (2) As permitted by 31 U.S.C. 1535, VA allows advance payment for services and supplies obtained from another Government agency.

    (3) As permitted by 5 U.S.C. 4109, VA allows advance payment for all or any part of the necessary expenses for training Government employees, including obtaining professional credentials under 5 U.S.C. 5757, in Government or non-Government facilities, including the purchase or rental of books, materials, and supplies or services directly related to the training of a Government employee.

    Subpart 832.5 [Removed and Reserved] 23. Subpart 832.5 is removed and reserved. Subpart 832.8 [Removed and Reserved] 24. Subpart 832.8 is removed and reserved. Subpart 832.9—Prompt Payment
    832.904 [Redesignated as 832.904-70 and Amended]
    25. Redesignate section 832.904 as 832.904-70 and revise newly redesignated section 832.904-70 to read as follows:
    832.904-70 Determining payment due dates for small businesses.

    Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-11-32, Accelerating Payments to Small Businesses for Goods and Services, contracting officers shall, to the full extent permitted by law, make payments to small business contractors as soon as practicable, with the goal of making payments within 15 days of receipt of a proper invoice and confirmation that the goods and services have been received and accepted by the Federal Government.

    Subpart 832.11 [Removed and Reserved] 26. Subpart 832.11 is removed and reserved. 27. Revise subpart 832.70 to read as follows: Subpart 832.70—Electronic Invoicing Requirements Sec. 832.7000 General. 832.7001 Electronic payment requests. 832.7001-1 Data transmission. 832.7001-2 Contract clause.
    832.7000 General.

    This subpart prescribes policy requirements for submitting and processing payment requests in electronic form.

    832.7001 Electronic payment requests.

    (a) The contractor shall submit payment requests in electronic form unless directed by the contracting officer to submit payment requests by mail. Purchases paid with a Government-wide commercial purchase card are considered to be an electronic transaction for purposes of this rule, and therefore no additional electronic invoice submission is required.

    (b) The contracting officer may direct the contractor to submit payment requests by mail, through the United States Postal Service, to the designated agency office for—

    (1) Awards made to foreign vendors for work performed outside the United States;

    (2) Classified contracts or purchases when electronic submission and processing of payment requests could compromise the safeguarding of classified or privacy information;

    (3) Contracts awarded by contracting officers in the conduct of emergency operations, such as responses to national emergencies;

    (4) Solicitations or contracts in which the designated agency office is a VA entity other than the VA Financial Services Center in Austin, Texas; or

    (5) Solicitations or contracts in which the VA designated agency office does not have electronic invoicing capability as described above.

    832.7001-1 Data transmission.

    The contractor shall submit electronic payment requests through—

    (a) VA's Electronic Invoice Presentment and Payment System at the current website address provided in the contract; or

    (b) A system that conforms to the X12 electronic data interchange (EDI) formats established by the Accredited Standards Center (ASC) chartered by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

    832.7001-2 Contract clause.

    The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 852.232-72, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests, in solicitations and contracts exceeding the micro-purchase threshold, except those for which the contracting officer has directed otherwise under 832.7001, and those paid with a Governmentwide commercial purchase card.

    PART 852—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 28. The authority citation for part 852 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    38 U.S.C. 8127-8128, and 8151-8153; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 41 U.S.C. 1121(c)(3); 41 U.S.C. 1303; 41 U.S.C. 1702; and 48 CFR 1.301-1.304.

    Subpart 852.2—Text of Provisions and Clauses 29. Section 852.211-70 is revised to read as follows:
    852.211-70 Equipment Operation and Maintenance Manuals.

    As prescribed in 811.107-70, insert the following clause:

    Equipment Operation and Maintenance Manuals (Nov 2018)

    The Contractor shall follow standard commercial practices to furnish manual(s), handbook(s) or brochure(s) containing operation, installation, and maintenance instructions, including pictures or illustrations, schematics, and complete repair/test guides, as necessary, for technical medical equipment and devices, and/or other technical and mechanical equipment provided per CLIN(s) #___ [Contracting Officer insert CLIN information]. The manuals, handbooks or brochures shall be provided in hard copy, soft copy or with electronic access instructions, consistent with standard industry practices for the equipment or device. Where applicable, the manuals, handbooks or brochures will include electrical data and connection diagrams for all utilities. The documentation shall also contain a complete list of all replaceable parts showing part number, name, and quantity required.

    (End of clause)
    852.211-71 [Removed and Reserved]
    30. Section 852.211-71 is removed and reserved. 31. Section 852.211-72 is revised to read as follows:
    852.211-72 Technical Industry Standards.

    As prescribed in 811.204-70, insert the following clause:

    Technical Industry Standards (Nov 2018)

    (a) The Contractor shall conform to the standards established by:___ [Contracting Officer: Insert name of organization establishing the requirement, reference title, cite and date, e.g., United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Institutional Meat Purchase Specifications (IMPS), Series 100, Beef products, Jan 2010] as to [Contracting Officer: Insert item and CLIN, e.g., CLIN 0005 Ground Beef].

    (b) The Contractor shall submit proof of conformance to the standard. This proof may be a label or seal affixed to the equipment or supplies, warranting that the item(s) have been tested in accordance with the standards and meet the contract requirement. Proof may also be furnished by the organization listed above certifying that the item(s) furnished have been tested in accordance with and conform to the specified standards.

    (c) Offerors may obtain the standards cited in this provision by submitting a request, including the solicitation number, title and number of the publication to: [Organization]_____ [Mail or email address] _____.

    (d) The offeror shall contact the Contracting Officer if response is not received within two weeks of the request.

    (End of clause)
    852.211-73, 852.211-74, and 852.211-75 [Removed and Reserved]
    32. Remove and reserve sections 852.211-73 through 852.211-75. 33. Add section 852.232-70 to read as follows:
    852.232-70 Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Without NAS-CPM).

    As prescribed in 832.111-70, insert the following clause in contracts that do not contain a section entitled “Network Analysis System—Critical Path”

    Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Without NAS-CPM) (Nov 2018)

    The clause FAR 52.232-5, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts, is implemented as follows:

    (a) Retainage. (1) The Contracting Officer may retain funds—

    (i) Where performance under the contract has been determined to be deficient or the Contractor has performed in an unsatisfactory manner in the past; or

    (ii) As the contract nears completion, to ensure that deficiencies will be corrected and that completion is timely.

    (2) Examples of deficient performance justifying a retention of funds include, but are not restricted to, the following—

    (i) Unsatisfactory progress as determined by the Contracting Officer;

    (ii) Failure to meet schedule in Schedule of Work Progress;

    (iii) Failure to present submittals in a timely manner; or

    (iv) Failure to comply in good faith with approved subcontracting plans, certifications, or contract requirements.

    (3) Any level of retention shall not exceed 10 percent either where there is determined to be unsatisfactory performance, or when the retainage is to ensure satisfactory completion. Retained amounts shall be paid promptly upon completion of all contract requirements, but nothing contained in this paragraph (a)(3) shall be construed as limiting the Contracting Officer's right to withhold funds under other provisions of the contract or in accordance with the general law and regulations regarding the administration of Government contracts.

    (b) The Contractor shall submit a schedule of cost to the Contracting Officer for approval within 30 calendar days after date of receipt of notice to proceed. Such schedule will be signed and submitted in triplicate. The approved cost schedule will be one of the bases for determining progress payments to the Contractor for work completed. This schedule shall show cost by the work activity/event for each building or unit of the contract, as instructed by the resident engineer.

    (1) The work activities/events shall be subdivided into as many sub-activities/events as are necessary to cover all component parts of the contract work.

    (2) Costs as shown on this schedule must be true costs and the resident engineer may require the Contractor to submit the original estimate sheets or other information to substantiate the detailed makeup of the schedule.

    (3) The sums of the sub-activities/events, as applied to each work activity/event, shall equal the total cost of such work activity/event. The total cost of all work activities/events shall equal the contract price.

    (4) Insurance and similar items shall be prorated and included in the cost of each branch of the work.

    (5) The cost schedule shall include separate cost information for the systems listed in the table in this paragraph (b)(5). The percentages listed in the following table are proportions of the cost listed in the Contractor's cost schedule and identify, for payment purposes, the value of the work to adjust, correct and test systems after the material has been installed. Payment of the listed percentages will be made only after the Contractor has demonstrated that each of the systems is substantially complete and operates as required by the contract.

    Value of Adjusting, Correcting, and Testing System System Percent Pneumatic tube system 10 Incinerators (medical waste and trash) 5 Sewage treatment plant equipment 5 Water treatment plant equipment 5 Washers (dish, cage, glass, etc.) 5 Sterilizing equipment 5 Water distilling equipment 5 Prefab temperature rooms (cold, constant temperature) 5 Entire air-conditioning system (Specified under 600 Sections) 5 Entire boiler plant system (Specified under 700 Sections) 5 General supply conveyors 10 Food service conveyors 10 Pneumatic soiled linen and trash system 10 Elevators and dumbwaiters 10 Materials transport system 10 Engine-generator system 5 Primary switchgear 5 Secondary switchgear 5 Fire alarm system 5 Nurse call system 5 Intercom system 5 Radio system 5 TV (entertainment) system 5

    (c) In addition to this cost schedule, the Contractor shall submit such unit costs as may be specifically requested. The unit costs shall be those used by the Contractor in preparing its bid and will not be binding as pertaining to any contract changes.

    (d) The Contracting Officer will consider for monthly progress payments material and/or equipment procured by the Contractor and stored on the construction site, as space is available, or at a local approved location off the site, under such terms and conditions as the Contracting Officer approves, including but not limited to the following—

    (1) The materials or equipment are in accordance with the contract requirements and/or approved samples and shop drawings;

    (2) The materials and/or equipment are approved by the resident engineer;

    (3) The materials and/or equipment are stored separately and are readily available for inspection and inventory by the resident engineer;

    (4) The materials and/or equipment are protected against weather, theft and other hazards and are not subjected to deterioration; and

    (5) The Contractor obtains the concurrence of its surety for off-site storage.

    (e) The Government reserves the right to withhold payment until samples, shop drawings, engineer's certificates, additional bonds, payrolls, weekly statements of compliance, proof of title, nondiscrimination compliance reports, or any other requirements of this contract, have been submitted to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer.

    (f) The Contracting Officer will notify the Contractor in writing within 10 calendar-days of exercising retainage against any payment in accordance with FAR clause 52.232-5(e). The notice shall disclose the amount of the retainage in value and percent retained from the payment, and provide explanation for the retainage.

    (End of clause)

    Alternate I (Nov 2018). If the specifications include guarantee period services, the Contracting Officer shall include the following paragraphs as additions to paragraph (b) of the basic clause:

    (6)(i) The Contractor shall at the time of contract award furnish the total cost of the guarantee period services in accordance with specification section(s) covering guarantee period services. The Contractor shall submit, within 15 calendar days of receipt of the notice to proceed, a guarantee period performance program that shall include an itemized accounting of the number of work-hours required to perform the guarantee period service on each piece of equipment. The Contractor shall also submit the established salary costs, including employee fringe benefits, and what the Contractor reasonably expects to pay over the guarantee period, all of which will be subject to the Contracting Officer's approval.

    (ii) The cost of the guarantee period service shall be prorated on an annual basis and paid in equal monthly payments by VA during the period of guarantee. In the event the installer does not perform satisfactorily during this period, all payments may be withheld and the Contracting Officer shall inform the Contractor of the unsatisfactory performance, allowing the Contractor 10 days to correct deficiencies and comply with the contract. The guarantee period service is subject to those provisions as set forth in the Payments and Default clauses.

    34. Add section 852.232-71 to read as follows:
    852.232-71 Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Including NAS-CPM).

    As prescribed in 832.111-70, insert the following clause in contracts that contain a section entitled “Network Analysis System—Critical Path Method (NAS-CPM).”

    Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts (Including NAS-CPM) (Nov 2018)

    The clause FAR 52.232-5, Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts, is implemented as follows:

    (a) Retainage. (1) The Contracting Officer may retain funds—

    (i) Where performance under the contract has been determined to be deficient or the Contractor has performed in an unsatisfactory manner in the past; or

    (ii) As the contract nears completion, to ensure that deficiencies will be corrected and that completion is timely.

    (2) Examples of deficient performance justifying a retention of funds include, but are not restricted to, the following—

    (i) Unsatisfactory progress as determined by the Contracting Officer;

    (ii) Failure to meet schedule in Schedule of Work Progress;

    (iii) Failure to present submittals in a timely manner; or

    (iv) Failure to comply in good faith with approved subcontracting plans, certifications, or contract requirements.

    (3) Any level of retention shall not exceed 10 percent either where there is determined to be unsatisfactory performance, or when the retainage is to ensure satisfactory completion. Retained amounts shall be paid promptly upon completion of all contract requirements, but nothing contained in this paragraph (a)(3) shall be construed as limiting the Contracting Officer's right to withhold funds under other provisions of the contract or in accordance with the general law and regulations regarding the administration of Government contracts.

    (b) The Contractor shall submit a schedule of costs in accordance with the requirements of section “Network Analysis System—Critical Path Method (NAS-CPM)” to the Contracting Officer for approval within 90 calendar days after date of receipt of notice to proceed. The approved cost schedule will be one of the bases for determining progress payments to the Contractor for work completed.

    (1) Costs as shown on this schedule must be true costs and the resident engineer may require the Contractor to submit its original estimate sheets or other information to substantiate the detailed makeup of the cost schedule.

    (2) The total costs of all work activities/events shall equal the contract price.

    (3) Insurance and similar items shall be prorated and included in each work activity/event cost of the critical path method (CPM).

    (4) The CPM shall include a separate cost loaded activity for adjusting and testing of the systems listed in the table in paragraph (b)(5) of this clause. The percentages listed in paragraph (b)(5) will be used to determine the cost of adjust and test work activities/events and identify, for payment purposes, the value of the work to adjust, correct and test systems after the material has been installed.

    (5) Payment for adjust and test activities will be made only after the Contractor has demonstrated that each of the systems is substantially complete and operates as required by the contract.

    Value of Adjusting, Correcting, and Testing System System Percent Pneumatic tube system 10 Incinerators (medical waste and trash) 5 Sewage treatment plant equipment 5 Water treatment plant equipment 5 Washers (dish, cage, glass, etc.) 5 Sterilizing equipment 5 Water distilling equipment 5 Prefab temperature rooms (cold, constant temperature) 5 Entire air-conditioning system (Specified under 600 Sections) 5 Entire boiler plant system (Specified under 700 Sections) 5 General supply conveyors 10 Food service conveyors 10 Pneumatic soiled linen and trash system 10 Elevators and dumbwaiters 10 Materials transport system 10 Engine-generator system 5 Primary switchgear 5 Secondary switchgear 5 Fire alarm system 5 Nurse call system 5 Intercom system 5 Radio system 5 TV (entertainment) system 5

    (c) In addition to this cost schedule, the Contractor shall submit such unit costs as may be specifically requested. The unit costs shall be those used by the Contractor in preparing its bid and will not be binding as pertaining to any contract changes.

    (d) The Contracting Officer will consider for monthly progress payments material and/or equipment procured by the Contractor and stored on the construction site, as space is available, or at a local approved location off the site, under such terms and conditions as the Contracting Officer approves, including but not limited to the following—

    (1) The materials or equipment are in accordance with the contract requirements and/or approved samples and shop drawings;

    (2) The materials and/or equipment are approved by the resident engineer;

    (3) The materials and/or equipment are stored separately and are readily available for inspection and inventory by the resident engineer;

    (4) The materials and/or equipment are protected against weather, theft and other hazards and are not subjected to deterioration; and

    (5) The Contractor obtains the concurrence of its surety for off-site storage.

    (e) The Government reserves the right to withhold payment until samples, shop drawings, engineer's certificates, additional bonds, payrolls, weekly statements of compliance, proof of title, nondiscrimination compliance reports, or any other requirements of this contract, have been submitted to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer.

    (f) The Contracting Officer will notify the Contractor in writing within 10 calendar-days of exercising retainage against any payment in accordance with FAR clause 52.232-5(e). The notice shall disclose the amount of the retainage in value and percent retained from the payment, and provide explanation for the retainage.

    (End of clause)

    Alternate I (Nov 2018). If the specifications include guarantee period services, the Contracting Officer shall include the following paragraphs as additions to paragraph (b) of the basic clause:

    (6)(i) The Contractor shall show on the critical path method (CPM) the total cost of the guarantee period services in accordance with the guarantee period service section(s) of the specifications. This cost shall be priced out when submitting the CPM cost loaded network. The cost submitted shall be subject to the approval of the Contracting Officer. The activity on the CPM shall have money only and not activity time.

    (ii) The Contractor shall submit with the CPM a guarantee period performance program which shall include an itemized accounting of the number of work-hours required to perform the guarantee period service on each piece of equipment. The Contractor shall also submit the established salary costs, including employee fringe benefits, and what the Contractor reasonably expects to pay over the guarantee period, all of which will be subject to the Contracting Officer's approval.

    (iii) The cost of the guarantee period service shall be prorated on an annual basis and paid in equal monthly payments by VA during the period of guarantee. In the event the installer does not perform satisfactorily during this period, all payments may be withheld and the Contracting Officer shall inform the Contractor of the unsatisfactory performance, allowing the Contractor 10 days to correct and comply with the contract. The guarantee period service is subject to those provisions as set forth in the Payments and Default clauses.

    35. Section 852.232-72 is revised to read as follows:
    852.232-72 Electronic Submission of Payment Requests.

    As prescribed in 832.7001-2, insert the following clause:

    Electronic Submission of Payment Requests (Nov 2018)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this clause—

    (1) Contract financing payment has the meaning given in FAR 32.001;

    (2) Designated agency office means the office designated by the purchase order, agreement, or contract to first receive and review invoices. This office can be contractually designated as the receiving entity. This office may be different from the office issuing the payment;

    (3) Electronic form means an automated system transmitting information electronically according to the accepted electronic data transmission methods and formats identified in paragraph (c) of this clause. Facsimile, email, and scanned documents are not acceptable electronic forms for submission of payment requests;

    (4) Invoice payment has the meaning given in FAR 32.001; and

    (5) Payment request means any request for contract financing payment or invoice payment submitted by the Contractor under this contract.

    (b) Electronic payment requests. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this clause, the Contractor shall submit payment requests in electronic form. Purchases paid with a Government-wide commercial purchase card are considered to be an electronic transaction for purposes of this rule, and therefore no additional electronic invoice submission is required.

    (c) Data transmission. A Contractor must ensure that the data transmission method and format are through one of the following:

    (1) VA's Electronic Invoice Presentment and Payment System at the current website address provided in the contract.

    (2) Any system that conforms to the X12 electronic data interchange (EDI) formats established by the Accredited Standards Center (ASC) and chartered by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

    (d) Invoice requirements. Invoices shall comply with FAR 32.905.

    (e) Exceptions. If, based on one of the circumstances in this paragraph (e), the Contracting Officer directs that payment requests be made by mail, the Contractor shall submit payment requests by mail through the United States Postal Service to the designated agency office. Submission of payment requests by mail may be required for—

    (1) Awards made to foreign vendors for work performed outside the United States;

    (2) Classified contracts or purchases when electronic submission and processing of payment requests could compromise the safeguarding of classified or privacy information;

    (3) Contracts awarded by Contracting Officers in the conduct of emergency operations, such as responses to national emergencies;

    (4) Solicitations or contracts in which the designated agency office is a VA entity other than the VA Financial Services Center in Austin, Texas; or

    (5) Solicitations or contracts in which the VA designated agency office does not have electronic invoicing capability as described above.

    (End of clause)
    852.236-82 and 852.236-83 [Removed and Reserved]
    36. Remove and reserve sections 852.236-82 and 852.236-83. PART 870—SPECIAL PROCUREMENT CONTROLS 37. The authority citation for part 870 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 41 U.S.C. 1702; and 48 CFR 1.301-1.304.

    870.112 and 870.113 [Removed]
    38. Remove sections 870.112 and 870.113.
    [FR Doc. 2018-18984 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
    83 190 Monday, October 1, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 920 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-18-0060; SC18-920-1 PR] Kiwifruit Grown California; Decreased Assessment Rate AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would implement a recommendation from the Kiwifruit Administrative Committee (Committee) to decrease the assessment rate established for the 2018-2019 and subsequent fiscal periods. The assessment rate would remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposed rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or internet: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposed rule will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria Stobbe, Marketing Specialist or Terry Vawter, Senior Marketing Specialist, California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202)720-8938, or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, proposes an amendment to regulations issued to carry out a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This proposed rule is issued under Marketing Agreement and Order No. 920, as amended (7 CFR part 920), regulating the handling of kiwifruit grown in California. Part 920 (referred to as the “Order”) is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.” The Committee locally administers the Order and is comprised of producers of kiwifruit operating within the area of production, and one member of the public.

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in conformance with Executive Orders 13563 and 13175. This action falls within a category of regulatory actions that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 12866 review. Additionally, because this proposal does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action, it does not trigger the requirements contained in Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, titled ‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs’ ” (February 2, 2017).

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the Order now in effect, kiwifruit handlers in California are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the Order are derived from such assessments. It is intended that the assessment rate would be applicable to all assessable kiwifruit for the 2018-2019 fiscal period, and continue until amended, suspended, or terminated.

    The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

    The Order provides authority for the Committee, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the program. The members of the Committee are producers of kiwifruit grown in California, and one member of the public. They are familiar with the Committee's needs and with the costs for goods and services in their local area and are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.

    This proposed rule would decrease the assessment rate for the 2018-2019 and subsequent fiscal periods from $0.040 to $0.025 per 9-kilo volume-fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit handled.

    The Committee met on July 19, 2018, and unanimously recommended 2018-19 expenditures of $119,000, and an assessment rate of $0.025 per 9-kilo volume-fill of kiwifruit. In comparison, last year's budgeted expenditures were $114,383. The assessment rate of $.025 is $0.015 lower than the rate currently in effect. The Committee currently has a cash reserve of approximately $52,056. The proposed decreased assessment rate, plus the cash reserve are sufficient to fund the 2018-2019 budgeted expenses.

    The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for 2018-2019 include $80,000 for management services, $29,000 in office expenditures, and $10,000 for research. Budgeted expenses for these items in 2017-2018 were $80,000 for management services, $24,383 in office expenditures, and $10,000 for research.

    The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by considering anticipated expenses, expected shipments of kiwifruit in the production area, and the level of funds in the authorized reserve. Kiwifruit shipments for the 2018-2019 season are estimated at 4,207,071 9-kilo volume-fill containers, which should provide $105,177 in assessment income (4,207,071 9-kilo volume-fill containers times $0.025 per container equals $105,177). Income derived from handler assessments, along with interest income and funds from the Committee's authorized reserve, would be adequate to cover budgeted expenses. Funds in the reserve (currently $52,056) would be kept within the maximum permitted by the Order (approximately one fiscal period's expenses).

    The assessment rate recommended in this proposal would continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee and other available information.

    Although this assessment rate would be in effect for an indefinite period, the Committee would continue to meet prior to or during each fiscal period to recommend a budget of expenses and consider recommendations for modification of the assessment rate. The dates and times of Committee meetings are available from the Committee or USDA. Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. USDA would evaluate Committee recommendations and other available information to determine whether modification of the assessment rate is needed. Further rulemaking would be undertaken as necessary. The Committee's budget for subsequent fiscal periods would be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved by USDA.

    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this proposed rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

    There are approximately 140 producers of kiwifruit in the production area and approximately 20 handlers subject to regulation under the Order. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $7,500,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

    According to Committee, USDA Market News, and National Agricultural Statics Service (NASS) data, the average price of kiwifruit for the 2016-17 season was approximately $0.92 per pound, and the total crop was approximately 9.0 million tray equivalents, or 63 million pounds. Based on the average price and handler-specific annual kiwifruit sales data provided by the Committee, nineteen of the twenty handlers have average annual receipts less than $7,500,000. Thus, the majority of kiwifruit handlers may be classified as small business entities.

    In addition, based on information from the NASS, the average grower price for kiwifruit during the 2016-17 season was approximately $0.525 cents per pound. The Committee analyzed grower-specific production data and determined that growers with production over 204,081 9-kilo volume-fill containers would be classified as large entities (204,081 9-kilo volume-fill containers time 7 pounds per container times $0.525 per pound = $749,998). Using the NASS average grower price and the Committee's specific grower production information, at least 130 of 140 producers have annual receipts of less than $750,000. Thus, the majority of the kiwifruit producers may be classified as small entities.

    This proposal would decrease the assessment rate collected from handlers for the 2018-2019 and subsequent fiscal periods from $0.040 to $0.025 per 9-kilo volume-fill container of kiwifruit. The Committee unanimously recommended 2018-2019 expenditures of $119,000, and an assessment rate of $0.025 per 9-kilo volume-fill container. The proposed assessment rate of $0.025 is $0.015 lower than the 2017-2018 rate. The quantity of assessable commodity for the 2018-2019 fiscal year is estimated at 4,207,071 9-kilo volume-fill container. Thus, the $0.025 rate should provide $105,177 in assessment income (4,207,071 × $0.025). Income derived from handler assessments, along with interest income and funds from the Committee's authorized reserve (currently, $52,056), would be adequate to cover budgeted expenses.

    The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2018-2019 fiscal year include $80,000 for management services, $29,000 in office expenditures, and $10,000 for research. Budgeted expenses for these items in 2017-2018 were $80,000 for management services, $24,383 in office expenditures, and $10,000 for research. The Committee estimates that the funds in the reserve (currently $52,056) would be reduced by $13,303 to ensure the reserve remains within the maximum permitted by the Order (approximately one fiscal period's expenses).

    Prior to arriving at this budget and assessment rate, the Committee considered various options, such as maintaining the current assessment rate and expenditure levels. Alternative expenditure levels were discussed by the Committee, based upon the relative value of various activities to the kiwifruit industry. The Committee ultimately determined that 2018-2019 expenditures of $119,000 were appropriate, the recommended $0.025 assessment rate, and the use of $13,303 from the financial reserve, would be sufficient to meet its expenses.

    A review of historical crop and price information, as well as preliminary information pertaining to the upcoming fiscal period, indicates that the shipping point price for the 2017-2018 season averaged about $17.32 per 9-kilo volume-fill container of California kiwifruit handled. If the 2018-2019 price is similar to the 2017-2018 price, estimated assessment revenue as a percentage of total estimated handler revenue would be 0.14 percent for the 2018-2019 season ($0.025 divided by $17.32 per 9-kilo volume-fill container).

    This proposed rule would decrease the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. Assessments are applied uniformly on all handlers, and some of the costs may be passed on to producers. However, decreasing the assessment rate would reduce the burden on handlers, and may reduce the burden on producers. This proposal would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    The Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the production area. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the July 19, 2018, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and information collection impacts of this action on small businesses.

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the Order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB No. 0581-0189, Fruit Crops. No changes in those requirements would be necessary as a result of this proposed rule. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

    This proposed rule would not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California kiwifruit handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

    AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

    USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action.

    A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously-mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposed rule. All written comments timely received will be considered before a final determination is made on this rule.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920

    Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 920 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 920—KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN CALIFORNIA 1. The authority citation for part 920 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    2. Section 920.213 is revised to read as follows:
    § 920.213 Assessment rate.

    On and after August 1, 2018, an assessment rate of $0.025 per 9-kilo volume-fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit is established for kiwifruit grown in California.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Bruce Summers, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21264 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 1212 [Document Number AMS-SC-18-0016] Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order; Change in Membership AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposal invites comments on changing the National Honey Board (Board) importer-handler member and alternate to an importer member and alternate. The Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order (Order) is administered by the Board with oversight by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This proposal would also update the definition for the term Board to reflect current practices, and make clarifying and conforming changes to other provisions of the program.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposal. Comments may be submitted on the internet at: http://www.regulations.gov or to the Promotion and Economics Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 1406-S, Stop 0244, Washington, DC 20250-0244; facsimile: (202) 205-2800. All comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be made available for public inspection, including name and address, if provided, in the above office during regular business hours or it can be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sue Coleman, Marketing Specialist, Promotion and Economics Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 1406-S, Stop 0244, Washington, DC 20250-0244; telephone: (202) 378-2569; facsimile: (202) 205-2800; or electronic mail: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposal affecting 7 CFR part 1212 is authorized under the Commodity Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1996 (1996 Act) (7 U.S.C. 7411-7425).

    Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules and promoting flexibility. This action falls within a category of regulatory actions that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 12866 review. Additionally, because this rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action it does not trigger the requirements contained in Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

    Executive Order 13175

    This action has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. The review reveals that this regulation would not have substantial and direct effects on Tribal governments and would not have significant Tribal implications.

    Executive Order 12988

    This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. Section 524 of the 1996 Act (7 U.S.C. 7423) provides that it shall not affect or preempt any other Federal or State law authorizing promotion or research relating to an agricultural commodity.

    Under section 519 of the 1996 Act (7 U.S.C. 7418), a person subject to an order may file a written petition with USDA stating that an order, any provision of an order, or any obligation imposed in connection with an order, is not established in accordance with the law, and request a modification of an order or an exemption from an order. Any petition filed challenging an order, any provision of an order, or any obligation imposed in connection with an order, shall be filed within two years after the effective date of an order, provision, or obligation subject to challenge in the petition. The petitioner will have the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. Thereafter, USDA will issue a ruling on the petition. The 1996 Act provides that the district court of the United States for any district in which the petitioner resides or conducts business shall have the jurisdiction to review a final ruling on the petition, if the petitioner files a complaint for that purpose not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of USDA's final ruling.

    Background

    This proposal invites comments on changing the importer-handler member and alternate to an importer member and alternate on the Board under the Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order (Order). The Order is administered by the Board with oversight by USDA. Under the Order, assessments are collected from first handlers and importers and used for research and promotion projects designed to maintain and expand the market for honey and honey products in the United States and abroad. This proposal would change the importer-handler representatives to importer representatives and make clarifying and conforming changes to other provisions of the program. This action was unanimously recommended by the Board in October 2017 and would allow more importers to be eligible to serve on the Board.

    Section 1212.46 of the Order provides authority for the Board to recommend amendments to the Order. Section 1212.40 of the Order provides that the Board have ten members—three first handlers, two importers, one importer-handler, three producers, and one marketing cooperative representative. Each member shall have an alternate. Currently, the eligible importer-handler member and alternate must import at least 75 percent of the honey or honey products they market in the United States and handle at least 250,000 pounds annually. With the proposed amendment, the total number of Board representatives would remain at ten, but importer representatives would increase from two to three representatives and the importer-handler member would be removed. Handlers would continue to be represented with three members on the Board. A corresponding adjustment would be made to the alternate representatives for each member. This action would increase the pool of importer nominees eligible to serve on the Board and reflect the current distribution of the industry.

    U.S. honey imports have dramatically increased from 104,984 metric tons in 2008 to 203,534 metric tons in 2017. In comparison, U.S. honey production has decreased. USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service estimates U.S. honey production from producers with 5 or more colonies at 164 million pounds in 2008 and at 148 million pounds in 2017.1 The proposed changes to the Board would reflect the distribution of the production of honey and the quantity of the honey and honey products imported into the United States.

    1 USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Honey, March 14, 2018, p. 3, http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Hone/Hone-03-14-2018.pdf.

    Nominations to the Board are made by qualified national organizations and these organizations were consulted before the Board's recommendation. No qualified national organizations were opposed to the recommendation.

    The Board met on October 26, 2017, and unanimously recommended that the importer-handler member and alternate become an importer member and alternate. This should allow more importers to be eligible to serve on the Board. Section 1212.40 of the Order is proposed to be revised accordingly. Conforming changes would be made to remove references to the importer-handler representative by removing § 1212.12 and revising §§ 1212.22, 1212.41, and 1212.42(b).

    The current importer-handler member and alternate were appointed to the Board for a term that began on January 1, 2018 and ends on December 31, 2020. The importer-handler member and alternate would remain in their positions until their term expires on December 31, 2020. The following term beginning on January 1, 2021, would be filled by an importer member and importer alternate.

    Finally, this proposal would revise the term Board as defined in § 1212.2 from the `Honey Packers and Importers Board' to the `National Honey Board' to reflect current practices. The term as it appears in § 1212.40 and in the undesignated heading preceding § 1212.40 would also be revised to read `National Honey Board.'

    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), AMS is required to examine the impact of the proposed rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has considered the economic impact of this action on such entities.

    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions so that small businesses will not be disproportionately burdened. The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines, in 13 CFR part 121, small agricultural producers as those having annual receipts of no more than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms (first handlers and importers) as those having annual receipts of no more than $7.5 million.

    The Board reported that there were about 785 importers and 40 first handlers of honey and honey products covered under the program during the 2017 fiscal period. Fourteen out of the 40 first handlers (35 percent) and 23 out of the 785 importers (3 percent) accounted for 91 and 90 percent of the assessments in their respective categories. Total assessments for 2017 were $8.87 million, of which $2.09 million (24 percent) were paid by first handlers and $6.78 million (76 percent) were paid by importers. This data can be used to compute an estimate of average annual revenue from honey sales from each of these categories, which in turn helps to estimate the number of large and small first handlers and importers. As mentioned above, 14 first handlers account for 91 percent of the domestic assessments. Multiplying first handler assessments in 2017 of $2,091,881 by 0.91 and then dividing by 14 yields an average annual assessment of $135,972 for the first handlers in this category. Dividing this figure ($135,972) by the assessment rate of 1.5 cents per pound ($0.015) yields an average quantity per first handler of 9.065 million pounds. Multiplying 9.065 million pounds by the average 2017 U.S. domestic price of $2.16 per pound 2 yields an average, annual honey revenue per handler of $19.58 million, which is well above the SBA threshold of $7.5 million. It should be noted that this revenue estimate is based on the average price at the producer level, and the $19.58 million is an estimate of the total value at which the average size handler acquired the honey from producers. Therefore, most of the 14 first handlers that pay 91 percent of the domestic assessments are likely to be large firms according to the SBA definition.

    2 USDA, NASS, Honey, March 14, 2018, p. 3, http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Hone/Hone-03-14-2018.pdf.

    An equivalent computation can be made for the 23 importers who paid 90 percent of the $6,778,147 in assessments in 2017. Of the 23 importers, the average assessment per importer was $265,741. Dividing the average assessment per importer by the assessment rate of $0.015 per pound yields an average quantity per importer estimate of 17.716 million pounds.

    For honey imports, the equivalent of the season average price for domestic honey is referred to as a “unit value.” The unit value of $1.23 per pound is computed by dividing annual imported honey value of $550.16 million by average quantity of 448.72 million pounds.3 Multiplying the $1.23 unit value by the average quantity of 17.716 million pounds yields average annual honey revenue per importer figure of $21.790 million, almost three times the SBA threshold figure of $7.5 million for a large firm. Therefore, the majority of the 23 importers that pay 90 percent of the assessments are large firms, according to the SBA definition.

    3 USDA, AMS, SCP, MND, National Honey Report, February 26, 2018, p. 10, https://www.ams.usda.gov/mnreports/fvmhoney.pdf.

    Comparable computations can be made to determine the average 2017 honey revenue for the 26 first handlers and 762 importers that paid 9 and 10 percent, respectively, of the assessment in the first handler and importer categories. The first handler and importer average annual honey revenue figures are approximately $1,043,000 and $17,000, respectively, indicating that the vast majority are small businesses (in terms of honey sales), under the SBA large business threshold of $7.5 million in annual sales.

    Based on the foregoing, the majority of first handlers and importers may be classified as small entities.

    This proposed rule invites comments on changing the importer-handler Board member and alternate, as specified in section 1212.40 of the Order, to an importer member and alternate. The Order currently requires one importer-handler representative on the Board who must import at least 75 percent of the honey or honey products they market in the United States and handle at least 250,000 pounds annually. The U.S. honey industry has experienced dramatic increases in imported honey and honey products, as the domestic production has decreased. Thus, the Board unanimously recommended that the importer-handler representative become an importer representative. This would allow for a greater pool of importer nominees to be eligible to serve on the Board. Conforming changes would also be made to remove § 1212.12 and revise §§ 1212.22, 1212.41, and 1212.42(b). Finally, this proposal would update the term Board to reflect current practices (§ 1212.2, the heading preceding § 1212.40 and § 1212.40). Authority for this action is provided in section 1212.46(d) of the Order.

    Relaxing the eligibility requirements for importer representatives on the Board is administrative in nature and would have no economic impact on entities covered under the program. This change would help increase the number of importers who would be eligible to serve on the Board. Eligible producers, first handlers, and importers interested in serving on the Board would have to complete a background questionnaire. Those requirements are addressed later in this proposal in the section titled Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements.

    Prior to arriving at this proposed action, the Board consulted with the qualified national organizations that make the nominations to the Board. Alternatives that were considered included making no changes and adjusting the eligibility requirements. However, in considering the distribution of the production of honey and the quantity of honey and honey products imported into the United States, the Board concluded that revising the importer-handler representative to an importer representative would be an accurate reflection of the industry and would increase the pool of eligible importers.

    Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the information collection requirements that are imposed by the part have been previously approved by OMB under OMB control number 0581-0093. Additionally, Board nominees (including producers) must submit a Background Information form (AD-755) to ensure they are qualified to serve on the Board. The time to complete that form is estimated at 30 minutes per response. The background form is approved under OMB control no. 0505-0001. This proposed rule would not result in a change to the information collection and recordkeeping requirements previously approved and would impose no additional reporting requirements and recordkeeping burden on honey producers, first handlers, or importers.

    As with all Federal promotion programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public-sector agencies. Finally, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.

    This action was discussed with the qualified national organizations. The Board met on October 26, 2017, and unanimously recommended changing the importer-handler representative to an importer representative. All of the Board's meetings are open to the public and interested persons are invited to participate and express their views.

    AMS has performed this initial RFA regarding the impact of this proposed action on small entities and invites comments concerning potential effects of this action.

    USDA has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with and would effectuate the purposes of the 1996 Act.

    A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposal. All written comments received in response to this proposed rule by the date specified will be considered prior to finalizing this action.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1212

    Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Consumer information, Honey Packer and Importer promotion, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 1212 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 1212—HONEY PACKERS AND IMPORTERS RESEARCH, PROMOTION, CONSUMER EDUCATION AND INDUSTRY INFORMATION ORDER 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 1212 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7411-7425; 7 U.S.C. 7401.

    2. Revise § 1212.2 to read as follows:
    § 1212.2 Board.

    “Board” or “National Honey Board” means the administrative body established pursuant to § 1212.40, or such other name as recommended by the Board and approved by the Department.

    3. Remove and reserve § 1212.12. 4. Revise § 1212.22 to read as follows:
    § 1212.22 Qualified national organization representing importer interests.

    “Qualified national organization representing importer interests” means an organization that the Secretary certifies as being eligible to nominate importer and alternate importer members of the Board under § 1212.42.

    5. Revise the undesignated center heading preceding § 1212.40 to read “National Honey Board.” 6. Revise 1212.40 to read as follows:
    § 1212.40 Establishment and membership.

    The National Honey Board is established to administer the terms and provisions of this part. The Board shall have ten members, composed of three first handler representatives, three importer representatives, three producer representatives, and one marketing cooperative representative. In addition, each producer representative must produce a minimum of 50,000 pounds of honey in the United States annually based on the best three-year average of the most recent five calendar years, as certified by producers. The Secretary will appoint members to the Board from nominees submitted in accordance with § 1212.42. The Secretary shall also appoint an alternate for each member.

    7. Revise § 1212.41 to read as follows:
    § 1212.41 Term of office.

    Each Board member and alternate will serve a three-year term or until the Secretary selects his or her successor. No member or alternate may serve more than two consecutive terms. Each term of office will end on December 31, with new terms of office beginning on January 1.

    8. Revise § 1212.42 paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 1212.42 Nominations and appointments.

    (b) All qualified national organizations representing importer interests will have the opportunity to participate in a nomination caucus and will, to the extent practical, submit as a group a single slate of nominations to the Secretary for importer positions and the importer alternate positions on the Board. If the Secretary determines that there are no qualified national organizations representing importer interests, individual importers who have paid assessments to the Board in the most recent fiscal period may submit nominations.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Bruce Summers, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21266 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0801; Product Identifier 2017-NM-147-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008-24-14, which applies to all Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. AD 2008-24-14 requires revising the instructions for continued airworthiness to incorporate certain airworthiness limitations for the main landing gear (MLG) trunnion fitting assembly. Since we issued AD 2008-24-14, new airworthiness limitation (AWL) tasks have been introduced with revised inspection, modification, and safe-life requirements. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate certain AWLs. It would also require reworking the trunnion fitting in order to meet new structural safe-life limits. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

    Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 1-514-855-2999; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    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-2018-0801; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7329; fax 516-794-5531.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0801; Product Identifier 2017-NM-147-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

    Discussion

    We issued AD 2008-24-14, Amendment 39-15758 (73 FR 73785, December 4, 2008) (“AD 2008-24-14”), for all Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. AD 2008-24-14 requires revising the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate new structural inspection requirements. AD 2008-24-14 resulted from reports of the discovery of cracks on the MLG trunnion fitting web during fatigue testing. We issued AD 2008-24-14 to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the MLG trunnion fitting web.

    Actions Since AD 2008-24-14 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2008-24-14, new AWL tasks have been introduced with revised inspection, modification, and safe-life requirements, and we have determined that the trunnion fitting lower flange and both forward and aft bore holes are also subject to fatigue cracking.

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Cracks on the main landing gear (MLG) trunnion fitting web discovered during fatigue testing led to the issuance of [Canadian] AD CF-2008-21 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2008-24-14], which mandated new inspection requirements to ensure that fatigue cracking of the trunnion web would be detected and corrected.

    Additional fatigue test article findings and in-service findings have shown that the trunnion fitting lower flange and both forward and aft bore holes are also subject to fatigue cracking. Failure of the main landing gear trunnion fitting could result in the collapse of the main landing gear. Bombardier Inc. has decided to implement a series of design changes to improve the fatigue life of the trunnion fitting that is now a safe-life assembly.

    New and revised Airworthiness Limitation (AWL) tasks for the MLG trunnion fitting assembly have been introduced in order to require new inspection, modification, and safe-life requirements. This [Canadian] AD mandates the incorporation of these new and revised AWL tasks, and removal of the AWL tasks they replace, to ensure that fatigue cracking of the MLG trunnion fitting is detected and corrected. This [Canadian] AD also requires rework of the trunnion fitting in order to meet new structural safe-life limits.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0801.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued the following service information.

    • Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Revision C, dated December 20, 2012, describes the cold working of fastener holes in the MLG trunnion fitting, and related investigative and corrective actions.

    • Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-047, Revision B, dated October 2, 2012, describes the installation of forcemate bushings in the MLG trunnion, and related investigative and corrective actions.

    • Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Revision C, dated June 6, 2013, describes the cold working of holes on the web of the MLG trunnion, and related investigative and corrective actions.

    These documents are distinct because they apply to different parts of the airplane.

    The following service information describes certain AWL tasks for the MLG trunnion fitting assembly.

    • Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual Temporary Revision (TR) 2B-2237, dated June 19, 2014.

    • Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual Temporary Revision (TR) 2B-2238, dated June 19, 2014.

    • Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual Temporary Revision (TR) 2B-2239, dated June 19, 2014.

    • Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual Temporary Revision (TR) 2B-2241, dated June 19, 2014.

    • Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual Temporary Revision (TR) 2B-2242, dated June 19, 2014.

    • Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual Temporary Revision (TR) 2B-2246, dated November 7, 2014.

    These documents are distinct because they describe different actions. 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.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections). Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph (p)(1) of this proposed AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The MCAI includes the following statement: “If it is not possible to complete all of the instructions in the SBs . . . due to the configuration of the aircraft, contact Bombardier Inc. for approved instructions.” This issue is addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, which states that “If a change in a product affects your ability to accomplish the actions required by the AD in any way, you must request FAA approval of an AMOC [alternative method of compliance]. . . .” Since we do not currently have the authority to delegate AMOC approvals to foreign civil aviation authorities, the FAA is responsible for these approvals.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 460 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Retained actions 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $0 >$85 $39,100. Rework trunnion bearings (new proposed actions) Up to 178 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up to $15,130 38,928 Up to $54,058 Up to $24,866,680.

    We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

    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 proposed 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 transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 proposed regulation:

    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.

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008-24-14, Amendment 39-15758 (73 FR 73785, December 4, 2008), and adding the following new AD: Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2018-0801; Product Identifier 2017-NM-147-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 15, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2008-24-14, Amendment 39-15758 (73 FR 73785, December 4, 2008) (“AD 2008-24-14”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 7002 and subsequent.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks on the main landing gear trunnion (MLG) fitting during fatigue testing, the introduction of new airworthiness limitation (AWL) tasks with revised inspection, modification, and safe-life requirements, and a determination that the trunnion fitting lower flange and both forward and aft bore holes are also subject to fatigue cracking. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the MLG trunnion fitting. Failure of the MLG trunnion fitting web could compromise the structural integrity of the trunnion fitting and result in MLG collapse.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Revision of Airworthiness Limitation Section With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of AD 2008-24-14, with no changes. Within 30 days after December 19, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-24-14), revise the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to incorporate AWL 57-21-161, as identified in Bombardier Temporary Revision 2B-2136, dated May 1, 2008, to the Bombardier CL-600-2B19 Maintenance Requirements Manual, Part 2, Appendix B—Airworthiness Limitations. The initial compliance time for the task starts from the applicable time specified in table 1 or table 2 to paragraphs (g) and (j) of this AD, as applicable. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable interval specified in Bombardier Temporary Revision 2B-2136, dated May 1, 2008.

    EP01OC18.000 (h) Retained No Alternative Actions or Intervals With New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f)(2) of AD 2008-24-14, with a new exception: Except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, after accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals may be used unless the inspection or inspection interval is approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this AD.

    (i) New Requirement of This AD: Revision of Maintenance or Inspection Program

    (1) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by incorporating the AWL tasks specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (i) and (o) of this AD. Except as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD, the initial compliance times for the tasks are at the applicable times specified in the temporary revisions (TRs) identified in figure 1 to paragraph (i) and (o) of this AD, or within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. When the information in AWL tasks identified in the TRs specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (i) and (o) of this AD has been included in the general revisions of Bombardier Maintenance Requirements Manual (MRM), CSP A-053, Part 2, Appendix B, the general revisions may be inserted in the MRM, and the TRs may be removed.

    EP01OC18.001

    (2) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by removing the AWL tasks specified in figure 2 to paragraph (i) of this AD.

    EP01OC18.002 (j) New Requirement of This AD: Initial Compliance Times for AWL Tasks

    (1) For AWL 57-21-161, the compliance time for the initial inspection of AWL 57-21-161 is as specified in tables 1 or 2 to paragraphs (g) and (j) of this AD, as applicable; or within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (2) For AWL 57-21-161, the compliance time for the limitation section is at the applicable time specified in AWL 57-21-161 or within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (3) For AWL 57-21-145 and AWL 57-21-155, the compliance times for the initial inspections are at the applicable times specified in AWL 57-21-145 and AWL 57-21-155 or within 2,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (k) New Requirement of This AD: No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this AD.

    (l) New Requirement of This AD: Rework of MLG Trunnion To Meet Structural Safe-Life Limits

    Except as specified in paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of this AD: Within the phase-in times specified in paragraphs (j)(2) and (j)(3) of this AD, rework the MLG trunnion in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service information identified in paragraphs (l)(1) through (l)(3) of this AD, as applicable.

    (1) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Revision C, dated December 20, 2012, for the cold working of fastener holes in the MLG trunnion fitting, and related investigative and corrective actions.

    (2) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-047, Revision B, dated October 2, 2012, for the installation of forcemate bushings in the MLG trunnion, and related investigative and corrective actions.

    (3) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Revision C, dated June 6, 2013, for the cold work of holes on the web of the MLG trunnion, and related investigative and corrective actions.

    (m) Exceptions to Rework Requirements

    (1) For airplanes on which Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Revision A, dated December 21, 2009; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Initial Issue, dated July 17, 2009; was accomplished prior to the effective date of this AD: Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, do Part G of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Revision C, dated December 20, 2012.

    (2) For airplanes on which Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Revision A, dated November 24, 2009; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Initial Issue, dated July 17, 2009; was accomplished prior to the effective date of this AD: Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, do Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Revision C, dated June 6, 2013.

    (n) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (l)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD, using Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Revision B, dated August 24, 2012.

    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (l)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD, using the service information specified in paragraph (n)(2)(i) or (n)(2)(ii) of this AD.

    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-047, Revision A, dated February 1, 2012.

    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-047, Initial Issue, dated June 29, 2011.

    (3) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (l)(3) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD, using Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Revision B, dated August 24, 2012.

    (4) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (m)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD, using Part G of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-046, Revision B, dated August 24, 2012.

    (5) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (m)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD, using Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-57-048, Revision B, dated August 24, 2012.

    (o) Repairs and Alternative Actions or Intervals

    (1) If any damage is found during an inspection required by the AWLs identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (i) and (o) of this AD, repair before further flight using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature. The approved repair instructions must specifically refer to this AD or Canadian AD CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017.

    (2) Repairs approved by Bombardier, Inc., that deviate from the AWLs identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (i) and (o) of this AD are acceptable methods of compliance if approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature. The approved repair instructions must specifically refer to this AD or Canadian AD CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017.

    (3) For repairs approved before the effective date of this AD that affect the AWLs identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (i) and (o) of this AD and the approved repair instructions do not specifically refer to Canadian AD CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017: Within 6 months of the effective date of this AD, contact the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO Inc., for new or revised limitations or inspection requirements on the repair area and comply with the revised limitations or inspections requirements. The new or revised limitations or inspection requirements must specifically refer to this AD or Canadian AD CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017.

    (4) Canadian AMOC No. AARDG-2018/A21, dated May 1, 2018, which was approved before the effective date of this AD by TCCA, is an acceptable method of compliance to the corresponding requirements of this AD.

    (p) Other FAA AD Provisions

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO 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 certification office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7300; fax 516-794-5531. 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.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature. The approved corrective action instructions must specifically refer to this AD or Canadian AD CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017.

    (q) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2017-27, dated August 2, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0801.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7329; fax 516-794-5531.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 1-514-855-2999; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on September 11, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-20950 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service 36 CFR Part 242 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. FWS-R7-SM-2018-0003; FXRS12610700000-189-FF07J00000; FBMS #4500124645] RIN 1018-BB99 Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska—Cook Inlet Area Regulations AGENCY:

    Forest Service, Agriculture; Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would revise the regulations for seasons, harvest limits, and methods and means for the subsistence taking of fish in the Cook Inlet Area of Alaska. This action would also reorganize specific regulations addressing the Kenai River, which would provide clarity for the public, and allow the Federal Subsistence Board to correct regulatory conflicts that have arisen based on recent rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Public meetings: The Southcentral Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council will hold a public meeting October 29-30, 2018, to receive comments, make proposals to change this proposed rule, and make recommendations to the Federal Subsistence Board. The Board will discuss and evaluate proposed regulatory changes during a public meeting in January 2019. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific information on the public meetings.

    Public comments: Comments and proposals to change this proposed rule must be received or postmarked by October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public meetings: The Federal Subsistence Board and the Southcentral Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council will hold public meetings at various locations in Alaska. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific information on the dates and locations of the public meetings.

    Public comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov and search for FWS-R7-SM-2018-0003, which is the docket number for this rulemaking.

    By hard copy: U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: USFWS, Office of Subsistence Management, 1011 East Tudor Road, MS 121, Attn: Theo Matuskowitz, Anchorage, AK 99503-6199, or hand delivery to the Designated Federal Official attending the Southcentral Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council public meeting. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on locations of the public meetings.

    We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Review Process section below for more information).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Chair, Federal Subsistence Board, c/o U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Attention: Thomas C.J. Doolittle, Office of Subsistence Management; (907) 786-3888 or [email protected] For questions specific to National Forest System lands, contact Thomas Whitford, Regional Subsistence Program Leader, USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region; (907) 743-9461 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Under Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111-3126), the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture (hereafter referred to as “the Secretaries”) jointly implement the Federal Subsistence Management Program (hereafter referred to as “the Program”). The Program provides a preference for take of fish and wildlife resources for subsistence uses on Federal public lands and waters in Alaska. Only Alaska residents of areas identified as rural are eligible to participate in the Program. The Secretaries published temporary regulations to carry out the Program in the Federal Register on June 29, 1990 (55 FR 27114), and final regulations on May 29, 1992 (57 FR 22940). Program officials have subsequently amended these regulations a number of times.

    Because the Program is a joint effort between the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture, these regulations are located in two titles of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): The Agriculture regulations are at title 36, “Parks, Forests, and Public Property,” and the Interior regulations are at title 50, “Wildlife and Fisheries,” at 36 CFR 242.1-28 and 50 CFR 100.1-28, respectively. Consequently, to indicate that identical changes are proposed for regulations in both titles 36 and 50, in this document we will present references to specific sections of the CFR as shown in the following example: § __.27.

    The Program regulations contain subparts as follows: Subpart A, General Provisions; Subpart B, Program Structure; Subpart C, Board Determinations; and Subpart D, Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife. Consistent with subpart B of these regulations, the Secretaries established a Federal Subsistence Board to administer the Program. The Board comprises:

    • A Chair appointed by the Secretary of the Interior with concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture;

    • The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

    • The Alaska Regional Director, National Park Service;

    • The Alaska State Director, Bureau of Land Management;

    • The Alaska Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs;

    • The Alaska Regional Forester, USDA Forest Service; and

    • Two public members appointed by the Secretary of the Interior with concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture.

    Through the Board, these agencies and public members participate in the development of regulations for subparts C and D. Subpart C sets forth important Board determinations regarding program eligibility, i.e., which areas of Alaska are considered rural and which species are harvested in those areas as part of a “customary and traditional use” for subsistence purposes. Subpart D sets forth specific harvest seasons and limits.

    In administering the Program, the Secretaries divided Alaska into 10 subsistence resource regions, each of which is represented by a Regional Advisory Council. The Regional Advisory Councils provide a forum for rural residents with personal knowledge of local conditions and resource requirements to have a meaningful role in the subsistence management of fish and wildlife on Federal public lands in Alaska. The Regional Advisory Council members represent varied geographical, cultural, and user interests within each region.

    Public Review Process—Comments, Proposals, and Public Meetings

    The Southcentral Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council will have a substantial role in reviewing this proposed rule and making recommendations for the final rule. The Federal Subsistence Board, through the Southcentral Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, will hold a public meeting on this proposed rule in Cordova, AK, beginning October 29, 2018.

    The location and date may change based on weather or local circumstances. The amount of work on the Southcentral Regional Advisory Council's agenda will determine the length of the meeting.

    The Board will discuss and evaluate proposed changes to this proposed rule during a public meeting to be held in Anchorage, AK, in January 2019. The Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council Chairs, or their designated representatives, will present their respective Councils' recommendations at the Board meeting. Additional oral testimony may be provided on this proposed rule to the Board at that time. At that public meeting, the Board will deliberate and take final action on this proposed rule. Specific information about the meeting locations may be obtained closer to the meeting dates from the contacts listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    You may submit written comments and materials concerning this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire comment, including any personal identifying information, will be posted on the website. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy comments on http://www.regulations.gov.

    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R7-SM-2018-0003, or by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at: USFWS, Office of Subsistence Management, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503.

    Reasonable Accommodations

    The Federal Subsistence Board is committed to providing access to these meetings for all participants. Please direct all requests for sign language interpreting services, closed captioning, or other accommodation needs to Caron McKee, 907-786-3880, [email protected], or 800-877-8339 (TTY), seven business days prior to the meeting you would like to attend.

    Tribal Consultation and Comment

    As expressed in Executive Order 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,” the Federal officials that have been delegated authority by the Secretaries are committed to honoring the unique government-to-government political relationship that exists between the Federal Government and Federally Recognized Indian Tribes (Tribes) as listed in 82 FR 4915 (January 17, 2017). Consultation with Alaska Native corporations is based on Public Law 108-199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 452, as amended by Public Law 108-447, div. H, title V, Sec. 518, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267, which provides that: “The Director of the Office of Management and Budget and all Federal agencies shall hereafter consult with Alaska Native corporations on the same basis as Indian tribes under Executive Order No. 13175.”

    ANILCA does not provide specific rights to Tribes for the subsistence taking of wildlife, fish, and shellfish. However, because tribal members are affected by subsistence fishing, hunting, and trapping regulations, the Secretaries, through the Board, will provide Federally recognized Tribes and Alaska Native corporations an opportunity to consult on this proposed rule.

    The Board will engage in outreach efforts for this proposed rule, including a notification letter, to ensure that Tribes and Alaska Native corporations are advised of the mechanisms by which they can participate. The Board will provide a variety of opportunities for consultation: Commenting on proposed changes to the existing rule; engaging in dialogue at the Regional Advisory Council meeting; engaging in dialogue at the Board meeting; and providing input in person, by mail, email, or phone at any time during the rulemaking process. The Board will commit to efficiently and adequately providing an opportunity to Tribes and Alaska Native corporations for consultation in regard to subsistence rulemaking.

    The Board will consider Tribes' and Alaska Native corporations' information, input, and recommendations, and address their concerns as much as practicable.

    Developing the Cook Inlet Area Proposed Regulations

    In titles 36 and 50 of the CFR, the subparts C and D regulations are subject to periodic review and revision. The Board currently completes the process of revising subsistence take of fish and shellfish regulations in odd-numbered years and wildlife regulations in even-numbered years; public proposal and review processes take place during the preceding year. The Board also addresses customary and traditional use determinations during the applicable cycle, and nonrural determinations during the fish and shellfish cycle.

    The current Cook Inlet Area subsistence regulations were revised on May 18, 2015 (80 FR 28187). Two of the revisions addressed community gillnets on the Kasilof and Kenai rivers. While the intent of providing additional opportunities for subsistence users was met, details concerning the harvest limits were difficult and confusing to the public since they overlapped with other active subsistence fisheries on these rivers. In addition, the new regulations were in conflict with existing regulations dealing with early- and late-run Chinook salmon, and various size limits for rainbow trout and Dolly Varden.

    The Board directed program and field staff to develop recommendations to alleviate these concerns from the Council and members of the public. While some of the size limits are needed as management tools in certain fisheries, the limits are not required in other fisheries. Issues with early and late runs of Chinook salmon will require new regulations addressing early-run fish.

    In the interim, the Board addressed these concerns through the special action process as defined in § __.19 of these regulations.

    This proposed rule reflects the combined efforts of program and field staff, staff from other agencies participating in the Federal program, and members of the public and tribal entities affected by these regulations.

    Compliance With Statutory and Regulatory Authorities National Environmental Policy Act

    A Draft Environmental Impact Statement that described four alternatives for developing a Federal Subsistence Management Program was distributed for public comment on October 7, 1991. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was published on February 28, 1992. The Record of Decision (ROD) on Subsistence Management for Federal Public Lands in Alaska was signed April 6, 1992. The selected alternative in the FEIS (Alternative IV) defined the administrative framework of an annual regulatory cycle for subsistence regulations.

    A 1997 environmental assessment dealt with the expansion of Federal jurisdiction over fisheries and is available at the office listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Secretary of the Interior, with concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture, determined that expansion of Federal jurisdiction does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the human environment and, therefore, signed a Finding of No Significant Impact.

    Section 810 of ANILCA

    An ANILCA section 810 analysis was completed as part of the FEIS process on the Federal Subsistence Management Program. The intent of all Federal subsistence regulations is to accord subsistence uses of fish and wildlife on public lands a priority over the taking of fish and wildlife on such lands for other purposes, unless restriction is necessary to conserve healthy fish and wildlife populations. The final section 810 analysis determination appeared in the April 6, 1992, ROD and concluded that the Federal Subsistence Management Program, under Alternative IV with an annual process for setting subsistence regulations, may have some local impacts on subsistence uses, but will not likely restrict subsistence uses significantly.

    During the subsequent environmental assessment process for extending fisheries jurisdiction, an evaluation of the effects of the subsistence program regulations was conducted in accordance with section 810. That evaluation also supported the Secretaries' determination that the regulations will not reach the “may significantly restrict” threshold that would require notice and hearings under ANILCA section 810(a).

    Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This proposed rule does not contain any new collections of information that require Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval. OMB has reviewed and approved the collections of information associated with the subsistence regulations at 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100, and assigned OMB Control Number 1018-0075, which expires June 30, 2019. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this proposed rule is not significant.

    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this proposed rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of flexibility analyses for rules that will have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities, which include small businesses, organizations, or governmental jurisdictions. In general, the resources to be harvested under this proposed rule are already being harvested and consumed by the local harvester and do not result in an additional dollar benefit to the economy. However, we estimate that two million pounds of meat are harvested by subsistence users annually and, if given an estimated dollar value of $3.00 per pound, this amount would equate to about $6 million in food value statewide. Based upon the amounts and values cited above, the Departments certify that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    Under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), this proposed rule is not a major rule. It will not have an effect on the economy of $100 million or more, will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, and will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

    Executive Order 12630

    Title VIII of ANILCA requires the Secretaries to administer a subsistence priority on public lands. The scope of this program is limited by definition to certain public lands. Likewise, these proposed regulations have no potential takings of private property implications as defined by Executive Order 12630.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Secretaries have determined and certify pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local or State governments or private entities. The implementation of this rule is by Federal agencies and there is no cost imposed on any State or local entities or tribal governments.

    Executive Order 12988

    The Secretaries have determined that these regulations meet the applicable standards provided in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, regarding civil justice reform.

    Executive Order 13132

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the proposed rule does not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Title VIII of ANILCA precludes the State from exercising subsistence management authority over fish and wildlife resources on Federal lands unless it meets certain requirements.

    Executive Order 13175

    Title VIII of ANILCA does not provide specific rights to tribes for the subsistence taking of wildlife, fish, and shellfish. However, the Secretaries, through the Board, will provide Federally recognized Tribes and Alaska Native corporations an opportunity to consult on this proposed rule, as discussed above under Tribal Consultation and Comment.

    Executive Order 13211

    This Executive Order requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. However, this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 13211, affecting energy supply, distribution, or use, and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.

    Drafting Information

    Theo Matuskowitz drafted this proposed rule under the guidance of Thomas C.J. Doolittle of the Office of Subsistence Management, Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Additional assistance was provided by:

    • Daniel Sharp, Alaska State Office, Bureau of Land Management;

    • Clarence Summers, Alaska Regional Office, National Park Service;

    • Dr. Glenn Chen, Alaska Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs;

    • Carol Damberg, Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and

    • Thomas Whitford, Alaska Regional Office, USDA-Forest Service.

    List of Subjects 36 CFR Part 242

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Fish, National forests, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.

    50 CFR Part 100

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Fish, National forests, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.

    Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Subsistence Board proposes to amend 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 as set forth below.

    PART__—SUBSISTENCE MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC LANDS IN ALASKA 1. The authority citation for both 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd, 3101-3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551-3586; 43 U.S.C. 1733.

    Subpart D—Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife 2. Amend 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 by revising § __.27(e)(10) to read as follows:
    § __.27 Subsistence taking of fish.

    (e) * * *

    (10) Cook Inlet Area. The Cook Inlet Area includes all waters of Alaska enclosed by a line extending east from Cape Douglas (58°51.10′ N Lat.) and a line extending south from Cape Fairfield (148°50.25′ W Long.).

    (i) General area regulations.

    (A) Unless restricted by regulations in this section, or unless restricted under the terms of a subsistence fishing permit, you may take fish at any time in the Cook Inlet Area.

    (B) If you take rainbow or steelhead trout incidentally in subsistence net fisheries, you may retain them for subsistence purposes, unless otherwise prohibited or provided for in this section. With jigging gear through the ice or rod-and-reel gear in open waters, there is an annual limit of two rainbow or steelhead trout 20 inches or longer, taken from Kenai Peninsula fresh waters.

    (C) Under the authority of a Federal subsistence fishing permit, you may take only salmon, trout, Dolly Varden, and other char.

    (D) All fish taken under the authority of a Federal subsistence fishing permit must be marked and recorded prior to leaving the fishing site.

    (1) The fishing site includes the particular Federal public waters and/or adjacent shoreline from which the fish were harvested.

    (2) Marking means removing the dorsal fin.

    (E) You may not take grayling or burbot for subsistence purposes.

    (F) You may take smelt with dip nets in fresh water only from April 1 through June 15. There are no harvest or possession limits for smelt.

    (G) You may take whitefish in the Tyone River drainage using gillnets.

    (H) You may take fish by gear listed in this section unless restricted by other regulations in this section or under the terms of a Federal subsistence fishing permit (as may be modified by regulations in this section).

    (I) Seasons, harvest and possession limits, and methods and means for take are the same as for the taking of those species under Alaska sport fishing regulations (5 AAC 56 and 5 AAC 57) unless modified herein or by issuance of a Federal special action.

    (J) Applicable harvest provisions are as follows:

    Permit Location Methods and means Household Annual Permit Kasilof River Drainage Kasilof dip net or rod and reel for salmon; Kasilof fish wheel for salmon; Kasilof experimental gillnet for salmon. Kenai River Drainage Kenai dip net or rod and reel for salmon; Kenai gillnet for salmon. General Subsistence Fishing Permit (Daily/Possession Limits) Kasilof River Drainage Tustumena Lake rod and reel for salmon; Kasilof drainage rod and reel for resident species. Kenai River Drainage Kenai rod and reel only for salmon; Kenai River and tributaries under ice jigging and rod and reel for resident species. Tustumena Lake Winter Permit Tustumena Lake Tustumena Lake under ice fishery.

    (1) Harvest limits may not be accumulated.

    (2) Each household may harvest its annual salmon limits in one or more days.

    (3) All salmon harvested as part of a household annual limit must be reported to the Federal in-season manager within 72 hours of leaving the fishing site.

    (4) For Ninilchik residents, the household annual limits for Chinook salmon in the Kasilof River and for late-run Chinook salmon in the Kenai River are combined.

    (ii) Seasons, harvest limits, and methods and means for Kasilof fisheries. Household annual limits for salmon in Kasilof River fisheries are as follows:

    Species Number of fish
  • allowed for each
  • permit holder
  • Additional fish
  • allowed for each
  • household
  • member
  • Sockeye 25 5 Chinook 10 2 Coho 10 2 Pink 10 2

    (A) Kasilof dip net or rod and reel; salmon.

    (1) Residents of Ninilchik may take sockeye, Chinook, coho, and pink salmon through a dip net or rod and reel fishery on the upper mainstem of the Kasilof River from a Federal regulatory marker on the river below the outlet of Tustumena Lake downstream to a marker on the river approximately 2.8 miles below the Tustumena Lake boat ramp.

    (2) Residents using rod-and-reel gear may fish with up to two baited single or treble hooks.

    (3) Harvest seasons are as follows:

    Species Season Harvest limits Sockeye salmon June 16-August 15 Chinook salmon June 16-August 15 Coho salmon June 16-October 31 Pink salmon June 16-October 31 Rainbow and steelhead trout April 1-August 15 The Federal in-season manager will close the take of rainbow and steelhead trout after 200 have been harvested.

    (B) Kasilof fish wheel; salmon.

    (1) Residents of Ninilchik may harvest sockeye, Chinook, coho, and pink salmon through a fish wheel fishery in the Federal public waters of the upper mainstem of the Kasilof River.

    (2) Residents of Ninilchik may retain other species incidentally caught in the Kasilof River fish wheel except for rainbow or steelhead trout, which must be released and returned unharmed to the water.

    (3) Only one fish wheel may be operated on the Kasilof River. The fish wheel must: Have a live box, be monitored when fishing, be stopped from fishing when it is not being monitored or used, and be installed and operated in compliance with any regulations and restrictions for its use within the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.

    (4) One registration permit will be available and will be awarded by the Federal in-season fishery manager, in consultation with the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge manager, based on the merits of the operational plan. The registration permit will be issued to an organization that, as the fish wheel owner, will be responsible for its construction, installation, operation, use, and removal in consultation with the Federal fishery manager. The owner may not rent or lease the fish wheel for personal gain. As part of the permit, the organization must:

    (i) Prior to the season: Provide a written operational plan to the Federal fishery manager including a description of how fishing time and fish will be offered and distributed among households and residents of Ninilchik.

    (ii) During the season: Mark the fish wheel with a wood, metal, or plastic plate that is at least 12 inches high by 12 inches wide, permanently affixed, and plainly visible and that contains the following information in letters and numerals at least 1 inch high: Registration permit number; organization's name and address; and primary contact person name and telephone number.

    (iii) After the season: Provide written documentation of required evaluation information to the Federal fishery manager including, but not limited to, persons or households operating the gear, hours of operation, and number of each species caught and retained or released.

    (5) People operating the fish wheel must:

    (i) Have in possession a valid Federal subsistence fishing permit and remain onsite to monitor the fish wheel and remove all fish at least every hour.

    (ii) In addition, any person operating the fish wheel who is not the owner must attach to the fish wheel an additional wood, metal, or plastic plate that is at least 12 inches high by 12 inches wide, is plainly visible, and contains the person's fishing permit number, name, and address in letters and numerals at least 1 inch high.

    (6) The organization owning the fish wheel may operate the fish wheel for subsistence purposes on behalf of residents of Ninilchik by requesting a subsistence fishing permit that:

    (i) Identifies a person who will be responsible for operating the fish wheel; and

    (ii) Includes provisions for recording daily catches, the household to whom the catch was given, and other information determined to be necessary for effective resource management by the Federal fishery manager.

    (7) Fishing is allowed from June 16 through October 31 on the Kasilof River unless closed or otherwise restricted by Federal special action.

    (C) Kasilof experimental gillnet; salmon.

    (1) Residents of Ninilchik may harvest sockeye, Chinook, coho, and pink salmon through an experimental community gillnet fishery in the Federal public waters of the upper mainstem of the Kasilof River from a Federal regulatory marker on the river below the outlet of Tustumena Lake downstream to the Tustumena Lake boat launch June 16 through August 15.

    (2) The experimental community gillnet fishery will expire July 13, 2020.

    (3) Only one community gillnet may be operated on the Kasilof River. The gillnet may not be over 10 fathoms in length and may not obstruct more than half of the river width with stationary fishing gear. In addition, subsistence stationary gillnet gear may not be set within 200 feet of other subsistence stationary gear.

    (4) One registration permit will be available and will be awarded by the Federal in-season fishery manager, in consultation with the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge manager, based on the merits of the operational plan. The registration permit will be issued only to an organization that, as the community gillnet owner, will be responsible for its use in consultation with the Federal fishery manager. As part of the permit, the organization must:

    (i) Prior to the season: Provide a written operational plan to the Federal fishery manager including a description of fishing method, mesh size requirements, fishing time and location, and how fish will be offered and distributed among households and residents of Ninilchik.

    (ii) After the season: Provide written documentation of required evaluation information to the Federal fishery manager including, but not limited to, persons or households operating the gear, hours of operation, and number of each species caught and retained or released.

    (5) The experimental community gillnet is subject to compliance with applicable Kenai National Wildlife Refuge regulations and restrictions. It is the obligation of the gillnet owner to be familiar with such regulations and restrictions.

    (6) The organization owning the gillnet may operate the net for subsistence purposes on behalf of residents of Ninilchik by requesting a subsistence fishing permit that identifies a person who will be responsible for fishing the gillnet and includes provisions for recording daily catches, the household to whom the catch was given, and other information determined to be necessary for effective resource management by the Federal fishery manager.

    (7) Residents of Ninilchik may retain other species incidentally caught in the Kasilof River experimental community gillnet fishery. The gillnet fishery will be closed when the retention of rainbow or steelhead trout has been restricted under Federal subsistence regulations.

    (D) Tustumena Lake rod and reel; salmon.

    (1) In addition to the dip net and rod and reel fishery on the upper mainstem of the Kasilof River described under paragraph (e)(10)(ii)(B) of this section, residents of Ninilchik may also take coho and pink salmon through a rod and reel fishery in Tustumena Lake. Fishing is allowed with up to two baited single or treble hooks.

    (2) Seasons, areas, harvest and possession limits, and methods and means for take are the same as for the taking of these species under Alaska sport fishing regulations (5 AAC 56), except for the following harvest and possession limits:

    Species Size Limits Coho salmon 16 inches and longer 4 per day and 4 in possession. Pink salmon 16 inches and longer 6 per day and 6 in possession.

    (E) Kasilof drainage rod and reel; resident species. Resident fish species including lake trout, rainbow or steelhead trout, and Dolly Varden or Arctic char may be harvested by rod and reel in Federally managed waters of the Kasilof River drainage the entire year as follows:

    Species Specifications Limits Lake trout Fish 20 inches and longer 4 per day and 4 in possession. Fish less than 20 inches in length 15 per day and 15 in possession. Dolly Varden and Arctic char In flowing waters 4 per day and 4 in possession. In lakes and ponds 10 per day and 10 in possession. Rainbow or steelhead trout In flowing waters 2 per day and 2 in possession. In lakes and ponds 5 per day and 5 in possession.

    (F) Tustumena Lake under ice fishery; resident species.

    (1) You may fish in Tustumena Lake with a gillnet under the ice, or with jigging gear used through the ice. The gillnet may not be longer than 10 fathoms.

    (2) Harvest limits are as follows:

    Methods Limits Additional provisions Jigging gear through the ice Household annual limit of 30 fish in any combination of lake trout, rainbow trout, and Dolly Varden or Arctic char Household limits are included in the overall total annual harvest quota. Gillnet under the ice Total annual harvest quota of 200 lake trout, 200 rainbow trout, and 500 Dolly Varden or Arctic char The Federal in-season manager will issue a closure for this fishery once any of these quotas has been met.

    (3) You may harvest fish under the ice only in Tustumena Lake. Gillnets are not allowed within a 1/4-mile radius of the mouth of any tributary to Tustumena Lake, or the outlet of Tustumena Lake.

    (4) A permit is required. The permit will be issued by the Federal in-season manager or designated representative and will be valid for the winter season unless the season is closed by special action.

    (i) The permittee must report the following information: The number of each species caught; the number of each species retained; the length, depth (number of meshes deep), and mesh size of gillnet fished; the fishing site; and the total hours fished.

    (ii) The gillnet must be checked at least once in every 48-hour period.

    (iii) For unattended gear, the permittee's name and address must be plainly and legibly inscribed on a stake at one end of the gillnet.

    (5) Incidentally caught fish may be retained and must be recorded on the permit before transporting fish from the fishing site.

    (6) Failure to return the completed harvest permit by May 31 may result in issuance of a violation notice and/or denial of a future subsistence permit.

    (iii) Seasons, harvest limits, and methods and means for Kenai fisheries. Household annual limits for salmon in Kenai River fisheries are as follows:

    Species Number of fish
  • allowed for each
  • permit holder
  • Additional fish
  • allowed for each
  • household
  • member
  • Additional provisions
    Sockeye salmon 25 5 Chum salmon that are retained are to be included within the annual limit for sockeye salmon. Chinook salmon—Early-run (July 1 through July 15) 2 1 For the Kenai River community gillnet fishery described under paragraph (e)(10)(iii)(B) of this section. Chinook salmon—Late-run (July 16 through August 31) 10 2 Coho salmon 20 5 Pink salmon 15 5

    (A) Kenai dip net or rod and reel; salmon.

    (1) You may take only sockeye salmon through a dip net or rod and reel fishery at one specified site on the Russian River.

    (i) For the Russian River fishing site, incidentally caught fish may be retained for subsistence uses, except for early- and late-run Chinook salmon, coho salmon, rainbow trout, and Dolly Varden, which must be released.

    (ii) At the Russian River Falls site, dip netting is allowed from a Federal regulatory marker near the upstream end of the fish ladder at Russian River Falls downstream to a Federal regulatory marker approximately 600 yards below Russian River Falls. Residents using rod and reel gear at this fishery site may not fish with bait at any time.

    (2) You may take sockeye, late-run Chinook, coho, and pink salmon through a dip net or rod and reel fishery at two specified sites on the Kenai River below Skilak Lake and as provided in this section.

    (i) For both Kenai River fishing sites below Skilak Lake, incidentally caught fish may be retained for subsistence uses, except for early-run Chinook salmon (unless otherwise provided for in this section), rainbow trout 18 inches or longer, and Dolly Varden 18 inches or longer, which must be released.

    (ii) At the Kenai River Moose Range Meadows site, dip netting is allowed only from a boat from a Federal regulatory marker on the Kenai River at about river mile 29 downstream approximately 2.5 miles to another marker on the Kenai River at about river mile 26.5. Residents using rod and reel gear at this fishery site may fish from boats or from shore with up to two baited single or treble hooks June 15 through August 31.

    (iii) At the Kenai river mile 48 site, dip netting is allowed while either standing in the river or from a boat, from Federal regulatory markers on both sides of the Kenai River at about river mile 48 (approximately 2 miles below the outlet of Skilak Lake) downstream approximately 2.5 miles to a marker on the Kenai River at about river mile 45.5. Residents using rod and reel gear at this fishery site may fish from boats or from shore with up to two baited single or treble hooks June 15 through August 31.

    (3) Fishing seasons are as follows:

    Species Season Location Sockeye salmon June 15-August 15 All three sites. Late-run Chinook salmon July 16-September 30 Kenai River sites only. Pink salmon July 16-September 30 Kenai River sites only. Coho salmon July 16-September 30 Kenai River sites only.

    (B) Kenai gillnet; salmon.

    (1) Residents of Ninilchik may harvest sockeye, Chinook, coho, and pink salmon in the Moose Range Meadows area of the Federal public waters of the Kenai River with a single gillnet to be managed and operated by the Ninilchik Traditional Council.

    (2) Fishing will be allowed July 1 through August 15 and September 10-30 on the Kenai River unless closed or otherwise restricted by Federal special action. The following conditions apply to harvest in the Kenai community gillnet fishery:

    (i) Salmon taken in this fishery will be included as household annual limits of participating households.

    (ii) Additional harvest restrictions for this fishery are as follows:

    Species Period Harvest Limits Early-run Chinook salmon less than 46 inches in length or greater than 55 inches in length July 1-15 Fish may be retained if the most current preseason forecast from the State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game projects the in-river run to be within or above the optimal escapement goal range for early-run Chinook salmon; otherwise, live fish must be released Fishery will close until July 16 once 50 early-run Chinook salmon have been retained or released. Late-run Chinook salmon July 16-August 15 Fishery will close prior to August 15 if 200 late-run Chinook salmon have been retained or released prior to that date. Fishery will reopen September 10-30 for species available at that time. Pink salmon July 16-August 15 and September 10-30 Coho salmon July 16-August 15 and September 10-30 Incidentally caught rainbow trout and Dolly Varden All live fish must be released. Fish that die in net may be retained Fishery will close for the season once 100 rainbow trout or 150 Dolly Varden have been released or retained.

    (iii) Chinook salmon less than 20 inches in length may be retained and do not count towards retained or released totals.

    (iv) Other incidentally caught species may be retained; however, all incidental fish mortalities, except for Chinook salmon less than 20 inches in length, count towards released or retained totals specified in this section.

    (3) Only one community gillnet may be operated on the Kenai River.

    (i) The gillnet may not: Be over 10 fathoms in length to take salmon; be larger than 5.25-inch mesh; and obstruct more than half of the river width with stationary fishing gear.

    (ii) Subsistence stationary gillnet gear may not be set within 200 feet of other subsistence stationary gear.

    (4) One registration permit will be available and will be issued by the Federal in-season manager, in consultation with the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge manager, to the Ninilchik Traditional Council. As the community gillnet owner, the Ninilchik Traditional Council will be responsible for its use and removal in consultation with the Federal in-season manager. As part of the permit, the Ninilchik Traditional Council must provide post-season written documentation of required evaluation information to the Federal in-season manager including, but not limited to:

    (i) Persons or households operating the gear;

    (ii) Hours of operation; and

    (iii) Number of each species caught and retained or released.

    (5) The Ninilchik Traditional Council may operate the net for subsistence purposes on behalf of residents of Ninilchik by requesting a subsistence fishing permit that:

    (i) Identifies a person who will be responsible for fishing the gillnet; and

    (ii) Includes provisions for recording daily catches, the household to whom the catch was given, and other information determined to be necessary for effective resource management by the Federal in-season manager.

    (C) Kenai rod and reel only; salmon.

    (1) For Federally managed waters of the Kenai River and its tributaries, you may take sockeye, Chinook, coho, pink, and chum salmon through a separate rod and reel fishery in the Kenai River drainage.

    (2) Seasons, areas, harvest and possession limits, and methods and means for take are the same as for the taking of these salmon species under State of Alaska fishing regulations (5 AAC 56, 5 AAC 57 and 5 AAC 77.540), except for the following harvest and possession limits:

    Species Size Limits Early-run Chinook salmon Less than 46 inches or 55 inches and longer 2 per day and 2 in possession. Late-run Chinook salmon 20 inches and longer 2 per day and 2 in possession. All other salmon 16 inches and longer 6 per day and 6 in possession, of which no more than 4 per day and 4 in possession may be Coho salmon, except for the Sanctuary Area and Russian River where no more than 2 per day and 2 in possession may be Coho salmon.

    (i) In the Kenai River below Skilak Lake, fishing is allowed with up to two baited single or treble hooks June 15 through August 31.

    (ii) Annual harvest limits for any combination of early- and late-run Chinook salmon are four for each permit holder.

    (iii) Incidentally caught fish, other than salmon, are subject to regulations found in paragraph (e)(10)(iii)(D) of this section.

    (D) Kenai River and tributaries under ice jigging and rod and reel; resident species.

    (1) For Federally managed waters of the Kenai River and its tributaries below Skilak Lake outlet at river mile 50, you may take resident fish species including lake trout, rainbow trout, and Dolly Varden or Arctic char with jigging gear through the ice or rod and reel gear in open waters. Seasons, areas, harvest and possession limits, and methods and means for take are the same as for the taking of these resident species under State of Alaska fishing regulations (5 AAC 56, 5 AAC 57, and 5 AAC 77.540), except for the following harvest and possession limits:

    Species Specifications Limits Lake trout 20 inches or longer 4 per day and 4 in possession. Less than 20 inches 15 per day and 15 in possession. Dolly Varden or Arctic char In flowing waters For fish less than 18 inches, 1 per day and 1 in possession. In lakes and ponds 2 per day and 2 in possession, of which only one may be 20 inches or longer, may be harvested daily. Rainbow or steelhead trout In flowing waters For fish less than 18 inches in length, 1 per day and 1 in possession. In lakes and ponds 2 per day and 2 in possession, of which only one fish 20 inches or longer may be harvested daily.

    (2) For Federally managed waters of the upper Kenai River and its tributaries above Skilak Lake outlet at river mile 50, you may take resident fish species including lake trout, rainbow trout, and Dolly Varden or Arctic char with jigging gear through the ice or rod and reel gear in open waters. Seasons, areas, harvest and possession limits, and methods and means for take are the same as for the taking of these resident species under Alaska fishing regulations (5 AAC 56, 5 AAC 57, 5 AAC 77.540), except for the following harvest and possession limits:

    Species Specifications Limits Lake trout 20 inches or longer 4 per day and 4 in possession. Less than 20 inches 15 per day and 15 in possession. From Hidden Lake 2 per day and 2 in possession regardless of length. Dolly Varden or Arctic char In flowing waters For fish less than 16 inches in length, 1 per day and 1 in possession. In lakes and ponds 2 per day and 2 in possession, of which only one fish 20 inches or longer may be harvested daily. Rainbow or steelhead trout In flowing waters For fish less than 16 inches in length, 1 per day and 1 in possession. In lakes and ponds 2 per day and 2 in possession, of which only one fish 20 inches or longer may be harvested daily.
    Dated: September 25, 2018. Thomas C.J. Doolittle, Acting Assistant Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Dated: September 25, 2018. Thomas Whitford, Subsistence Program Leader, USDA-Forest Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21218 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P; 3411-15-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0531; FRL-9984-83—Region 4] Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; Ozone NAAQS Update AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of North Carolina through the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ) with a letter dated March 21, 2018. The SIP submittal includes changes to the State's air quality rules for ozone to be consistent with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to approve these provisions of the SIP revision because the State has demonstrated that these changes are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and federal regulations.

    DATES:

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

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0531 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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. 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://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tiereny Bell, 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. The telephone number is (404) 562-9088. Ms. Bell can also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA govern the establishment, review, and revision, as appropriate, of the NAAQS to protect public health and welfare. The CAA requires periodic review of the air quality criteria—the science upon which the standards are based—and the standards themselves. EPA's regulatory provisions that govern the NAAQS are found at 40 CFR 50—National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards. In this rule, EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the North Carolina air quality rules addressing Rule 15A NCAC 02D .0405, Ozone, in the North Carolina SIP. EPA notes that the cover letter was dated March 21, 2018.1 Rule 15A NCAC 02D.0405 is amended by updating air quality standards to reflect the most recent ozone NAAQS as well as making textual modifications in the following manner: Removing 0.075 parts per million (ppm) and replacing it with 0.070 ppm; deleting “8-hour” and replacing it with “eight-hour”; deleting the word “is” and replacing it with “shall be” and later “shall be deemed”; and deleting Appendix P, which referenced the 2008 Ozone Standard, and replacing it with Appendix U, which references the 2015 Ozone Standard. The SIP submission amending the North Carolina regulations to incorporate the most recent ozone NAAQS can be found in the docket for this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov and is summarized below.

    1 The submittal date is the date of receipt by EPA, which was April 4, 2018.

    II. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's Submittal

    On October 26, 2015, EPA promulgated revised 8-hour primary and secondary ozone NAAQS, strengthening both from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm (the 2015 8-hour Ozone NAAQS). See 80 FR 65292. Accordingly, in the March 21, 2018, SIP submission, North Carolina revised Rule 15A NCAC 02D .0405, “Ozone,” by updating the State's air quality standard to be consistent with the 2015 8-hour Ozone NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 2015. EPA is proposing to approve this change because it is consistent with the CAA and Federal regulations.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the NCDAQ Rule 15A NCAC 02D .0405 entitled “Ozone,” state effective January 1, 2018, which revises the ozone standard to be consistent with the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 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).

    IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's March 21, 2018, SIP submission identified in sections I and II above, because these changes are consistent with the CAA and federal regulations.

    V. 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. This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    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.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 19, 2018. Onis “Trey” Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21328 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 82 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0629; FRL-9984-55-OAR] RIN 2060-AT81 Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Revisions to the Refrigerant Management Program's Extension to Substitutes AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Clean Air Act (CAA) prohibits knowingly venting or releasing ozone-depleting and substitute refrigerants in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances or industrial process refrigeration. On November 18, 2016, EPA finalized a rule that updated the existing refrigerant management requirements and extended requirements that previously applied only to refrigerants containing an ozone-depleting substance (ODS) to substitute refrigerants such as hydrofluorocarbons that are subject to the venting prohibition (i.e., those that have not been exempted from that prohibition). The Agency is revisiting the aspects of the 2016 Rule that apply to equipment containing such substitute refrigerants. This action proposes changes to the legal interpretation that supported that rule and amendments to the regulations based on the revised interpretation. More specifically, in connection with the proposed changes to the legal interpretation, EPA is proposing to revise the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions so they apply only to equipment using refrigerant containing a class I or class II substance. Based on this proposed limitation of the leak repair requirements, this document further proposes to revise the list of practices that must be followed in order for refrigerant releases to be considered de minimis to clarify that the reference to following leak repair practices only applies to equipment that contains ODS refrigerant. EPA is also taking comment on whether, in connection with the proposed changes to the legal interpretation, the 2016 Rule's extension of subpart F refrigerant management requirements to such substitute refrigerants should be rescinded in full. Additionally, EPA is proposing to extend by six to twelve months the January 1, 2019 compliance date for when appliances containing only substitute refrigerants subject to the venting prohibition must comply with the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received by November 15, 2018. EPA will hold a public hearing on or before October 16, 2018. The hearing will be held in Washington, DC. More details concerning the hearing can be found at www.epa.gov/section608.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0629, at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (e.g., 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 www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeremy Arling by regular mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division (6205T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; by telephone: (202) 343-9055; or by email: [email protected]

    I. General Information A. What is the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program?

    Section 608 of the CAA, titled “National Recycling and Emissions Reduction Program,” has three main components. First, section 608(a) requires EPA to establish standards and requirements regarding the use and disposal of class I and class II substances.1 The second component, section 608(b), requires that the regulations issued pursuant to subsection (a) contain requirements for the safe disposal of class I and class II substances. The third component, section 608(c), prohibits the knowing venting, release, or disposal of ODS refrigerants 2 and their substitutes 3 in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances or industrial process refrigeration (IPR). This third component is also referred to as the “venting prohibition” in this proposal. Section 608(c)(1) includes an exemption from this prohibition for “[d]e minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose” of class I or class II substances, and section 608(c)(2) extends 608(c)(1) to substitute refrigerants. Section 608(c)(2) also includes a provision that allows the Administrator to exempt a substitute refrigerant from the venting prohibition if he or she determines that such venting, release, or disposal of a substitute refrigerant “does not pose a threat to the environment.” 4

    1 A class I or class II substance refers to an ozone-depleting substance listed at 40 CFR part 82 subpart A, appendix A or appendix B, respectively. This proposal refers to class I and class II substances collectively as ozone-depleting substances, or ODS.

    2 The term “ODS refrigerant” as used in this proposal refers to any refrigerant or refrigerant blend in which one or more of the components is a class I or class II substance.

    3 The term “substitute” is defined at 40 CFR 82.152. In the context of the subpart F regulations, any refrigerant or refrigerant blend in which none of the components is a class I or class II substance is treated as a substitute, while any refrigerant or refrigerant blend in which one or more the components is a class I or class II substance is regulated as an ODS refrigerant.

    4 EPA is using the term “non-exempt substitute” in this document to refer to substitute refrigerants that have not been exempted from the venting prohibition under CAA section 608(c)(2) and 40 CFR 82.154(a) in the relevant end-use. Similarly, the term “exempt substitute” refers to a substitute refrigerant that has been exempted from the venting prohibition under section 608(c)(2) and § 82.154(a) in the relevant end-use. A few exempt substitutes have been exempted from the venting prohibition in all end-uses.

    EPA first issued regulations under section 608 of the CAA on May 14, 1993 (58 FR 28660, “1993 Rule”), to establish the national refrigerant management program for ODS refrigerants recovered during the service, repair, or disposal of air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances. These regulations were intended to substantially reduce the use and emissions of refrigerants that are ODS.

    The 1993 Rule required that persons servicing air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment containing ODS refrigerants observe certain practices that reduce emissions. It established requirements for refrigerant recovery equipment, reclaimer certification, and technician certification, and also restricted the sale of ODS refrigerant so that only certified technicians could purchase it. In addition, the 1993 Rule required that ODS be removed from appliances prior to disposal, and that all air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment using an ODS be provided with a servicing aperture or process stub to facilitate refrigerant recovery. The 1993 Rule also established a requirement to repair leaking appliances containing more than 50 pounds of ODS refrigerant. The rule set an annual leak rate of 35 percent for commercial refrigeration appliances and IPR and 15 percent for comfort cooling appliances. If the applicable leak rate is exceeded, the appliance must be repaired within 30 days. Further, consistent with CAA section 608(c)(1), the 1993 Rule included a regulatory provision prohibiting the knowing venting or release of ODS refrigerant by any person maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance. 58 FR 28714; 40 CFR 82.154(a) (1993). It also provided that such releases would be considered de minimis, and therefore not subject to the prohibition, if they occurred when certain regulatory requirements were followed. 40 CFR 82.154(a) (1993).

    EPA revised these regulations, which are found at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F (“subpart F”), through subsequent rulemakings published on August 19, 1994 (59 FR 42950), November 9, 1994 (59 FR 55912), August 8, 1995 (60 FR 40420), July 24, 2003 (68 FR 43786), March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11946), January 11, 2005 (70 FR 1972), April 13, 2005 (70 FR 19273), May 23, 2014 (79 FR 29682), April 10, 2015 (80 FR 19453), and November 18, 2016 (81 FR 82272). In the April 2005 rulemaking, EPA revised the regulatory venting prohibition in 40 CFR 82.154, so that it also applied to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, and included such substitutes in the regulatory provision implementing the de minimis exemption, so that it exempted “de minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recycle or recover refrigerants or non-exempt substitutes” from the prohibition. 70 FR 19278. However, in contrast to how these regulations applied to ODS refrigerants, they did not provide that releases of non-exempt substitute refrigerants would be considered de minimis if certain regulatory requirements were followed. Additionally, the 2004 and 2005 rules exempted certain substitute refrigerants from the venting prohibition either in specific end uses or in all end uses. See 69 FR 11953-11954; 70 FR 19278; 40 CFR 82.154(a) (June 2005). This regulatory list of exemptions from the venting prohibition in 40 CFR 82.154(a) has been periodically updated since 2005. EPA also issued proposed rules to revise the regulations in subpart F on June 11, 1998 (63 FR 32044), elements of which were not finalized, and on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78558), for which no elements were finalized. A more detailed history of these regulatory updates can be found at 81 FR 82275. Prior to the 2016 Rule, EPA regulations did not address how regulated entities could avail themselves of the de minimis exemption for non-exempt substitutes. See, e.g., 81 FR 82283-82285.

    On November 18, 2016, EPA published a rule updating the refrigerant management requirements and extending requirements that previously applied only to refrigerants containing an ODS to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and hydrofluorolefins (HFOs) (81 FR 82272) (“2016 Rule”). The 2016 Rule also made a number of revisions to improve the efficacy of the refrigerant management program as a whole, such as revisions of regulatory provisions for increased clarity and readability, and removal of provisions that had become obsolete.

    B. Does this action apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially affected by this action include those who own, operate, maintain, service, repair, recycle, reclaim, or dispose of refrigeration and air-conditioning appliances and refrigerants, as well as entities that manufacture or sell refrigerants, products, and services for the refrigeration and air-conditioning industry. Potentially affected entities include, but are not limited to, the following:

    Table 1—Potentially Affected Entities Category North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code Examples of regulated entities Industrial Process Refrigeration (IPR) 111, 11251, 11511, 21111, 2211, 2212, 2213, 311, 3121, 3221, 3222, 32311, 32411, 3251, 32512, 3252, 3253, 32541, 3256, 3259, 3261, 3262, 3324, 3328, 33324, 33341, 33361, 3341, 3344, 3345, 3346, 3364, 33911, 339999 Owners or operators of refrigeration equipment used in agriculture and crop production, oil and gas extraction, ice rinks, and the manufacture of frozen food, dairy products, food and beverages, ice, petrochemicals, chemicals, machinery, medical equipment, plastics, paper, and electronics. Commercial Refrigeration 42374, 42393, 42399, 4242, 4244, 42459, 42469, 42481, 42493, 4451, 4452, 45291, 48422, 4885, 4931, 49312, 72231 Owners or operators of refrigerated warehousing and storage facilities, supermarkets, grocery stores, warehouse clubs, supercenters, convenience stores, and refrigerated transport. Comfort Cooling 45211, 45299, 453998, 512, 522, 524, 531, 5417, 551, 561, 6111, 6112, 6113, 61151, 622, 7121, 71394, 721, 722, 813, 92 Owners or operators of air-conditioning equipment used in the following: hospitals, office buildings, colleges and universities, metropolitan transit authorities, real estate rental & leased properties, lodging and food services, property management, schools, and public administration or other public institutions. Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors 238220, 811111, 81131, 811412 Plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors, and refrigerant recovery contractors, including automotive repair. Manufacturers and Distributors of Small Cans of Refrigerant 325120, 441310, 447110 Automotive parts and accessories stores and industrial gas manufacturers. Reclaimers 325120, 423930, 424690, 562920, 562212 Industrial gas manufacturers, recyclable material merchant wholesalers, materials recovery facilities, solid waste landfills, and other chemical and allied products merchant wholesalers. Disposers and Recyclers of Appliances 423990, 562212, 562920 Materials recovery facilities, solid waste landfills, and other miscellaneous durable goods merchant wholesalers. Refrigerant Wholesalers 325120, 42, 424690 Industrial gas manufacturers, other chemical and allied products merchant wholesalers, wholesale trade. Certifying Organizations 541380 Environmental test laboratories and services.

    This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. To determine whether your facility, company, business, or organization could be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the regulations at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F and the proposed revisions below. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action, if finalized, to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    C. What action is the agency taking?

    Subpart F contains a comprehensive set of specific refrigerant management requirements, including provisions that: Restrict the servicing of appliances and the sale of refrigerant to certified technicians; specify the proper evacuation levels before opening an appliance; require the use of certified refrigerant recovery and/or recycling equipment; require the maintenance and repair of appliances that meet size and leak rate thresholds; require that refrigerant be removed from appliances prior to disposal; require that appliances have a servicing aperture or process stub to facilitate refrigerant recovery; require that refrigerant reclaimers be certified to reclaim and sell used refrigerant; and establish standards for technician certification programs, recovery equipment, and quality of reclaimed refrigerant (40 CFR part 82 subpart F).

    Based on feedback from some in the regulated community, the Agency reviewed the 2016 Rule, focusing in particular on whether the Agency had the statutory authority to extend the full set of subpart F refrigerant management regulations to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, such as HFCs and HFOs. Based on that review, Administrator Pruitt signed a letter on August 10, 2017 stating that EPA is “planning to issue a proposed rule to revisit aspects of the 2016 Rule's extension of the 40 CFR part 82 subpart F refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitutes.” 5 Consistent with the Administrator's letter, the Agency is now proposing to withdraw the recent extension of the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions at 40 CFR 82.157 6 to appliances using only non-exempt substitute refrigerants.7 This proposal would relieve businesses from having to conduct leak inspections, repair leaks, and keep records for appliances containing 50 or more pounds of non-exempt substitute refrigerant. EPA is also taking comment on whether to withdraw the extension of the full set of subpart F provisions to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA is not proposing any changes to the refrigerant management program as it relates to requirements for ozone-depleting refrigerants or appliances containing or using any amount of ODS. Accordingly, none of the proposed changes would affect requirements for ODS under CAA section 608.

    5 Letter from EPA to National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air Project and the Air Permitting Forum (Aug. 10, 2017), available at www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-08/documents/608_update_letter.pdf and in the docket to this rule.

    6 For ease of reference, in this document EPA uses the terms “leak repair provisions” or “leak repair requirements” to refer to the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions at 40 CFR 82.157.

    7 Ozone-depleting refrigerants and appliances that contain or use any amount of class I or class II ODS would continue to be subject to the ODS requirements.

    D. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    These proposed revisions to the regulations found at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F are based on proposed changes to EPA's interpretation of its authority under CAA section 608. In particular, in the 2016 Rule EPA had for the first time adopted an interpretation of CAA section 608 to support the extension of the full set of subpart F refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. Under the interpretation proposed in this document, EPA now proposes to conclude that its authority to regulate substitutes under section 608 does not extend as far as its authority to regulate ODS. Specifically, EPA would conclude, as a legal matter, that the extension of the full set (that is, the entirety) of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants exceeds EPA's statutory authority. In connection with the proposed changes in its legal interpretation, EPA is proposing to rescind the 2016 Rule's extension of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitutes, while retaining the extension of the remaining subpart F requirements. In light of the questions regarding the scope of EPA's authority to regulate non-exempt substitute refrigerants under section 608, EPA is also taking comment on whether it would be appropriate and warranted for the agency to instead rescind the entire extension of the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes at this time. EPA is not, however, proposing to change the interpretation that EPA has authority to interpret the venting prohibition and the de minimis exemption in section 608(c) and to explain how that prohibition and that exemption apply to non-exempt substitute refrigerants.8

    8 Section 608(c) does not expressly provide that EPA may write regulations under that section. Section 301, however, states that the “Administrator is authorized to prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out his functions under [the Clean Air Act].”

    EPA's authority for this proposed action is further supported by the Agency's authority to revisit and revise existing regulations and legal interpretations. More detail on EPA's authority for this action is provided in subsequent sections of this document, including in sections II.D and II.E below, discussing EPA's authority under CAA sections 608(c) and 608(a), respectively.

    E. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

    By rescinding the extension of the leak repair provisions to substitutes, the proposed rule would reduce the burden associated with the 2016 Rule by $39 million per year. EPA also estimates this rule would increase the need to purchase non-exempt substitute refrigerant for leaking appliances, at an overall cost of approximately $15 million per year. Thus, incremental compliance savings and increased refrigerant costs combined are estimated to be a reduction of at least $24 million per year. EPA estimates that this proposed action would result in foregone annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions benefits of at least 3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e). This proposed rule to rescind the extension of the leak repair provisions to substitutes would not directly affect the stratospheric ozone layer.

    EPA is also taking comment whether the agency should rescind the entire extension of the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes and any additional cost savings associated with that action. This would reduce the burden associated with the 2016 Rule by at least an additional $4 million per year (for a total annual burden reduction of at least $43 million per year). EPA estimates withdrawing subpart F regulations of non-exempt substitute refrigerants to result in additional foregone annual GHG emissions reductions of 0.7 MMTCO2e associated with the use of self-sealing valves for a total foregone emissions reduction of at least 3.6 MMTCO2e.

    Table 2 presents a summary of the annual costs and benefits associated with two scenarios including rescinding the extension of the leak repair provisions to non-exempt substitutes and rescinding the extension of all Subpart F provisions to non-exempt substitutes.

    Table 2—Summary of Annual Costs and Benefits With 7% and 3% Discount Rates [2014$] Rescinding extension of leak repair provisions to non-exempt substitutes 7% Discount rate 3% Discount rate Rescinding extension of all Subpart F provisions to non-exempt substitutes 7% Discount rate 3% Discount rate Burden Reduction $38,958,000 $35,264,000 $43,014,000 $39,320,000 Refrigerant Replacement Cost −$14,874,000 −$14,874,000 −$14,874,000 −$14,874,000 Forgone Emissions Reductions 2.946 MMTCO2e 2.946 MMTCO2e 3.603 MMTCO2e 3.603 MMTCO2e Annual Cost Savings $24,084,000 $20,390,000 $28,140,000 $24,446,000

    Additional information on these analyses can be found in Section III of this document and the technical support document in the docket.

    II. The Proposed Rule A. History of the Extension of the Subpart F Requirements to Non-Exempt Substitutes

    On November 18, 2016, EPA published a rule updating existing refrigerant management requirements and extending the full set of the subpart F refrigerant management requirements, which prior to that rule applied only to ODS refrigerants,9 to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, such as HFCs and HFOs (81 FR 82272). As such, as part of the 2016 Rule, EPA extended the “appliance maintenance and leak repair” provisions, currently codified at 40 CFR 82.157, to appliances that contain 50 or more pounds of non-exempt substitute refrigerant. Included in the leak repair provisions are requirements to conduct leak rate calculations when refrigerant is added to an appliance, repair an appliance that leaks above the threshold leak rate applicable to that type of appliance, conduct verification tests on repairs, conduct periodic leak inspections on appliances that have exceeded the threshold leak rate, report to EPA on chronically leaking appliances, retrofit or retire appliances that are not repaired, and maintain related documentation to verify compliance. Although the 2016 Rule took effect on January 1, 2017, it included later compliance dates for some of the revised regulations, including the leak repair provisions. Under the 2016 Rule, owners and operators of appliances that contain 50 or more pounds of refrigerant must comply with these revised appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions beginning January 1, 2019.

    9 The only subpart F requirements that applied to substitute refrigerants prior to the 2016 Rule were the venting prohibition and certain exemptions from that, as set forth in § 82.154(a).

    Two industry coalitions, National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air Project (NEDA/CAP) and the Air Permitting Forum (APF), filed petitions for judicial review of the 2016 Rule in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and the cases have been consolidated. See NEDA/CAP v. EPA, No. 17-1016 (D.C. Cir. filed January 17, 2017); APF v. EPA, No. 17-1017 (D.C. Cir. filed January 17, 2017). The Chemours Company, Honeywell International Inc., the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy are participating as intervenor-respondents in that litigation, in support of the 2016 Rule. In addition, APF has filed a petition with EPA for administrative reconsideration of the 2016 Rule. The petition for reconsideration is available in the docket for this action and raises several issues regarding changes made in the 2016 Rule, including EPA's statutory authority for its decision in the 2016 Rule to expand the scope of the refrigerant management requirements—including, but not limited to, leak repair requirements—to cover non-exempt substitute refrigerants. Honeywell International Inc. submitted a document styled as a response to APF's petition for reconsideration, which is also available in the docket for this action.

    B. Legal Background

    The discussion of EPA's statutory authority to extend refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule focused primarily on CAA section 608, especially on sections 608(c) and 608(a). See generally 81 FR 82284-82288.

    Section 608(a) requires EPA to establish standards and requirements regarding use and disposal of class I and class II substances. With regard to refrigerants, EPA is to promulgate regulations establishing standards and requirements for the use and disposal of class I and class II substances during the service, repair, or disposal of air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances or IPR. Regulations under section 608(a) are to include requirements to reduce the use and emission of ODS to the lowest achievable level, and to maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances. Section 608(a) further provides that “[s]uch regulations may include requirements to use alternative substances (including substances which are not class I or class II substances) or to minimize use of class I or class II substances, or to promote the use of safe alternatives pursuant to section [612] or any combination of the foregoing.”

    Section 608(c) establishes a self-effectuating prohibition, commonly called the “venting prohibition.” 10 Section 608(c)(1), effective July 1, 1992, makes it unlawful for any person in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance or IPR to knowingly vent, release, or dispose of any ODS used as a refrigerant in such equipment in a manner that permits that substance to enter the environment. Section 608(c)(1) also includes an exemption from this prohibition for “[d]e minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose” of such a substance. Section 608(c)(2) states that, effective November 15, 1995, “paragraph (1) shall also apply to the venting, release, or disposal of any substitute substance for a class I or class II substance by any person maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance or [IPR] which contains and uses as a refrigerant any such substance, unless the Administrator determines that venting, releasing, or disposing of such substance does not pose a threat to the environment.” EPA interprets section 608(c)(2)'s extension of section 608(c)(1) to substitute refrigerants to extend both the prohibition on venting and the de minimis exemption to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. This is a long-held position and EPA is not proposing to revisit it. See, e.g., 69 FR 11949 (March 12, 2004); 70 FR 19274-19275 (April 13, 2005).

    10 In this context, EPA uses the term “self-effectuating” to mean that the statutory prohibition on venting is itself legally binding even in the absence of implementing regulations.

    In the 2016 Rule, EPA interpreted section 608 of the CAA as being ambiguous with regard to EPA's authority to establish refrigerant management regulations for non-exempt substitute refrigerants because Congress had not precisely spoken to this issue. Accordingly, EPA took the view that it had the discretion under Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843-44 (1984), to interpret section 608 as providing EPA with authority to extend all aspects of its refrigerant management regulations under section 608 to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, including those regulations that had previously only applied to ODS refrigerants. See 81 FR 82283. The 2016 Rule explained that EPA had established the subpart F standards for the proper handling of ODS refrigerants during service, repair, or disposal of an appliance to maximize the recovery and/or recycling of such substances and reduce the use and emission of such substances primarily under section 608(a). Section 608(a) expressly requires EPA to issue regulations that apply to class I and class II substances, but does not expressly address whether EPA could establish the same refrigerant management practices for substitute substances. On the other hand, section 608(c)(2) explicitly mentions substitute refrigerants and directly applies the provisions for ODS refrigerants in section 608(c)(1) to them.

    In the 2016 Rule EPA grounded its authority for the extension of refrigerant requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants largely on section 608(c), which EPA interpreted to provide it authority to promulgate regulations that interpret, explain, and enforce the venting prohibition and the de minimis exemption as they apply to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. See 81 FR 82283-82284. In reaching this interpretation, EPA relied in part on a policy rationale that by establishing a comprehensive and consistent framework that applies to both ODS and non-exempt substitute refrigerants, the 2016 Rule would provide clarity to the regulated community concerning the measures that should be taken to comply with the venting prohibition for non-exempt substitutes and would thus reduce confusion and enhance compliance for both ODS and non-exempt substitutes. EPA further explained its view in the 2016 Rule that the extension of requirements under section 608 to non-exempt substitutes was also supported by section 608(a) because having a consistent regulatory framework for non-exempt substitutes and ODS is expected to reduce emissions of ODS refrigerants, as well as non-exempt substitutes. In addition, EPA located supplemental authority for the 2016 Rule in section 301(a), which provides authority for EPA to “prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out [the EPA Administrator's] functions” under the Act. Id. Further, EPA located supplemental authority to extend the recordkeeping and reporting requirements to non-exempt substitutes in section 114, which provides authority to the EPA Administrator to require recordkeeping and reporting in carrying out provisions of the CAA. Id.

    C. EPA's Authority To Revisit Existing Regulations and Interpretations

    EPA's ability to revisit existing regulations is well-grounded in the law. Specifically, EPA has inherent authority to reconsider, repeal, or revise past decisions to the extent permitted by law so long as the Agency provides a reasoned explanation. The CAA complements EPA's inherent authority to reconsider prior rulemakings by providing the Agency with broad authority to prescribe regulations as necessary in CAA section 301(a). The authority to reconsider prior decisions exists in part because EPA's interpretations of statutes it administers “[are not] instantly carved in stone,” but must be evaluated “on a continuing basis.” Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NRDC, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 863-64 (1984). This is true when, as is the case here, review is undertaken “in response to . . . a change in administrations.” National Cable & Telecommunications Ass'n v. Brand X internet Services, 545 U.S. 967, 981 (2005). Indeed, “[a]gencies obviously have broad discretion to reconsider a regulation at any time.” Clean Air Council v. Pruitt, 862 F.3d 1, 8-9 (D.C. Cir. 2017). Similarly, the fact that an agency has previously adopted one interpretation of a statute does not preclude it from later exercising its discretion to change its interpretation. National Cable & Telecommunications Ass'n, 545 U.S. at 981.

    In accordance with the Administrator's statement in the August 10, 2017 letter that EPA planned to issue a proposed rule to revisit aspects of the 2016 Rule's extension of the subpart F refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitutes, EPA has reassessed its decision to extend those requirements to non-exempt substitutes and the interpretations supporting that extension. The main considerations leading to the Agency's decision to reassess the 2016 Rule's extension of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants are questions about whether extending the full set of subpart F requirements exceeded EPA's statutory authority under CAA section 608. The subpart F requirements, including the leak repair requirements, were originally established for ODS based primarily on authority under CAA section 608(a). Sections 608(a)(1) and (2) explicitly require EPA to regulate ODS but make no mention of substitutes. Section 608(c)(2) does expressly mention substitute refrigerants. However, that provision focuses on prohibiting knowing releases of substitute refrigerants in the course of maintenance, service, repair, and disposal activities and on providing an exemption for de minimis releases.

    Thus, the structure of section 608, specifically the inclusion of the term “substitutes” in section 608(c) but not section 608(a), contrasted with the express references to ODS (class I and class II substances) in both subsections, suggests that EPA's authority to address substitutes under section 608 is more limited than its authority to address ODS. If Congress had intended to convey authority to EPA to promulgate the same, full set of refrigerant management requirements for substitutes as for ODS, it is reasonable to expect that Congress would have expressly included substitutes in section 608(a), as it did for section 608(c)—but it did not. On the other hand, section 608(a) requires the Agency to issue regulations that reduce the use and emission of ODS to the lowest achievable level and maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances. While section 608(a) contains discretionary language about what requirements those regulations may include, it does not contain any more specific mandates about how the required objectives should be achieved. To the extent that the extension of certain subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes is necessary to reduce the use and emission of ODS to the lowest achievable level or to maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances, EPA is proposing to conclude, as in the 2016 Rule, that such an extension would be authorized by section 608(a). In addition, EPA believes that section 608(c) is reasonably construed as providing the Agency discretionary authority to interpret and apply the venting prohibition and the de minimis exemption, as they are expressly incorporated as relating to substitutes under section 608(c)(2). However, EPA believes that its statutory authority under section 608, taking that authority as a whole, does not extend as far with respect to substitutes as it does with respect to ODS, and specifically believes that section 608 is ambiguous with respect to the extent to which, if at all, Congress authorized EPA to issue refrigerant management regulations for substitutes.

    In light of these considerations, the Agency has re-examined its authority for aspects of the 2016 Rule. In particular, EPA has carefully reviewed the specific requirements under subpart F that were extended to non-exempt substitute refrigerants and evaluated whether those extensions were within the scope of EPA's statutory authority under sections 608(a) and 608(c).

    While EPA believes the scope of its authority for substitutes under section 608 is narrower than that for ODS, EPA maintains that section 608 is ambiguous with respect to the extent of its authority to apply refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA is proposing to change some of the interpretations that supported the 2016 Rule. Specifically, EPA is proposing to conclude that the extension of the leak repair requirements in § 82.157 to non-exempt substitute refrigerants exceeds EPA's legal authority and furthermore is not necessary to fulfill the purposes of section 608(a). EPA proposes to conclude that these changes in interpretations are appropriate interpretations of sections 608(a) and (c) in light of the statutory text, context, and EPA's historical views. With regard to section 608(a), EPA is also taking comment on an alternative legal interpretation under which the agency would not rely on section 608(a) for any extension of the refrigerant management regulations to substitute refrigerants.

    In light of EPA's proposed legal interpretations, EPA's proposal for amending the 2016 Rule is to rescind the extension of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitutes, while retaining the extension of the remaining subpart F requirements. EPA is also requesting comment on whether the agency should rescind the entire extension of the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes. These points, and EPA's proposed legal interpretations, are discussed further below in the context of specific authority under sections 608(c) and (a), respectively.

    D. Authority Under CAA § 608(c) To Extend Refrigerant Management Provisions to Non-Exempt Substitute Refrigerants

    EPA is proposing to change aspects of the interpretation of CAA section 608(c) that it adopted in the 2016 Rule. Under the interpretation proposed in this action, the Agency exceeded its statutory authority under section 608(c) in the 2016 Rule by extending the leak repair (§ 82.157) requirements to appliances that use only substitute refrigerants.

    As in prior actions under section 608, EPA continues to interpret section 608(c) to provide it some authority to interpret, explain, and enforce the venting prohibition and the de minimis exemption, as these are both provisions in a statutory regime that EPA is entrusted to administer. However, EPA also recognizes that sections 608(a) and 608(c) differ from one another in some key respects, including the fact that 608(a)(1) and (2) expressly require EPA to issue regulations for class I and class II substances, but include no such requirement for (or, indeed, any mention of) substitutes.11 In contrast, 608(c) does explicitly apply to substitute refrigerants, but that subsection leaves EPA discretion as to whether to promulgate regulations implementing its provisions. In light of these differences in wording between 608(a) and 608(c), EPA is proposing to conclude that the 2016 Rule exceeded the agency's authority under section 608 by extending the full set of the subpart F requirements to substitutes.

    11 Section 608(a)(3) does provide that the regulations issued under section 608(a) “may include requirements to use alternative substances (including substances which are not class I or class II substances), . . . or to promote the use of safe alternatives pursuant to section [612].” (In implementing Title VI, EPA has at times used the terms “alternative” and “substitute” interchangeably. See, e.g., 81 FR 86779, n.1; 81 FR 82276, 82291.) EPA is not relying upon these provisions in 608(a)(3) in this document, as the proposed regulatory changes do not relate to requirements to use substitutes or promote their use pursuant to section 612. Furthermore, EPA did not rely on these authorities in 608(a)(3) in extending the refrigerant management requirements to substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule, and is not relying on them in addressing the underlying questions of statutory interpretation at issue here.

    Specifically, EPA believes that the extension of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants exceeded its authority. To justify the extension of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule, EPA reversed its longstanding position that “topping off” leaking appliances was not venting or a knowing release of refrigerant in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance within the meaning of section 608(c). Prior to the 2016 Rule, EPA's position had been that refrigerant released during the use of an appliance is not subject to the venting prohibition. When establishing the original leak repair provisions, EPA in 1993 stated that:

    [T]he venting prohibition itself, which applies to the maintenance, service, repair, and disposal of equipment, does not prohibit `topping off' systems, which leads to emissions of refrigerant during the use of equipment. The provision on knowing releases does, however, include the situation in which a technician is practically certain that his or her conduct will cause a release of refrigerant during the maintenance, service, repair, or disposal of equipment. Knowing releases also include situations in which a technician closes his or her eyes to obvious facts or fails to investigate them when aware of facts that demand investigation. [58 FR 28672.]

    In the 2016 Rule, EPA changed the Agency's interpretation of the venting prohibition as part of the rationale that supported applying the leak repair requirements, originally issued under CAA section 608(a), to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA stated in the 2016 Rule that it:

    concludes that its statements in the 1993 Rule presented an overly narrow interpretation of the statutory venting prohibition. Consistent with the direction articulated in the proposed 2010 Leak Repair Rule, EPA is adopting a broader interpretation. When refrigerant must be added to an existing appliance, other than when originally charging the system or for a seasonal variance, the owner or operator necessarily knows that the system has leaks. At that point the owner or operator is required to calculate the leak rate. If the leaks exceed the applicable leak rate for that particular type of appliance, the owner or operator will know that absent repairs, subsequent additions of refrigerant will be released in a manner that will permit the refrigerant to enter the environment. Therefore, EPA interprets section 608(c) such that if a person adds refrigerant to an appliance that he or she knows is leaking, he or she also violates the venting prohibition unless he or she has complied with the applicable practices referenced in § 82.154(a)(2), as revised, including the leak repair requirements, as applicable. [81 FR 82285.]

    EPA is proposing to conclude that this 2016 interpretation exceeds the scope of the Agency's authority under section 608(c)(2). The agency is therefore proposing to return to the interpretation used prior to the 2016 Rule.12 First, the 2016 interpretation is based on a strained reading of section 608(c)(2) because the refrigerant releases from such leaks typically occur during the normal operation of the appliance, rather than “in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of ” an appliance. The operational leaks that trigger the leak repair provisions may take the form of a slow leak that results in the need to add refrigerant and that occurs in the weeks or months prior to the servicing event. Leaks may also result from an unintended catastrophic failure, which leads to a subsequent service event to recharge the appliance. While section 608(c)(2) applies to the release of substitute refrigerants in “the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance,” neither of those types of leaks typically occur in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance. Moreover, EPA has always understood that few appliances are leak-free, which further supports the notion that leaks frequently occur during normal operation of an appliance.13 Further, EPA has recognized that refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment often does leak, and that “[t]his is particularly likely for larger and more complicated appliances like those subject to the subpart F leak repair provisions.” (81 FR 82313). Therefore, the leak repair provisions apply to activities that are too distinct from the activities identified in section 608(c) to provide EPA with regulatory authority to extend the leak repair regulations to non-exempt substitute refrigerants.

    12 The 2010 leak repair proposal (75 FR 78558) was not finalized. As noted in the 2016 Rule (81 FR 82275), EPA withdrew the 2010 proposal in the 2016 rulemaking and re-proposed elements of the 2010 proposal in the notice of proposed rulemaking (80 FR 69461) for the 2016 Rule.

    13 Recognizing that appliances can leak during their normal operation, 40 CFR 82.157(g) requires periodic leak inspections of appliances with 50 or more pounds of refrigerant that had been repaired after leaking above the applicable threshold rate. Automatic leak detection equipment is also allowed in lieu of inspections for such appliances, or portions of such appliances. This proposal, if finalized, would rescind this requirement for appliances containing only non-exempt substitute refrigerant.

    EPA notes that under the proposed revisions to its interpretation discussed in this document, the venting prohibition under section 608(c) would continue to apply to actions taken in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances containing non-exempt substitute refrigerant, including those containing 50 or more pounds of such refrigerant. For example, knowing release from cutting refrigerant lines when disposing of an appliance is prohibited. Similarly, opening an appliance to repair a component without first isolating it and recovering the refrigerant would typically lead to a knowing release of refrigerant to the environment. It is also possible that some “topping off” may occur in an appliance with a leak that is so visible, audible, or frequent that adding refrigerant to the appliance creates the practical certainty that the refrigerant will be released contemporaneously with the servicing event and therefore may constitute a knowing release. For example, hearing hissing or noticing a ruptured line while continuing to add refrigerant to an appliance would constitute a knowing release. However, EPA does not believe this occurs in a substantial number of situations, and thus does not believe that the possibility of such an event justifies a blanket interpretation that “topping off” an appliance that has leaked, absent adherence to the leak repair requirements at § 82.157, is necessarily and per se a violation of 608(c).

    EPA is proposing to remove the extension of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants as exceeding its authority, but to retain the other provisions of subpart F as appropriate measures to implement, explain, and enforce the venting prohibition for non-exempt substitute refrigerants. In contrast to the leak repair requirements, the other provisions of subpart F that EPA extended to non-exempt substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule relate directly to emissions that necessarily occur in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance. Accordingly, those provisions directly address the potential for knowing releases of non-exempt substitute refrigerants that would be within the scope of section 608(c)(2). Moreover, prior to the 2016 Rule, EPA had long recognized connections between other subpart F requirements and the potential for releases to occur during appliance maintenance, service, repair or disposal, and continues to do so. For example, failure to properly evacuate an appliance (§ 82.156 and § 82.158) before opening it for servicing will create the practical certainty that the refrigerant in the appliance will be released during the servicing event. EPA required that recovery and/or recycling equipment be tested and certified by an EPA-approved laboratory or organization “[i]n order to ensure that recycling and recovery equipment on the market is capable of limiting emissions.” (58 FR 28682).

    Similarly, disposing of the appliance without removing the refrigerant (§ 82.155) will result in the release of any remaining refrigerant during disposal of the appliance. EPA acknowledged this when finalizing the safe disposal requirements in 1993, writing: “The Agency wishes to clarify that the prohibition on venting refrigerant includes individuals who are preparing to dispose of a used appliance.” (58 FR 28703). EPA established the reclamation requirement for used refrigerant to prevent equipment damage from dirty refrigerant and ensure a market for recovered refrigerants, both of which minimize knowingly venting or releasing of refrigerant during appliance maintenance, servicing, repair, and disposal. (58 FR 28678). With respect to the sales restriction and technician certification requirements, EPA stated that “unrestricted sales will enable untrained or undertrained technicians to obtain access to refrigerants that are likely to be used improperly in connection with servicing activities that will result in the venting of refrigerants” (58 FR 28698) and that “[e]ducating technicians on how to contain and conserve refrigerant effectively, curtailing illegal venting into the atmosphere” was one of the primary reasons many technicians commented in support of the certification program. (58 FR 28691). Accordingly, as part of EPA's proposal, the agency would conclude that the 2016 Rule's extension of the other, non-leak-repair requirements under subpart F to non-exempt substitute refrigerants is within the scope of EPA's authority under CAA section 608(c)(2), because those other requirements implement that provision's venting prohibition.

    While EPA continues to believe that it has authority to implement, explain, and enforce the venting prohibition and the exemptions in 608(c) for non-exempt substitute refrigerants, as explained above, it is proposing to conclude that the extension of the full set of the subpart F requirements to appliances using only substitute refrigerant exceeded its legal authority under section 608(c). As explained above, it is proposing to rescind the extension of subpart F's leak repair requirements to appliances using only non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA is also seeking comments on whether the agency should instead withdraw the entire extension of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule given its proposed interpretation. Section 608(c) does not expressly require EPA to issue regulations, nor does it contain specific deadlines or requirements for any rules that EPA might promulgate under that authority. Accordingly, EPA has substantial discretion in issuing regulations under section 608(c) and the timing of any such regulations. Given that discretion, EPA could conclude that a full withdrawal of the extension of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants is appropriate and warranted at this time. Such an approach could be reasonable in light of the questions as to EPA's legal authority for that extension. For example, if EPA were to conclude that interpreting section 608(c) to authorize the same full set of requirements as 608(a) for refrigerants renders 608(a) superfluous with respect to refrigerants 14 and that this structural issue raises critical uncertainties as to the extent to which EPA should replicate 608(a) requirements under 608(c), EPA could decide that a full withdrawal of the extension is an appropriate use of its discretion under section 608(c). Such action would allow the Agency to consider and potentially develop options not discussed in this proposed rule. If EPA were to decide that a full withdrawal of the extension is prudent, the prohibitions under section 608(c) would continue to apply directly to any knowing release of non-exempt substitute refrigerant in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance.

    14 While section 608(c) only addresses refrigerants, whether ODS or substitutes, section 608(a) is not limited to refrigerants. In fact, EPA has applied its authority under section 608(a) to establish or consider regulations for ODS in non-refrigerant applications. For example, in 1998, EPA issued a rule on halon management under the authority of section 608(a)(2). (63 FR 11084). Accordingly, when considering potential issues arising from interpretations of section 608(c) to authorize the same requirements as 608(a), it is appropriate to focus on refrigerants.

    For the reasons discussed above in this section, EPA is specifically requesting comment on whether to retain the non-leak repair requirements in the final rule or whether to rescind the entirety of the 2016 Rule's extension of the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes. Included in the docket for this action is a version of the regulatory text in subpart F with red-line strikeout showing the types of revisions to subpart F that the Agency is considering making, should it decide to finalize a full withdrawal of the 2016 Rule's extension of the refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitutes. Additional information on the costs and benefits of rescinding that entire extension is found in Section III of this document and the technical support document in the docket. If EPA were to rescind the extension in full through this rulemaking, it would likely give subsequent consideration to whether some subset of the subpart F requirements, a different set of requirements, or some combination of the two, would be an appropriate means of implementing the venting prohibition for substitutes. Such consideration could result in a new proposal following final action on this current proposal.

    EPA requests comment on the proposed changes discussed above, including the proposed changes in interpretation of section 608(c). EPA also welcomes comment on whether section 608(c) provides authority to promulgate a set of leak repair provisions, or refrigerant management requirements generally, for non-exempt substitutes that may be different from the ones currently found in subpart F, to meet the purposes of that section while minimizing overlap with requirements authorized under section 608(a). Additionally, EPA requests comment on the practical considerations of implementing the venting prohibition for substitutes in a manner that is different from ODS. Lastly, EPA requests comment on whether stakeholders may have a reliance interest in either the leak repair provisions or the other subpart F provisions as they relate to substitutes under the 2016 Rule and how that interest would be affected by the proposed changes discussed above.

    E. Authority Under CAA § 608(a) To Extend Refrigerant Management Provisions to Non-Exempt Substitute Refrigerants

    As noted above, EPA concluded in the 2016 Rule that it had supplemental authority under section 608(a) to extend the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes:

    This action extending the regulations under subpart F to non-exempt substitutes is additionally supported by the authority in section 608(a) because regulations that minimize the release and maximize the recapture and recovery of non-exempt substitutes will also reduce the release and increase the recovery of ozone-depleting substances. Improper handling of substitute refrigerants is likely to contaminate appliances and recovery cylinders with mixtures of ODS and non-ODS substitutes, which can lead to illegal venting because such mixtures are difficult or expensive to reclaim or appropriately dispose of . . . . In short, the authority to promulgate regulations regarding the use of class I and II substances encompasses the authority to establish regulations regarding the proper handling of substitutes where this is needed to reduce emissions and maximize recapture and recycling of class I and II substances. Applying consistent requirements to all non-exempt refrigerants will reduce complexity and increase clarity for the regulated community and promote compliance with those requirements for ODS refrigerants, as well as their substitutes. [81 FR 82286.]

    In reviewing the legal interpretation of 608(a) that supported the 2016 Rule, EPA has further examined the connection between the purposes of section 608(a) and the 2016 Rule's extension of subpart F refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. After further consideration of this issue, EPA believes that the statements in the preamble to the 2016 Rule, which were advanced generally and without distinction to support extending all the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, failed to recognize that particular requirements may have a greater or lesser connection to the purposes of section 608(a) when applied to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to conclude that the connection between applying the leak repair requirements to appliances with only substitute refrigerants and the reduction in emissions of ODS is too tenuous to support reliance on CAA section 608(a) as a basis for authority to extend the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitutes.

    This may be particularly true when the leak repair provisions are compared to the other provisions of subpart F. The 2016 Rule also identified several scenarios where failure to apply consistent standards to appliances containing non-exempt substitute refrigerants could arguably lead to emissions of ODS. For example, improper handling of non-exempt substitute refrigerants by persons lacking the requisite training may contaminate appliances and recovery cylinders with mixtures of ODS and non-ODS substitutes. Contaminated appliances may lead to equipment failures and emissions from those systems, including emissions of ODS. Because contaminated cylinders may be more costly to recycle they may simply be destroyed. The costs of handling or properly disposing of these mixed refrigerants may incentivize intentional releases to the atmosphere. Therefore, contamination can lead to the release of class I and class II substances. Maintaining the sales restriction and technician certification requirement for non-exempt substitute refrigerants may reduce the possibility that refrigerant in the appliances will be misidentified by an uncertified person attempting to service the appliance, which in turn reduces the possibility that contamination and subsequent refrigerant releases may occur. Maintaining reclamation standards may ensure that used refrigerant is not contaminated when it reenters the market for use and may reduce emissions associated with the mixing of refrigerants and equipment damage. EPA solicits comment and any data or analysis commenters may have regarding these scenarios, their frequency, and their emissions effects.

    In contrast, requiring the repair of appliances using only substitute refrigerants would reduce emissions from those particular appliances, but is unlikely to independently reduce cross-contamination, refrigerant mixing, or releases from an ODS appliance. The response to comments for the 2016 Rule 15 did note, in the context of explaining EPA's authority for the revisions to 40 CFR 82.157, that providing a consistent standard for ODS and non-exempt substitute refrigerants would reduce emissions of ODS by reducing the incidence of failure to follow the requirements for ODS appliances. However, in that discussion, EPA did not address whether, if all other subpart F requirements were extended to non-exempt substitutes, it would be necessary to also extend § 82.157 to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA is proposing to withdraw the extension of the subpart F provisions related to leak repair for non-exempt substitute refrigerants. Other elements of the 608 program such as the refrigerant sales restriction, technician certification, reclamation standards, and evacuation standards would continue to apply to non-exempt substitute refrigerants if this proposal is finalized. If these other subpart F requirements continue to apply, such that, for example, the regulations only permit certified technicians to service equipment regardless of whether it contains ODS or non-exempt substitutes, those requirements could also reduce the incidence of failure to follow the requirements for ODS appliances. By contrast, it is unclear how application specifically of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants would lead to additional reductions in ODS emissions if those other requirements are applied to non-exempt substitutes. Thus, insofar as the 2016 Rule was grounded in an argument that section 608(a) supports the extension of the leak repair provisions to non-exempt substitute refrigerants, EPA is proposing to withdraw that interpretation.

    15 Response to Comments for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Update to the Refrigerant Management Requirements under the Clean Air Act, pages 13-14 (pdf pages 18-19). Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0453-0226.

    EPA is also seeking comment on whether, as a matter of statutory interpretation, the agency can rely on section 608(a) for the issuance of any of the subpart F requirements for substitute refrigerants, even those for which there is demonstrably a connection between the regulatory requirement and the purposes of section 608(a) to reduce use and emission of class I and II substances to the lowest achievable levels and maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances. As noted above, in section 608(a) Congress specifically required EPA to issue regulations for class I and class II substances that would meet certain statutory purposes set forth in that section. But Congress did not list substitutes for coverage by those requirements. In contrast, section 608(c) does expressly extend requirements to substitute refrigerants. This difference between section 608(a) and 608(c) could be interpreted as a manifestation of Congressional intent to distinguish between the categories of substances covered in these respective provisions and to only convey authority to address substitute refrigerants under 608(c), not 608(a).16 This interpretation, if adopted, would lead to the conclusion that section 608(a) cannot provide a basis for extending any of subpart F's refrigerant management requirements to substitute refrigerants.17

    16 This interpretation would not affect EPA's discretionary authority to “include requirements to use alternative substances (including substances which are not class I or class II substances) . . . or to promote the use of safe alternatives pursuant to section [612]” in regulations under section 608(a), as these authorities are expressly mentioned in section 608(a)(3). As discussed at n.11, supra, EPA did not rely on these authorities in 608(a)(3) in extending the refrigerant management requirements to substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule, and is not relying on them in this proposal or in addressing the underlying questions of statutory interpretation at issue here.

    17 Some commenters on the 2016 Rule pointed out that Congress specifically listed class I and class II substances for coverage under the regulations required by section 608(a) and contended that those regulations could not be applied to refrigerants that are neither class I nor class II substances.

    EPA requests comment on the proposed changes discussed in this section, including the proposed changes in interpretation of section 608(a) so as to remove support for the extension of the leak repair requirements in § 82.157 to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA also requests comment on the frequency of appliances being contaminated by mixtures of ODS and substitute refrigerants, and the resulting equipment damage. Further, EPA requests comment on whether the agency should conclude that it could not rely on section 608(a) for any authority to extend subpart F requirements to substitutes. If EPA were to reach such a conclusion, EPA would rely solely on section 608(c) for the extension of the non-leak repair subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes, or alternatively, would withdraw the entire extension. As noted previously, the docket contains a version of the regulatory text showing the types of revisions to subpart F that the Agency is considering making should it decide to finalize a full withdrawal of the 2016 Rule's extension of the refrigerant management requirements to non-exempt substitutes. In addition, EPA welcomes comment on whether section 608(a) provides authority to promulgate a set of leak repair provisions, or refrigerant management requirements generally, for non-exempt substitutes that may be different from the ones currently found in subpart F. If the Agency were to decide to pursue a different approach than one of the two potential outcomes discussed in detail in this proposed rule—the proposed action, rescinding the 2016 Rule's extension of the leak repair requirements to non-exempt substitutes, or the potential alternative approach on which it takes comment, rescinding its extension of the full set of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes—it would provide the public with an opportunity to offer comments on that different approach. Lastly, EPA requests comment on whether stakeholders may have a reliance interest in either the leak repair provisions or the other subpart F provisions as they relate to substitutes under the 2016 Rule and how that interest would be affected by the potential changes discussed in this section.

    F. Extension of the January 1, 2019 Compliance Date for the Appliance Maintenance and Leak Repair Provisions for Non-Exempt Substitute Refrigerants

    EPA is evaluating whether the January 1, 2019 compliance date for the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions for non-exempt substitutes remains viable for regulated entities or whether the date should be extended, depending on the outcome and timing of the final rule. EPA has been working to develop this proposed rule expeditiously and intends to develop the final rule as quickly as practicable, in recognition of the January 1, 2019 compliance date for the extension of the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions at § 82.157 to non-exempt substitutes.18 Despite the Agency's best efforts, it is possible that regulated entities will face a choice about whether to incur compliance costs prior to issuance of a final rule that could rescind those requirements for non-exempt substitutes. In that scenario, certain regulated entities likely would incur costs to comply with provisions that might ultimately be rescinded, while the foregone benefits of extending the compliance date likely would be limited as explained below. Therefore, EPA is proposing to take final action to extend the compliance date in § 82.157(a) for appliances containing only non-exempt substitute refrigerants if final action on the substantive portions of this proposed rule will not occur within a reasonable time before the existing compliance date. If we take final action on this proposal, we will revise the first sentence of § 82.157(a) to extend the compliance date for appliances containing only non-exempt substitute refrigerants. Such an extension would only be for as long as is needed to provide regulated entities certainty on whether to incur expenditures necessary to comply with these provisions. EPA anticipates that the extension would be between six to twelve months beyond January 1, 2019. If needed, EPA intends to take final action on the proposed extension of the compliance date separate from, and before, taking final action on other proposals in this document.

    18 Only the amendments to the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions found at § 82.157 have a compliance date of January 1, 2019. EPA is not proposing an extension of the compliance dates for the extension of any of the other subpart F requirements, as those compliance dates have already passed. While the amendments at § 82.157 include revisions to the appliance maintenance and leak repair program that affect appliances using ODS refrigerants, as well those using only non-exempt substitutes, EPA is only proposing to extend the compliance date for appliances using only non-exempt substitutes, for the reasons described later in this document.

    EPA is proposing this extension because it anticipates that there could be undue costs to owners and operators to comply with the appliance maintenance and leak repair provisions for appliances containing non-exempt substitutes, such as inventorying equipment, establishing recordkeeping procedures, and meeting the new leak rate thresholds if it has not finalized any revisions within a reasonable time before the existing compliance date and if that compliance date is not extended. Facilities that have both ODS and non-exempt substitute appliances may already be using similar refrigerant management programs for all of their appliances. However, the costs may be greater for facilities that only have appliances that use non-exempt substitute refrigerants and that do not have established procedures for ODS-containing equipment. In the 2016 Rule EPA did consider the ongoing costs that such facilities would face in complying with the newly applicable subpart F requirements, but did not consider potential one-time costs to such facilities associated with establishing a refrigerant management program or designing a recordkeeping system. EPA's analysis of appliance data submitted to the California Air Resources Board under its Refrigerant Management Program show that 46 percent of facilities only have HFC appliances. Within that group of facilities, EPA estimates that 55 percent have at least one appliance that exceeds the new threshold rates. As discussed in the economic analysis section, EPA estimates that extending the compliance date by up to 12 months would result in foregone annual GHG emissions reductions benefits of 3 MMTCO2e.

    EPA requests comment on the proposal to extend the date by which appliances containing non-exempt substitute refrigerants must comply with § 82.157. EPA is interested in whether facilities, and particularly those facilities that do not have ODS equipment, anticipate any practical difficulties in gearing up to meet the January 1, 2019 compliance date, and intends to consider such information in determining whether a compliance date extension is needed. EPA additionally requests comments on any costs or hardship that owners and operators of appliances containing non-exempt substitutes would face if this compliance date is not extended and if EPA has not finalized any revisions within a reasonable time before the current compliance date for § 82.157, and on any foregone benefits from extending this compliance date.

    EPA further notes that the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a recent decision in Air Alliance Houston v. EPA, No. 17-1155 (DC Cir. August 17, 2018), which addressed an EPA rule delaying the effective date of a previously issued EPA regulation in the context of a reconsideration proceeding under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act. In contrast to the rule at issue in the Air Alliance Houston case, this notice of proposed rulemaking is not occurring in the context of a section 307(d)(7)(B) reconsideration. Nevertheless, EPA requests comments regarding the implications, if any, of this recent decision for its ability to finalize an extension of the compliance date as proposed in this section. EPA will consider these comments in deciding whether to finalize such an extension.

    III. Economic Analysis

    Section 608 of the CAA does not explicitly address whether costs or benefits should be considered in developing regulations under that section. Because the statutory language does not dictate a particular means of taking economic factors into account, if at all, EPA has discretion to adopt a reasonable method for doing so. EPA has focused primarily on the proper scope of the Agency's authority to regulate, although it has also presented and considered an analysis of costs and benefits in making the choices underlying this proposed rulemaking. EPA interprets section 608 to permit it to consider costs and benefits, but does not interpret section 608 to require it to propose or select the option with the best cost-benefit outcome.

    While EPA is proposing to determine that the 2016 Rule's extension of the full set of subpart F requirements, in its entirety, to non-exempt substitute refrigerants exceeded EPA's statutory authority, the agency notes that it has also considered costs in developing this proposal. EPA's economic analysis indicates that the expected cost savings for the proposal would outweigh the monetized foregone benefits. Specifically, the $39 million annual savings of rescinding the 2016 Rule's extension of the leak repair provisions to non-exempt substitutes would outweigh the foregone benefits of $15 million in avoided refrigerant purchases. For the scenario where the agency would rescind the entire extension of the subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitutes in the 2016 Rule, the cost savings of $43 million would outweigh the same $15 million in foregone benefits.19 EPA requests comment on whether it should continue to explicitly take costs into consideration in the final rule, and if so how.

    19 This analysis is based on effects that EPA monetized in the 2016 Rule. As discussed later in this section, EPA is requesting comment on additional factors.

    The Agency attempted to minimize costs in the 2016 Rule, in particular by allowing more time and options for repair before requiring retrofit or retirement. As an example, EPA provided an extension if a component is not available in the first 30 days after discovering the leak. Prior to 2016, an owner/operator would have had to retrofit or retire their appliance. Owners and operators of appliances containing non-exempt substitutes would also benefit from those flexibilities, but also became subject to a new regulatory scheme.

    EPA is proposing to remove the requirement to repair leaks in appliances containing only substitute refrigerants, along with the associated verification tests, leak inspections, and recordkeeping. In the 2016 Rule, EPA estimated that extending the leak repair provisions to appliances containing non-exempt substitutes would have an annual cost of $39 million in 2014 dollars using a 7 percent discount rate. This is composed of $10 million in recordkeeping costs and $29 million in repair and leak inspection costs. Costs were modeled for a single typical year in which all the requirements were in effect, based on the appliance distribution modeled for 2015. To allow for ease of comparison between the two rules, the model and the use of 2014 dollars are the same in the analysis for this proposal as EPA used in the 2016 Rule.

    In the 2016 Rule, EPA also estimated lower expenditures to purchase replacement refrigerant and lower emissions of refrigerant expressed in ozone depletion potential tons and global warming potential. The current leak repair requirement in the 2016 Rule was expected to result in appliance owners or operators purchasing less refrigerant because they would be able to identify and repair leaks earlier, preventing refrigerant releases. EPA estimated that the total annual reduced expenditures for purchasing non-exempt substitute refrigerant would be $15 million. By withdrawing that portion of the 2016 Rule, those reduced expenditures would not be realized.

    EPA estimates that this proposed rule to rescind the extension of the leak repair provisions to substitutes would not directly affect the stratospheric ozone layer. EPA is not proposing to amend any provisions of 40 CFR part 82, subpart F that relate to ODS refrigerants. EPA estimates that this proposed action would result in foregone annual GHG emissions reductions benefits of 2.9 MMTCO2e—approximately a 40 percent reduction from the level estimated for the 2016 rulemaking. GHG emissions reductions benefits associated with the reduction in emissions of ODS refrigerants would be retained.

    As discussed previously, EPA is requesting comment on whether to withdraw the entire extension of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. EPA estimates that rescinding the entire subpart F requirements for non-exempt substitute refrigerants would reduce the annual burden associated with the 2016 Rule by at least an additional $4 million per year (for a total annual burden reduction of at least $43 million per year). This is composed of $3 million in compliance costs associated with the requirement to use self-sealing valves on small cans of refrigerant and $1 million in recordkeeping costs. The unrealized annual savings associated with reduced use of non-exempt substitute refrigerant would remain $15 million, as discussed previously. Thus, EPA estimates that withdrawing the entire extension of subpart F requirements to non-exempt substitute refrigerants would reduce total compliance costs by at least $28 million per year. EPA estimates that this would result in additional foregone annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions benefits of 0.7 MMTCO2e associated with the use of self-sealing valves (for a total of at least 3.6 MMTCO2e). While the majority of GHG reductions from HFC appliances that EPA quantified were the result of extending the leak repair provisions to non-exempt substitutes, in the 2016 Rule EPA asserted that there would be other, unquantified benefits resulting from extending the full set of refrigerant management provisions to substitutes.

    In the 2016 Rule, EPA did not identify any additional costs or benefits associated with extending certain provisions of subpart F to non-exempt substitute refrigerants. These provisions include the evacuation requirements, recovery equipment certification, safe disposal requirements, reclamation standards, and technician certification. As noted in the technical support document for the 2016 Rule, EPA assumes full compliance with the venting prohibition and such actions that were considered necessary to comply with the venting prohibition were not considered to lead to additional costs or benefits.

    With regard to the extension of the 608 technician certification requirement to non-exempt substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule, EPA understood that most technicians serviced both appliances containing ODS refrigerants, which were previously subject to the 608 technician certification requirements, and appliances containing non-exempt substitutes. Most technicians are contractors who work on appliances of various ages and for multiple clients, including both individuals and businesses. There was no evidence that facilities using only non-exempt substitute refrigerants are segregated geographically, such that a technician in a certain county would only encounter appliances solely using non-exempt substitutes, or are segregated by business type, such that a technician who only works in one sector (e.g., supermarkets or residential air conditioning) would only encounter appliances solely using non-exempt substitutes. Based on this rationale, EPA concluded in the 2016 Rule that it was extremely unlikely that a person in the air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment servicing field would never encounter equipment containing ODS refrigerant during the course of their career. Accordingly, in the 2016 Rule, EPA assumed persons entering that field would seek 608 technician certifications in order to maintain competitiveness and persons currently in that field already had 608 certification so that they could accept jobs that involved appliances containing ODS refrigerant.

    While commenters on the 2016 Rule did not provide any information indicating EPA's analysis was missing a significant group of new technicians that would be newly required to go through the 608 certification process, during the development of this notice of proposed rulemaking one Federal Department indicated that they had 608 certified technicians working on facilities with appliances containing class I or class II refrigerant, and a separate group of un-certified persons working at facilities that contained only appliances using non-exempt substitute refrigerant.

    Based on this new information, EPA broadly requests comment on whether there are costs associated with the technician certification requirements in the 2016 Rule and on whether removal of that technician certification requirement for non-exempt substitutes would alleviate those costs. EPA particularly requests comment on whether this Federal Department's arrangement is typical, either for larger entities that have in-house personnel servicing appliances or for contractors that provide technicians to service refrigeration and cooling equipment. If so, EPA requests comment on what training was provided prior to the 2016 Rule related to the handling of refrigerants or the venting prohibition for those technicians, whether there were any costs associated with tracking which personnel are 608 certified and thus were eligible to work on appliances containing ODS refrigerant, and which were not certified and thus were only eligible to work on appliances containing non-exempt substitutes. Similarly, EPA broadly requests comments on whether there are costs associated with the other provisions that were extended to non-exempt substitute refrigerants in the 2016 Rule for which EPA had previously assumed no incremental compliance costs. Conversely, because those requirements have now gone into effect, EPA requests comment on whether there are any costs associated with rescinding those requirements as they apply to non-exempt substitute refrigerants.

    Details of the methods used to estimate the benefits of this proposed rule are discussed in the Analysis of the Economic Impact of the Proposed 2018 Revisions to the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program in the docket. For a complete description of the methodology used in EPA's analysis, see the technical support document and Section VI of the 2016 Rule (81 FR 82344).

    To avoid the costs associated with leaking appliances and increased refrigerant purchases, owners and operators of large appliances that use non-exempt substitute refrigerants may already be engaged in effective refrigerant management programs that work for their facilities and their types of equipment. EPA welcomes input from owners and operators of such equipment for how to achieve the goals of the 2016 Rule in reducing refrigerant leaks without a comprehensive regulatory program for leak repair.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket. EPA prepared an economic analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this action which is available in Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0629.

    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    This action is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this action.

    C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this proposed rule have been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1626.16. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here.

    EPA is proposing to revise the leak repair provisions so they apply only to equipment using refrigerant containing a class I or class II substance. This proposal does not affect the recordkeeping and reporting requirements finalized in the 2016 Rule that apply to appliances containing 50 or more pounds of an ODS refrigerant. There are no new records that would be maintained or reports that would be submitted under this proposal. Most of this burden is already covered by the existing requirements in 40 CFR part 82, subpart F, and the existing ICR.

    Respondents/affected entities: This proposal would remove reporting and recordkeeping requirements for owners and operators of appliances containing 50 or more pounds of a non-exempt substitute refrigerant (e.g., HFCs) and technicians servicing such appliances. Entities required to comply with reporting and recordkeeping requirements include technicians; technician certification programs; refrigerant wholesalers; refrigerant reclaimers; refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment owners and/or operators; and other establishments that perform refrigerant removal, service, or disposal.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 82, subpart F).

    Estimated number of respondents: 573,731.

    Frequency of response: The frequency of responses vary from once a year to daily. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to vary from one minute to 9.4 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions and gathering, maintaining, and submitting information.

    Total estimated burden: 434,359 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $24,625,892 (per year). There are no estimated annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs associated with the reporting or recordkeeping requirements.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

    Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to [email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than October 31, 2018. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule.

    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This proposed rule would not impose any new regulatory requirements. It is deregulatory in that it proposes to remove required leak repair and maintenance practices and associated recordkeeping for appliances containing non-exempt substitute refrigerant. This document also seeks comments on withdrawal of additional refrigerant management requirements for appliances containing non-exempt substitute refrigerant. We have therefore concluded that this action will relieve regulatory burden for directly regulated small entities.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.

    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866. EPA has not conducted a separate analysis of risks to infants and children associated with this proposed rule.

    I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a “significant energy action” because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    EPA believes that it is not feasible to quantify any disproportionately high and adverse effects from this action on minority populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 18, 2018. Andrew R. Wheeler, Acting Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 82 as follows:

    PART 82—PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE 1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

    2. Amend § 82.154 by revising paragraph (a)(2)(i) to read as follows:
    § 82.154 Prohibitions.

    (a) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (i) The applicable practices in § 82.155 and § 82.156 are observed, the practices in § 82.157 are observed for appliances that contain a class I or class II refrigerant, recovery and/or recycling machines that meet the requirements in § 82.158 are used whenever refrigerant is removed from an appliance, the technician certification provisions in § 82.161 are observed, and the reclamation requirements in § 82.164 are observed; or

    3. Amend § 82.157 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 82.157 Appliance maintenance and leak repair.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies as of January 1, 2019. This section applies only to appliances with a full charge of 50 or more pounds of any class I or class II refrigerant or blend containing a class I or class II refrigerant. Notwithstanding the use of the term refrigerant in this section, the requirements of this section do not apply to appliances containing solely substitute refrigerants. Unless otherwise specified, the requirements of this section apply to the owner or operator of the appliance.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21084 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 86 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0755; FRL-9984-54-OAR] RIN 2060-AT75 Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Program Technical Amendments AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is proposing two technical corrections to the light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards regulations finalized in the 2012 rulemaking that established standards for model years 2017-2025 light-duty vehicles. First, EPA proposes to correct regulations pertaining to how auto manufacturers must calculate credits for the GHG program's optional advanced technology incentives. The regulations currently in place result in auto manufacturers receiving fewer credits than the agency intended for electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles, and natural gas fueled vehicles. Auto manufacturers requested through a petition letter submitted jointly by the Auto Alliance and Global Automakers in June 2016 that EPA correct the regulations to provide the intended level of credits for these technologies. Second, the regulations regarding how manufacturers must calculate certain types of off-cycle credits contain an error and are inconsistent with the 2012 final rule preamble, raising implementation concerns for some manufacturers. The proposed amendments would clarify the calculation methodology in the regulations. Both of these corrections allow the program to be implemented as originally intended. The proposed corrections are not expected to result in any additional regulatory burdens or costs.

    DATES:

    Comments: Written comments must be received on or before October 31, 2018. If EPA receives a request for a public hearing by October 9, 2018, we will publish information related to the timing and location of the hearing and a new deadline for public comment.

    Public Hearing: EPA will not hold a public hearing on this matter unless a request is received by the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble by October 9, 2018. If EPA receives such a request, we will publish information related to the timing and location of the hearing and a new deadline for public comment.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0755, 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher Lieske, Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ), Assessment and Standards Division (ASD), Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4584; email address: [email protected]; fax number: 734-214-4816.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    This action affects companies that manufacture or sell new light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, as defined under EPA's CAA regulations.1 Regulated categories and entities include:

    1 “Light-duty vehicle,” “light-duty truck,” and “medium-duty passenger vehicle” are defined in 40 CFR 86.1803-01. Generally, the term “light-duty vehicle” means a passenger car, the term “light-duty truck” means a pick-up truck, sport-utility vehicle, or minivan of up to 8,500 lbs gross vehicle weight rating, and “medium-duty passenger vehicle” means a sport-utility vehicle or passenger van from 8,500 to 10,000 lbs gross vehicle weight rating. Medium-duty passenger vehicles do not include pick-up trucks.

    Category NAICS codes A Examples of potentially
  • regulated entities
  • Industry 336111
  • 336112
  • Motor Vehicle Manufacturers.
    Industry 811111
  • 811112
  • 811198
  • 423110
  • Commercial Importers of Vehicles and Vehicle Components.
    Industry 335312
  • 811198
  • Alternative Fuel Vehicle Converters.
    A North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
    B. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is proposing two technical corrections to the light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards regulations finalized in the 2012 rulemaking that established standards for model years 2017-2025 light-duty vehicles. First, EPA proposes to correct an error in the regulations pertaining to how auto manufacturers must calculate credits for the GHG program's optional advanced technology incentives. The regulations currently in place result in auto manufacturers receiving fewer credits than the agency intended for electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, fuel cell electric vehicles, and natural gas fueled vehicles. Auto manufacturers requested through a petition letter submitted jointly by the Auto Alliance and Global Automakers in June 2016 that EPA correct the regulations to provide the intended level of credits for these technologies. Second, the regulations regarding how manufacturers must calculate certain types of off-cycle credits contain an error and are inconsistent with the 2012 final rule preamble, raising implementation concerns for some manufacturers. The proposed amendments would clarify the calculation methodology in the regulations. Both of these corrections allow the program to be implemented as originally intended. The corrections are described in detail in Section III below.

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

    EPA is proposing technical amendments to provisions of the light-duty vehicle GHG regulations under section 202 (a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) ((42 U.S.C. 7521 (a)).

    D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

    The proposed corrections are not expected to result in any significant changes in regulatory burdens, costs, or benefits.

    II. Public Participation A. How do I prepare and submit information?

    Direct your submittals to Docket ID No EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0755. EPA's policy is that all submittals received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the submittal includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    Do not submit information to the docket that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov. The www.regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your submittal. If you submit an electronic submittal, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your submittal and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    B. Submitting CBI

    Do not submit this information to EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    C. Tips for Preparing Your Comments

    When submitting comments, remember to:

    • Identify the action by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

    • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

    • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

    • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

    • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

    • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

    • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified in the DATES section above.

    III. Proposed Provisions

    This proposed rule would correct two technical provisions in the regulations for the model year (MY) 2017-2025 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards. The first correction addresses how manufacturers must apply advanced technology vehicle multipliers during credit calculations in order to ensure that credits are calculated as EPA intended in the 2012 final rule. The second correction addresses how manufacturers must calculate off-cycle credits under the program's 5-cycle credit calculation methodology. EPA views these items as technical amendments that correct and clarify the regulations and are not changes in how the program functions. Therefore, neither of these technical amendments introduce or remove any requirements on automobile manufacturers, nor do these changes impose additional regulatory costs or benefits. We describe each of these changes in the following sections. We note that in the recent “Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks” issued by EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding GHG and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for Model Years (MY) 2021 to 2026 (see 83 FR 42986, August 24, 2018), the agencies are broadly seeking comment on various incentives and flexibilities, including the availability and scope of advanced technology multipliers and off-cycle credits for those model years. Today's proposal would correct the application of advanced technology vehicle multipliers for MYs 2017 through 2021, and an off-cycle credit calculation methodology for MY 2012 and later vehicles.

    A. Clarification of the Advanced Technology Multiplier Regulations

    As part of the MY 2017-2025 rule, EPA adopted temporary incentive multipliers for battery electric vehicles (BEVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), fuel cell vehicles (FCVs), and compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles.2 The multipliers allow manufacturers to count these lower CO2 emitting vehicles as more than one vehicle in their fleet average compliance calculations. For example, the 2.0 multiplier for MY 2017 BEVs would allow a manufacturer to count every MY 2017 BEV produced as two vehicles produced. The multipliers established in the MY 2017-2025 rule are shown in Tables 1 and 2 below.

    2 77 FR 62812-62816 (October 15, 2012) and 40 CFR 86.1866-12(b).

    3 40 CFR 86.1866-12(b)(1).

    4 40 CFR 86.1866-12(b)(2).

    Table 1—The Production Multipliers, by Model Year, for Electric Vehicles and Fuel Cell Vehicles 3 Model year Production multiplier 2017 2.0 2018 2.0 2019 2.0 2020 1.75 2021 1.5 Table 2—The Production Multipliers, by Model Year, for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles, Dedicated Natural Gas Vehicles, and Dual-Fuel Natural Gas Vehicles 4 Model year Production multiplier 2017 1.6 2018 1.6 2019 1.6 2020 1.45 2021 1.3

    EPA and NHTSA received a joint petition from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of Global Automakers on June 20, 2016 regarding various aspects of the CAFE and GHG programs.5 Item 8 of the petition, titled “Correct the Multiplier for BEVs, PHEVs, FCVs, and CNGs,” correctly notes that “the equation through which the number of earned credits is calculated is inaccurately stated in the regulations” and that credits would be inadvertently lost due to the error. EPA is proposing to modify the regulations so that the credits are calculated correctly in all cases. The calculations are done separately for the passenger car and light truck fleets. These advanced vehicle technology multipliers do not apply to the NHTSA CAFE program.

    5 “Petition for Direct Final Rule with Regard to Various Aspects of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Program and the Greenhouse Gas Program,” Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of Global Automakers, June 20, 2016.

    The current regulations regarding the application of the multipliers state that “[T]the actual production of qualifying vehicles may be multiplied by the applicable value according to the model year, and the result, rounded to the nearest whole number, may be used to represent the production of qualifying vehicles when calculating average carbon-related exhaust emissions under § 600.512 of this chapter.” 6 The following shows the application of this regulatory text in equation form: 7

    6 See 40 CFR 86.1866-12(b)(3).

    7 The descriptions of the terms in the above equations have been simplified somewhat for illustrative purposes compared to the proposed regulations. See the proposed language at 40 CFR 86.1866-12(b) for the proposed detailed regulatory provisions.

    CO2 Credits = (S−E adj) × VLM × P ÷ 1,000,000 [Megagrams] EP01OC18.005 Where: S = Production weighted fleet average standard Eadj = Production weighted fleet average carbon related exhaust emissions (CREE) with the multiplier(s) applied to the advanced technology production in the CREE average value calculation VLM = Vehicle lifetime miles (195,264 for cars and 225,865 for light trucks) P = Annual total vehicle production (for either cars or light trucks) Target = Model type footprint target Volume = Model type vehicle production Volumeadj = Model type vehicle production with multiplier(s) applied to advanced technology vehicle production

    Under the current regulations at 40 CFR 86.1865-12(k)(4), the multiplier for advanced technology production is applied by modifying the way the CREE 8 (Eadj in the equation above) is calculated. The petitioners noted that applying the multiplier only to Eadj does not produce the intended credit. The petitioners provided an example of the incorrect calculation for a manufacturer producing 5,000 battery electric vehicles (BEVs), which have a CREE of zero, showing that such a manufacturer would not receive any additional credits from the multiplier because the Eadj term would remain zero (regardless of the multiplier or how many vehicles were produced) and the fleet average standard term (i.e., the footprint-based standard) remains unchanged because the multiplier does not affect the fleet average standard calculation.

    8 Vehicle and fleet average compliance is based on a combination of CO2, hydrocarbon (HC), and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. This is consistent with the carbon balance methodology used to determine fuel consumption for the labeling and CAFE programs. The GHG regulations account for these total carbon emissions appropriately and refer to the sum of these emissions as the “carbon related exhaust emissions” (CREE).

    Example 1 below shows the calculation of credits without the multiplier and Example 1a shows the calculation with the incorrect application of the multiplier using the 5,000 BEV example, assuming a footprint-based standard of 210 g/mile and a multiplier of 2.0.

    Example 1a: Calculation of Credits Without the Multiplier CO 2 Credits = (210−0) × 195,264 × 5,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 205,027 Megagrams Example 1b: Incorrect Application of the Multiplier Under Current Regulations CO 2 Credits = (210−0) × 195,264 × 5,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 205,027 Megagrams Where the production weighted fleet average carbon related exhaust emissions, or Eadj, with the multiplier applied is calculated as follows: EP01OC18.006

    In order for the calculation to produce the correct result, the multiplier must be applied not only to the advanced technology vehicle production in the CREE average value, Eadj, calculation but also to the advanced technology vehicle production in the average standard calculation and the advanced technology vehicle production portions of the total production. The calculation of credits in megagrams with the multiplier correctly applied is represented by the following equations:

    EP01OC18.007 Where: Sadj = Production weighted fleet average standard with the multiplier(s) applied to the advanced technology vehicle production in the footprint target calculation Eadj = Production weighted fleet average CREE with the multiplier(s) applied to the advanced technology production in the CREE value calculation VLM = Vehicle lifetime miles (195,264 for cars and 225,865 for light trucks) Padj = Annual vehicle production with the multiplier(s) applied to the advanced technology vehicle production Target = Model type footprint target Volumeadj = Model type vehicle production with multiplier(s) applied to advanced technology vehicle production

    Using the corrected methodology, manufacturers would determine the additional credits associated with using the multiplier(s) by calculating fleet credits with and without the multiplier applied (the credits without the multiplier applied are shown below as term C). The credits calculated without the multiplier would be subtracted from the credits calculated with the multiplier with the difference reflecting the additional credits attributable to the multiplier.

    Credits due to multiplier = (Sadj−Eadj) × VLM × Padj ÷ 1,000,000 − C [Megagrams]

    Applying the above corrected equation to Example 1 produces the expected credits due to the multiplier. As shown using Example 1 from above, the correct application of the 2.0 multiplier doubles the resulting credit in this example, which is what EPA intended and manufacturers expected when the program was finalized.

    Example 1a: Calculation of Credits Without the Multiplier CO 2 Credits(C) = (210−0) × 195,264 × 5,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 205,027 Megagrams Example 1c: Correct Application of the Multiplier CO 2 CreditsM = (210−0) × 195,264 × (5,000 × 2.0) ÷ 1,000,000 = 410,054 Megagrams

    Where the production weighted fleet average standard and fleet average carbon related exhaust emissions, or CREEavg, are calculated with the multiplier as follows:

    EP01OC18.008

    And finally, the credits due to application of the multiplier are:

    Credits due to multiplier = 410,054−205,027 = 205,027 Example 2 below provides an example calculation for a fleet that consists of both conventional and advanced technology vehicles. The example consists of a fleet mix of two conventional vehicle models, one plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV) model, and one battery electric vehicle (BEV) model, where the PHEV multiplier is 1.6 and the EV multiplier is 2.0. Table 3—Example 2 Fleet Mix Vehicle model Production Footprint
  • target
  • (CO2 g/mi)
  • CREE
  • (CO2 g/mi)
  • Multiplier
    Conventional 1 10,000 300 320 N/A Conventional 2 8,000 210 210 N/A PHEV 5,000 210 50 1.6 BEV 5,000 210 0 2.0 Total 28,000
    Example 2a: Calculation of Credits for Mixed Fleet With No Multiplier CO 2 Credits(C) = (242−183) × 195,264 × 28,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 322,576 Megagrams

    Where the production weighted fleet average standard (S) and fleet average CREE (E) terms are calculated as follows:

    EP01OC18.009 Example 2b: Incorrect Application of the Multiplier Under Current Regulations CO 2 Credits = (242−147) × 195,264 × 28,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 519,402 Megagrams Where the production weighted fleet average Standard (S) and adjusted CREE with the multiplier applied (Eadj) are calculated as follows: EP01OC18.010 Example 2c: Calculation of Credits for Mixed Fleet Using Corrected Multiplier Methodology CO 2 Credits with multipler = (235−147) × 195,264 × 36,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = 618,596 Megagrams

    Where the production weighted fleet average Sadj and Eadj terms and the Padj terms, are calculated using the multiplier as follows:

    EP01OC18.011 Padj = 10,000 + 8,000 + (5,000 × 1.6) + (5,000 × 2.0) = 36,000

    Under the proposed regulations, manufacturers would use the above approach to calculate Megagrams of credits with and without the multipliers applied and report the difference to EPA as the credits attributed to the use of the advanced technology multipliers. In the above Example 2, the credits attributable to the multipliers are 618,596−322,576 = 296,020. The previously established incorrect methodology, which applies the multiplier only to the CREE term, would provide fewer credits (519,402−322,576 = 196,826 Mg) for this example.

    The descriptions of the terms in the above equations have been simplified somewhat for illustrative purposes compared to the proposed regulations. See the proposed language at 40 CFR 86.1866-12(b) for the proposed detailed regulatory provisions. Previously, § 86.1866-12(b)(3) simply modified the CREE term in the equation in § 86.1865-12(k)(4) to incorporate the multiplier. Now, since the multiplier should have been applied as discussed above, EPA proposes to revise the regulations to add additional steps to the calculation process. First, manufacturers would use the new equation to calculate the total number of credits generated with multipliers included. Then, manufacturers would subtract from that calculation the credits calculated without the multipliers applied, using the equation that already exists in § 86.1865-12(k)(4). The result provides the credit attributable to the multipliers to be reported to EPA as part of the credits portion of the year end compliance report.

    The advanced technology multiplier incentive is available starting with the 2017 model year. Manufacturers are required to report all credit information by May 1 of the year following the end of the model year, which, for model year 2017, is May 1, 2018. EPA recognizes that the timing of this rulemaking precludes the ability to finalize the multiplier-based credits by the deadline, and, given this, the submissions made by manufacturers on or before May 1, 2018 will be evaluated using the current incorrect multiplier. For the 2017 model year reporting, EPA has asked that manufacturers enter all their test data as they normally would (which needs to be done for CAFE calculations anyway), and that reports be submitted on time, with fleet credits calculated from the values as determined by EPA's current regulatory calculation. After the regulations proposed today are finalized, EPA will allow manufacturers to request through EPA's online system, used by manufacturers to submit data to EPA for vehicle emissions certification and compliance purposes, that the EPA system recalculate the manufacturer's fleet performance based on the corrected values. EPA does not expect this to be burdensome, as the necessary data for the recalculation will have previously been submitted electronically by the manufacturer.

    B. Off-Cycle Credit Calculations Based On the 5-Cycle Methodology

    EPA's GHG emissions standards allow manufacturers to generate credits toward compliance through the application of off-cycle technologies. In model years 2017 and later, fuel economy off-cycle credits equivalent to EPA CO2 credits are also available in the CAFE program. Off-cycle technologies are those that result in real-world emissions reductions that are not fully captured on the 2-cycle emissions tests used for compliance with the GHG standards (i.e., the city and highway test cycles). EPA originally adopted the off-cycle credits program as part of the rulemaking establishing the MY 2012-2016 standards.9 EPA later modified the off-cycle program in the MY 2017-2025 final rule.10 One of the methodologies for manufacturers to demonstrate off-cycle emissions reductions is by conducting 5-cycle testing 11 with and without the off-cycle technology applied (i.e., A/B testing).12 The original program did not allow off-cycle credits for technologies that showed significant benefits on the 2-cycle segment of the 5-cycle test. The regulations established by the MY 2012-2016 rule stated that the “CO2-reducing impact of the technology must not be significantly measurable over the Federal Test Procedure and the Highway Fuel Economy Test.” 13 As such, the regulations did not require manufacturers to subtract 2-cycle reductions from the 5-cycle benefits when deriving the off-cycle credit because the 2-cycle benefit would necessarily be negligible.

    9 75 FR 25438-25440 (May 7, 2010) and 75 FR 25697-25698.

    10 77 FR 62726-62738, 77 FR 62832-62840, and 40 CFR 86.1869-12.

    11 The 5-cycle methodology is currently used to determine fuel economy label values. EPA established the 5-cycle test methods to better represent real-world factors impacting fuel economy, including higher speeds and more aggressive driving, colder temperature operation, and the use of air conditioning.

    12 77 FR 62837.

    13 75 FR 25698.

    The program as revised by the MY 2017-2025 rule allows for the possibility that some qualifying technologies could have a small 2-cycle benefit but a larger off-cycle benefit. The 2012 rule stated “EPA is removing the “not significantly measurable over the 2-cycle test” criteria” allowing for credits for qualifying off-cycle technologies “providing small reductions on the 2-cycle tests but additional significant reductions off-cycle.” 14 EPA stated “[t]he intent of the off-cycle provisions is to provide an incentive for CO2 and fuel consumption reducing off-cycle technologies that would otherwise not be developed because they do not offer a significant 2- cycle benefit and that the program would “encourage innovative strategies for reducing CO2 emissions beyond those measured by the 2-cycle test procedures.” 15 It is plain from the proposed and final rules that the revised off-cycle credit program was intended to provide credits for the incremental benefit of the off-cycle technology that was not captured on the 2-cycle test. For example, EPA provided extensive discussion of how it developed the standards based on its evaluation of various technologies and their effectiveness as demonstrated on the 2-cycle test.16 EPA further stated that the off-cycle credits were intended to recognize GHG reductions in excess of the benefits already reflected in the standards.17 For the menu credits for waste heat recovery and active aerodynamics, for example, EPA derived the credits by estimating the 5-cycle benefit and then subtracting out the 2-cycle benefit.18

    14 77 FR 62835.

    15 77 FR 62832.

    16 76 FR 74942 (December 1, 2011) & 77 FR 62726.

    17 77 FR 62650 and 77 FR 62836.

    18 Joint Technical Support Document: Final Rulemaking for 2017-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, August 2012, EPA-420-R-12-901 pp. 5-65 and 5-82.

    However, EPA inadvertently did not make the associated change in the regulations to require that the 2-cycle benefit be subtracted from the 5-cycle benefit for those off-cycle credits which are based on a manufacturer-specific 5-cycle technology demonstration. This could lead to double counting of the 2-cycle benefit of the technology, which is also included in the 2-cycle tailpipe emissions results of the vehicle used to determine compliance with the standards. EPA made clear in the final rule that such “windfall credits” would be inappropriate.19 This issue has been raised by manufacturers seeking clarification from the agency. EPA is addressing this oversight and the potential double-counting issue by proposing to change the regulations such that the 2-cycle benefit is subtracted from the 5-cycle benefit of the off-cycle technology. EPA is proposing to add to the regulations the equation below to ensure that credits derived from the 5-cycle methodology are calculated properly. See the proposed regulatory language in 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c) for the complete proposed regulatory text.

    19 77 FR 62836.

    Under the proposed regulatory correction, manufacturers would calculate the off-cycle credit in grams per mile using the following formula, rounding the result to the nearest 0.1 grams/mile:

    Credit = (A−B)−(C−D) Where: Credit = the off-cycle benefit of the technology or technologies being evaluated, subject to EPA approval A = the 5-cycle adjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value for the vehicle without the off-cycle technology; B = 5-cycle adjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value for the vehicle with the off-cycle technology; C = 2-cycle unadjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emissions value for the vehicle without the off-cycle technology; and D = 2-cycle unadjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emissions value for the vehicle with the off-cycle technology. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. This action is a “significant regulatory action” because it raises policy issues. Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket.

    This proposed rule merely clarifies and corrects existing regulatory language. EPA does not believe there will not be costs associated with this rule. Also, this proposed rule is not anticipated to create additional burdens to the existing requirements. As such, a regulatory impact evaluation or analysis is unnecessary.

    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    This action is not expected to be subject to Executive Order 13771 because this proposed rule merely clarifies and corrects existing regulatory language and is not expected to result in costs or additional burdens.

    C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This proposed action would not impose any new information collection burden under the PRA, since it merely clarifies and corrects existing regulatory language. OMB has previously approved the information collection activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB control number of 2060-0104.

    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this proposed action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This proposed rule merely clarifies and corrects existing regulatory language. We therefore anticipate no costs and therefore no regulatory burden associated with this proposed rule. Further, small entities are generally exempt from the light-duty vehicles greenhouse gas standards unless the small entity voluntarily opts into the program. See 40 CFR 86.1801-12(j). We have therefore concluded that this proposed action will have no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This proposed action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The proposed action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments. Requirements for the private sector do not exceed $100 million in any one year.

    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This proposed action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule only corrects and clarifies regulatory provisions that apply to light-duty vehicle manufacturers. Tribal governments would be affected only to the extent they purchase and use regulated vehicles. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. This proposed rule merely corrects and clarifies previously established regulatory provisions.

    I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (“NTTAA”), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs agencies to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

    This proposed action modifies existing regulations to correct errors in the regulations and therefore involves technical standards previously established by EPA. The amendments to the regulations do not involve the application of new technical standards. EPA is continuing to use the technical standards previously established in its rules regarding the light-duty vehicle GHG standards for MYs 2017-2025. See 77 FR 62960.

    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an environmental health or safety standard. This proposed regulatory action makes technical corrections to a previously established regulatory action and as such does not have any impact on human health or the environment.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 18, 2018. Andrew R. Wheeler, Acting Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to amend part 86 of title 40, Chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    PART 86—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES AND ENGINES 1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. Section 86.1865-12 is amended by redesignating paragraph (k)(5)(v) as paragraph (k)(5)(vi) and by adding paragraph (k)(5)(v), to read as follows:
    § 86.1865-12 How to comply with the fleet average CO2 standards.

    (k) * * *

    (5) * * *

    (v) Advanced technology vehicle credits earned according to the provisions of § 86.1866-12(b)(3).

    3. Section 86.1866-12 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(3) to read as follows:
    § 86.1866-12 CO2 credits for advanced technology vehicles.

    (b) For electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, dedicated natural gas vehicles, and dual-fuel natural gas vehicles as those terms are defined in § 86.1803-01, that are certified and produced for U.S. sale in the 2017 through 2021 model years and that meet the additional specifications in this section, the manufacturer may use the production multipliers in this paragraph (b) to determine additional credits for advanced technology vehicles. Full size pickup trucks eligible for and using a production multiplier are not eligible for the performance-based credits described in § 86.1870-12(b).

    (3) Calculate credits for advanced technology vehicles for a given model year, and separately for passenger automobiles and light trucks, using the following equation. No credits are earned if the result is a negative value.

    Credits due to the multiplier = ((Sadj−Eadj) × Padj × VLM ÷ 1,000,000)−C Where: Sadj = adjusted CO2 standard calculated according to the method described in § 86.1818-12(c) or (d) and rounded to the nearest whole number. For the purpose of this calculation, the actual production of qualifying vehicles under this section must be multiplied by the applicable production multiplier, and the result shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Eadj = adjusted production-weighted fleet average carbon-related exhaust emissions calculated according to the method described in § 600.510-12(j) and rounded to the nearest whole number. For the purpose of this calculation, the actual production of qualifying vehicles under this section must be multiplied by the applicable production multiplier, and the result shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Padj = total adjusted production of passenger automobiles or light trucks, where the actual production of qualifying vehicles under this section must be multiplied by the applicable production multiplier and the result shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. VLM = vehicle lifetime miles, which for passenger automobiles shall be 195,264 and for light trucks shall be 225,865; and C = The credits calculated according to § 86.1865-12(k)(4), without use of multipliers, in whole megagrams.
    4. Section 86.1869-12 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(3) to read as follows:
    § 86.1869-12 CO2 credits for off-cycle CO2-reducing technologies.

    (c) * * *

    (1) Testing without the off-cycle technology installed and/or operating.

    (i) Determine carbon-related exhaust emissions over the FTP, the HFET, the US06, the SC03, and the cold temperature FTP test procedures according to the test procedure provisions specified in 40 CFR part 600 subpart B and using the calculation procedures specified in § 600.113-12 of this chapter. Run each of these tests a minimum of three times without the off-cycle technology installed and operating and average the per phase (bag) results for each test procedure.

    (ii) Calculate the FTP and HFET carbon-related exhaust emissions from the FTP and HFET averaged per phase results.

    (iii) Calculate the combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value from the FTP and HFET values determined in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section, where the FTP value is weighted 55% and the HFET value is weighted 45%. The resulting value is the 2-cycle unadjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emissions value for the vehicle without the off-cycle technology.

    (iv) Calculate the 5-cycle weighted city/highway combined carbon-related exhaust emissions from the averaged per phase results, where the 5-cycle city value is weighted 55% and the 5-cycle highway value is weighted 45%. The resulting value is the 5-cycle adjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value for the vehicle without the off-cycle technology.

    (2) Testing with the off-cycle technology installed and/or operating.

    (i) Determine carbon-related exhaust emissions over the FTP, the HFET, the US06, the SC03, and the cold temperature FTP test procedures according to the test procedure provisions specified in 40 CFR part 600 subpart B and using the calculation procedures specified in § 600.113-12 of this chapter. Run each of these tests a minimum of three times with the off-cycle technology installed and operating and average the per phase (bag) results for each test procedure.

    (ii) Calculate the FTP and HFET carbon-related exhaust emissions from the FTP and HFET averaged per phase results.

    (iii) Calculate the combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value from the FTP and HFET values determined in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section, where the FTP value is weighted 55% and the HFET value is weighted 45%. The resulting value is the 2-cycle unadjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emissions value for the vehicle with the off-cycle technology.

    (iv) Calculate the 5-cycle weighted city/highway combined carbon-related exhaust emissions from the averaged per phase results, where the 5-cycle city value is weighted 55% and the 5-cycle highway value is weighted 45%. The resulting value is the 5-cycle adjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value for the vehicle with the off-cycle technology.

    (3) Calculate the off-cycle credit in grams per mile using the following formula, rounding the result to the nearest 0.1 grams/mile:

    Credit = (A−B)−(C−D) Where: Credit = the off-cycle benefit of the technology or technologies being evaluated, subject to EPA approval A = the 5-cycle adjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value for the vehicle without the off-cycle technology calculated in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section; B = 5-cycle adjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emission value for the vehicle with the off-cycle technology calculated in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section; C = 2-cycle unadjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emissions value for the vehicle without the off-cycle technology calculated in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section; and D = 2-cycle unadjusted combined city/highway carbon-related exhaust emissions value for the vehicle with the off-cycle technology calculated in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this section.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21195 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    83 190 Monday, October 1, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [Doc. No. AMS-FGIS-18-0057] Designation for the Topeka, Kansas; Minot, North Dakota; Cincinnati, Ohio; Pocatello, Idaho; Evansville, Indiana; Salt Lake City, Utah; West Sacramento, California; Richmond, Virginia; and Savage, Minnesota Areas AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is announcing the designations of Kansas Grain Inspection Service, Inc. (Kansas); Minot Grain Inspection, Inc. (Minot); Tri-State Grain Inspection Service, Inc. (Tri-State); Idaho Grain Inspection Service, Inc. (Idaho); Ohio Valley Grain Inspection, Inc. (Ohio Valley); Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (Utah); California Agri Inspection Co., Ltd. (Cal-Agri); Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (Virginia); and State Grain Inspection, Inc. (State Grain) to provide official services under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA), as amended. The realignment of offices within the U.S. Department of Agriculture authorized by the Secretary's Memorandum dated November 14, 2017, eliminates the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) as a standalone agency. The grain inspection activities formerly part of GIPSA are now organized under AMS.

    DATES:

    July 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Jacob Thein, Compliance Officer, USDA, AMS, FGIS, QACD, 10383 North Ambassador Drive, Kansas City, MO 64153.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jacob Thein, 816-866-2223, [email protected] or [email protected]

    Read Applications: All applications and comments are available for public inspection at the office above during regular business hours (7 CFR 1.27(c)).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In the May 25, 2018, Federal Register (83 FR 24273-24274), AMS requested applications for designation to provide official services in the geographic areas presently serviced by Kansas, Minot, Tri-State, Idaho, Ohio Valley, Utah, Cal-Agri, Virginia, and State Grain. Applications were due by June 25, 2018.

    The current official agencies, Kansas, Minot, Tri-State, Idaho, Ohio Valley, Utah, Cal-Agri, Virginia, and State Grain, were the only applicants for designation to provide official services in these areas. As a result, AMS did not ask for additional comments.

    AMS evaluated the designation criteria in section 7(f) of the USGSA (7 U.S.C. 79(f)) and determined that Kansas, Minot, Tri-State, Idaho, Ohio Valley, Utah, Cal-Agri, Virginia, and State Grain are qualified to provide official services in the geographic areas specified in the Federal Register on May 25, 2018. The designations to provide official services in the specified areas of Kansas, Minot, and Tri-State are effective July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2023. The designations to provide official services in the specified areas of Idaho and Ohio Valley are effective October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2023. The designations to provide official services in the specified areas of Cal-Agri and Virginia are effective January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2023. The designation to provide official services in the specified area of Utah is effective October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2021. The designation to provide official services in the specified area of State Grain is effective January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021.

    Interested persons may obtain official services by contacting this agency at the following telephone number:

    Official agency Headquarters location and telephone Designation start Designation end Kansas Topeka, KS 785-233-7063 7/1/2018 6/30/2023 Minot Minot, ND 701-838-1734 7/1/2018 6/30/2023 Tri-State Cincinnati, OH 513-251-6571 7/1/2018 6/30/2023 Idaho Pocatello, ID 208-233-8303 10/1/2018 9/30/2023 Ohio Valley Evansville, IN 812-423-9010 10/1/2018 9/30/2023 Utah Salt Lake City, UT 801-392-2292 10/1/2018 9/30/2021 Cal-Agri West Sacramento, CA 916-374-9700 1/1/2019 12/31/2023 Virginia Richmond, VA 757-494-2455 1/1/2019 12/31/2023 State Grain Savage, MN 952-808-8566 1/1/2019 12/31/2021

    Section 7(f) of the USGSA authorizes the Secretary to designate a qualified applicant to provide official services in a specified area after determining that the applicant is better able than any other applicant to provide such official services (7 U.S.C. 79(f)).

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 71-87k.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Greg Ibach, Under Secretary, Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21265 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Office of the Chief Financial Officer Notice of Request for Approval of a Renewal Information Collection AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Financial Officer.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the intention of the Office of the Chief Financial Officer to request the renewal of a currently approved information collection (OMB No. 0505-0027) for suspension and debarment and drug-free workplace certifications.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by November 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted by either/one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: This website provides the ability to type short comments directly into the comment field on this web page or attach a file for lengthier comments. Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions at that site for submitting comments.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send to Director, Transparency and Accountability Reporting Division, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Room 3027-S, Stop Code 9011, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250.

    All comments received will be available for public inspection and posted without change, including any personal information, to http://regulations.gov, or during regular business hours at the same address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Martha E. Burton, Management Analyst, Transparency and Accountability Reporting Division, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Room 3027-S, Stop Code 9011, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250; (202) 205-6182; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the intention of the USDA Office of the Chief Financial Officer to request the renewal of a currently approved information collection (OMB No. 0505-0027) for suspension and debarment and drug-free workplace certifications.

    Title: Suspension and Debarment and Drug-Free Workplace Certifications.

    OMB Number: 0505-0027.

    Expiration Date of Current Approval: December 31, 2018.

    Type of Request: Intent to extend a currently approved information collection for three years.

    Abstract: The information will be collected by USDA Federal financial assistance agencies and staff offices as certifying information concerning applicant suitability in compliance with Federal Suspension and Debarment and Drug-Free Work Place regulations, as defined by 2 CFR parts 180, 417 and Public Law 100-690, Title V, Subtitle D: 41 U.S.C. 8101 et seq., 2 CFR parts 182 and 421. Suspensions and debarments are discretionary or statutory administrative actions taken by Federal agencies to protect the government by excluding persons and entities who are not presently responsible from participating in Federal programs or activities. Federal agencies are also prohibited from awarding financial assistance unless conditions are met that speak to recipient awareness of the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance while conducting any activity with the use of Federal financial assistance. The five forms that USDA uses with its financial assistance applications to collect the data include: (1) AD-1047—Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions; (2) AD-1048—Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion—Lower Tier Covered Transactions; (3) AD-1049—Certification Regarding Drug Free Workplace Requirements (Grants) Alternative 1 (For Grantees Other Than Individuals; (4) AD 1050—Certification Regarding Drug Free Workplace Requirements (Grants) Alternative 2 (For Grantees Who Are Individuals); and (5) AD-1052—Certification Regarding Drug Free Workplace Requirements-State and State Agencies).

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this total collection of information is estimated to average 0.25 hours per response per individual form. This burden is assumed for all of the forms in the aggregate.

    Type of Respondents: Individuals or private entities; businesses or other for profit; not-for profit; Federal, state, local or tribal governments; institutions of higher education or other research organizations; foreign organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 38,885.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 77,770.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 2.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 19,443.

    Form Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Number of responses Average time to
  • prepare
  • (hrs)
  • Total annual burden on respondents
  • (hrs)
  • AD-1047 11,886 2 23,772 0.25 5,943 AD-1048 11,595 2 23,190 0.25 5,798 AD-1049 7,007 2 14,014 0.25 3,504 AD-1050 3,482 2 6,964 0.25 1,741 AD-1052 4,915 2 9,830 0.25 2,457 Total 38,885 2 77,770 0.25 19,443

    Comments from interested parties are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) 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 those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Signed: Tyson P. Whitney, Director, Transparency and Accountability Reporting Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21240 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-KS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE U.S. Codex Office Codex Alimentarius Commission: Meeting of the Codex Committee on Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance (TFAMR) AGENCY:

    U.S. Codex Office, Department of Agriculture.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S Codex Office is sponsoring a public meeting on November 8, 2018. The objective of the public meeting is to provide information and receive public comments on agenda items and draft United States (U.S.) positions to be discussed at the 6th Session of the Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance (TFAMR) of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), in Busan, Republic of Korea on December 10-14, 2018. The U.S. Manager for Codex Alimentarius and the Under Secretary, Office of Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs, recognize the importance of providing interested parties the opportunity to obtain background information on the 6th Session of the TFAMR and to address items on the agenda.

    DATES:

    The public meeting is scheduled for Thursday, November 8, 2018 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public meeting will take place at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Jamie L. Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 107-A, Washington, DC 20250. Documents related to the 6th Session of the TFAMR will be accessible via the internet at the following address: http://www.codexalimentarius.org/meetings-reports/en.

    Donald A. Prater, U.S. Delegate to the 6th Session of the TFAMR, invites U.S. interested parties to submit their comments electronically to the following email address: [email protected]

    Call-In-Number: If you wish to participate in the public meeting for the 6th Session of the TFAMR by conference call, please use the call-in-number: 1-888-844-9904. The participant code will be posted here: http://www.usda.gov/codex.

    Registration: Attendees may register to attend the public meeting by emailing [email protected] by November 1, 2018. Early registration is encouraged because it will expedite entry into the building. The meeting will take place in a Federal building. Attendees should bring photo identification and plan for adequate time to pass through the security screening systems. Attendees who are not able to attend the meeting in person, but who wish to participate, may do so by phone, as discussed above.

    For Further Information about the 6th Session of the TFAMR Contact: Donald A. Prater, DVM, Office of Foods and Veterinary Medicine, FDA, #10903, New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993. Phone: (301) 348-3007.

    Email: [email protected]

    For Further Information about the Public Meeting Contact: Kenneth Lowery, U.S. Codex Office, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 4861, South Agriculture Building, Washington, DC 20250. Phone: (202) 690-4042, Fax: (202) 720-3157. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Codex was established in 1963 by two United Nations organizations, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Through adoption of food standards, codes of practice, and other guidelines developed by its committees, and by promoting their adoption and implementation by governments, Codex seeks to protect the health of consumers and ensure fair practices in the food trade.

    The TFAMR is responsible for:

    (1) Reviewing and revising, as appropriate, the Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Antimicrobial Resistance (CAC/RCP 61-2005) to address the entire food chain, in line with the mandate of Codex; and

    (2) considering the development of Guidance on Integrated Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance, taking into account the guidance developed by the WHO Advisory Group on Integrated Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance (AGISAR) and relevant World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) documents.

    The objective of the Task Force is to develop science-based guidance on the management of foodborne antimicrobial resistance, taking full account of the WHO Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance, in particular Objectives 3 and 4, the work and standards of relevant international organizations, such as FAO, WHO, and OIE, and the One-Health approach, to ensure members have the necessary guidance to enable coherent management of antimicrobial resistance along the food chain. The Task Force is expected to complete its work within three (or a maximum of four) sessions.

    The TFAMR is hosted by Korea. The United States attends TFAMR as a member country of Codex.

    Issues To Be Discussed at the Public Meeting

    The following items on the Agenda for the 6th Session of the TFAMR will be discussed during the public meeting:

    • Matters referred by the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its subsidiary bodies • Matters arising from FAO and WHO including the report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meeting in collaboration with OIE on Antimicrobial Resistance: Role of the Environment, Crops and Biocides • Matters arising from OIE and other relevant international organizations • Proposed draft revision of the Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Antimicrobial Resistance (CXC 61-2005) ○ Comments in reply to CXC 61-2005 • Proposed draft Guidelines on Integrated Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance ○ Comments in reply to proposed draft Guidelines • Other business • Date and Place of next session. Public Meeting

    At the November 8, 2018, public meeting, draft U.S. positions on the agenda items will be described and discussed, and attendees will have the opportunity to pose questions and offer comments. Written comments may be offered at the meeting or sent to Donald A. Prater, U.S. Delegate for the 6th Session of the TFMAR (see ADDRESSES). Written comments should state that they relate to activities of the 6th Session of the TFAMR.

    Additional Public Notification

    Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, the U.S. Codex Office will announce this Federal Register publication on-line through the USDA Codex web page located at: http://www.usda.gov/codex, a link that also offers an email subscription service providing access to information related to Codex. Customers can add or delete their subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password protect their accounts.

    USDA Non-Discrimination Statement

    No agency, officer, or employee of the USDA shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, or political beliefs, exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to discrimination any person in the United States under any program or activity conducted by the USDA.

    How To File a Complaint of Discrimination

    To file a complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which may be accessed online at http://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you or your authorized representative. Send your completed complaint form or letter to USDA by mail, fax, or email.

    Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410.

    Fax: (202) 690-7442, Email: [email protected]

    Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

    Done at Washington, DC, on September 27, 2018. Mary Lowe, U.S. Manager for Codex Alimentarius.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21326 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [S-149-2018] Foreign-Trade Zone 267—Fargo, North Dakota; Application for Subzone; Digi-Key Corporation; Fargo, North Dakota

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) by the Municipal Airport Authority of the City of Fargo, grantee of FTZ 267, requesting subzone status for the facility of Digi-Key Corporation (Digi-Key), located in Fargo, North Dakota. 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 26, 2018.

    The proposed subzone (10 acres) is located at 4206 33rd Street and 4551 37th Street, Fargo, North Dakota. No authorization for production activity has been requested at this time. The proposed subzone would be subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ.

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

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is 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 Board's website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

    For further information, contact Christopher Kemp at [email protected] or (202) 482-0862.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21324 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-59-2018] Foreign-Trade Zone 122—Corpus Christi, Texas; Application for Subzone; Gulf Coast Growth Ventures LLC; San Patricio County, Texas

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the Port of Corpus Christi Authority, grantee of FTZ 122, requesting subzone status for the facilities of Gulf Coast Growth Ventures LLC, located in San Patricio County, Texas. 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 FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on September 25, 2018.

    The proposed subzone would consist of the following sites in San Patricio County: Site 1 (1,351 acres)—Main Site, 4589 FM 2986, Gregory; and, Site 2 (9.2 acres)—Laydown Yard, located south of Voestalpine Texas LLC on Kay Bailey Hutchison Road, east of Northshore Country Club's eastern boundary and Berryman Properties, and northwest of the Voestalpine West Dock. A notification of proposed production activity has been submitted and will be published separately for public comment.

    In accordance with the FTZ Board's regulations, Camille Evans of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to review the application and make 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 25, 2018. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21323 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting

    The Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee (ISTAC) will meet on October 31 and November 1, 2018, 9:00 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution & Pennsylvania Avenues NW, Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to information systems equipment and technology.

    Wednesday, October 31 Open Session 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Working Group Reports 3. Old Business 4. Industry presentation: Post-Quantum Cryptography 5. Industry presentation: Automotive Radar 6. Industry presentation: HPCs and APP 7. New Business Thursday, November 1 Closed Session 8. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).

    The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Joanna Lewis at [email protected], no later than October 24, 2018.

    A limited number of seats will be available for the public session. Reservations are not accepted. If attending in person, forward your Name (to appear on badge), Title, Citizenship, Organization name, Organization address, Email, and Phone to Ms. Lewis. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that public presentation materials or comments be forwarded before the meeting to Ms. Lewis.

    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on January 4, 2018, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 § (l0)(d))), that the portion of the meeting concerning trade secrets and commercial or financial information deemed privileged or confidential as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and the portion of the meeting concerning matters the disclosure of which would be likely to frustrate significantly implementation of an agency action as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and l0(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.

    For more information, call Joanna Lewis at (202) 482-6440.

    Joanna Lewis, Committee Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21271 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-JT-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting

    The Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee (SITAC) will meet on October 16, 2018, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues NW, Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to sensors and instrumentation equipment and technology.

    Agenda Public Session 1. Welcome and Introductions. 2. Remarks from the Bureau of Industry and Security Management. 3. Industry Presentations. 4. New Business. Closed Session 5. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).

    The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at [email protected] no later than October 9, 2018.

    A limited number of seats will be available during the public session of the meeting.

    Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that the materials be forwarded before the meeting to Ms. Springer.

    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, formally determined on February 13, 2018 pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 § 10(d), that the portion of this meeting dealing with pre-decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and U.S. export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.

    For more information contact Yvette Springer on (202) 482-2813.

    Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21280 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting

    The Materials Processing Equipment Technical Advisory Committee (MPETAC) will meet on October 23, 2018, 9:00 a.m., Room 3884, in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues NW, Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to materials processing equipment and related technology.

    Agenda Open Session

    1. Opening remarks and introductions.

    2. Presentation of papers and comments by the Public.

    3. Discussions on results from last, and proposals from last Wassenaar meeting.

    4. Report on proposed and recently issued changes to the Export Administration Regulations.

    5. Other business.

    Closed Session

    6. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).

    The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Joanna Lewis at [email protected], no later than October 16, 2018.

    A limited number of seats will be available for the public session. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate the distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials prior to the meeting to Ms. Lewis via email.

    The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on February 13, 2018, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(d)), that the portion of the meeting dealing with matters the premature disclosure of which would be likely to frustrate significantly implementation of a proposed agency action as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.

    For more information, call Joanna Lewis at (202) 482-6440.

    Joanna Lewis, Committee Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21262 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-JT-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 October 2018,1 interested parties may request administrative review of the following orders, findings, or suspended investigations, with anniversary dates in October 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 Australia: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products, A-602-809 10/1/17-9/30/18 Brazil: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod A-351-832 10/1/17-9/30/18 Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products A-351-845 10/1/17-9/30/18 Indonesia: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod A-560-815 10/1/17-9/30/18 Italy: Pressure Sensitive Plastic Tape A-475-059 10/1/17-9/30/18 Japan: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products A-588-874 10/1/17-9/30/18 Mexico: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod A-201-830 10/1/17-9/30/18 Moldova: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod A-841-805 10/1/17-9/30/18 Republic of Korea: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products A-580-883 10/1/17-9/30/18 Taiwan: Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar A-583-859 3/7/17-9/30/18 The Netherlands: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products A-421-813 10/1/17-9/30/18 The People's Republic of China: Barium Carbonate A-570-880 10/1/17-9/30/18 Barium Chloride A-570-007 10/1/17-9/30/18 Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged For Sale A-570-018 10/1/17-9/30/18 Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide A-570-919 10/1/17-9/30/18 Helical Spring Lock Washers A-570-822 10/1/17-9/30/18 Polyvinyl Alcohol A-570-879 10/1/17-9/30/18 Steel Wire Garment Hangers A-570-918 10/1/17-9/30/18 Trinidad and Tobago: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod A-274-804 10/1/17-9/30/18 Turkey: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products A-489-826 10/1/17-9/30/18 United Kingdom: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products A-412-825 10/1/17-9/30/18 Countervailing Duty Proceedings Brazil: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod C-351-833 1/1/17-12/31/17 Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products, C-351-846 1/1/17-12/31/17 Iran: Roasted In Shell Pistachios, C-507-601 1/1/17-12/31/17 Republic of Korea: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products, C-580-884 1/1/17-12/31/17 The People's Republican o China: Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale, C-570-019 1/1/17-12/31/17 Suspension Agreements Argentina: Lemon Juice A-357-818 10/1/17-9/30/18 Russia: Uranium, A-821-802 10/1/17-9/30/18

    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 October 2018. If Commerce does not receive, by the last day of October 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: September 25, 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. 2018-21296 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-583-848] Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Teh Fong Ming International Co., Ltd. (TFM) has made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value during the period of review (POR), May 1, 2016, through April 30, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable October 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Romani, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0198.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On June 11, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stilbenic optical brightening agents (OBAs from Taiwan.1 The administrative review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, TFM. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results but received none. Hence, these final results are unchanged from the Preliminary Results. Commerce conducted this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

    1See Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 26950 (June 11, 2018) (Preliminary Results).

    Scope of the Order

    The stilbenic OBAs covered by this order are all forms (whether free acid or salt) of compounds known as triazinylaminostilbenes (i.e., all derivatives of 4,4'-bis [1,3,5- triazin-2-yl] 2 amino-2,2'-stilbenedisulfonic acid), except for compounds listed in the following paragraph. The stilbenic OBAs covered by this order include final stilbenic OBA products, as well as intermediate products that are themselves triazinylaminostilbenes produced during the synthesis of stilbenic OBA products.

    2 The brackets in this sentence are part of the chemical formula.

    Excluded from this order are all forms of 4,4'-bis[4-anilino-6-morpholino-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl] 3 amino-2,2'-stilbenedisulfonic acid, C40H40N12O8S2 (“Fluorescent Brightener 71”). This order covers the above-described compounds in any state (including but not limited to powder, slurry, or solution), of any concentrations of active stilbenic OBA ingredient, as well as any compositions regardless of additives (i.e., mixtures or blends, whether of stilbenic OBAs with each other, or of stilbenic OBAs with additives that are not stilbenic OBAs), and in any type of packaging.

    3Id.

    These stilbenic OBAs are classifiable under subheading 3204.20.8000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but they may also enter under subheadings 2933.69.6050, 2921.59.4000 and 2921.59.8090. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

    Final Results of the Administrative Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period of May 1, 2016, through April 30, 2017.

    Producer/exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Teh Fong Ming International Co., Ltd 1.31
    Assessment

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. We calculated an importer-specific assessment rate on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for each importer's examined sales and the total entered value of the sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).4

    4 In these final results, Commerce applied the assessment rate calculation method adopted 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).

    For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by TFM for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company involved in the transaction. We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of stilbenic OBAs from Taiwan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for TFM will be 1.31 percent, the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 6.19 percent, the all-others rate established in the investigation.5

    5See Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from Taiwan: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 77 FR 17027 (March 23, 2012).

    These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction 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 terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.

    We are issuing and publishing these results of an administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21325 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-836] Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results; 2013-2014 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On September 7, 2018, the Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the final results of remand redetermination pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from the People's Republic of China (China), covering the period of March 1, 2013, through February 28, 2014. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce's final results of the administrative review and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned to the China-wide entity.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 17, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Edythe Artman or Brian Davis, 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) 482-3931 or (202) 482-7924, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In the underlying 2013/2014 administrative review, Commerce rescinded its review with respect to Evonik Rexim (Nanning) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., (Evonik), finding Evonik's sales of subject merchandise to be not bona fide. 1 Accordingly, Commerce determined that Evonik's entries during the period of review would be subject to the rate for the China-wide entity in effect at the time of entry, which at that point in time was 453.79 percent.2 This rate was established as the China-wide rate in Final Results 12-13. 3 The rate of 453.79 percent was originally calculated in Final Results 10-11 for respondent Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. (Baoding Mantong).4 Baoding Mantong challenged that rate in Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Ct. No. 12-00362. In that separate proceeding, this Court twice remanded the calculation of the rate to Commerce, sustaining Commerce's second remand redetermination, which reduced Baoding Mantong's calculated margin to 0.00 percent for the Final Results 10-11. 5

    1See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 62,027 (October 15, 2015) (Final Results 13-14) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (Issues and Decision Memorandum) at Comment 5.

    2See Final Results 13-14 at 62,028.

    3See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 64,746, 64,748 (October 31, 2014) (Final Results 12-13).

    4See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 64,100, 64,101 (October 18, 2012) (Final Results 10-11).

    5See Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co. Ltd., Slip. Op. 17-169, 279 F. Supp. 3d 1321 (Ct. Int'l Trade Dec. 20, 2017) (Baoding Mantong). In an earlier decision, Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co. Ltd., 41 CIT ___, 222 F. Supp. 3d. 1231 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2017), the Court sustained an initial revision by Commerce of Baoding Mantong's rate to 64.97 percent.

    Because Final Results 10-11 was under judicial review at the commencement of its action before the Court, Evonik challenged Commerce's application of the rate of 453.79 percent to the China-wide entity 6 in its action on Final Results 13-14. The Court severed and stayed that claim from Consol. Ct. No. 15-00296,7 pending the disposition of the challenge in Baoding Mantong.

    6See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 6.

    7See Consol. Ct. No. 15-296 ECF Docket No. 70, and Ct. No. 17-132, ECF Docket No. 1.

    In light of the final judgment issued in Baoding Mantong, the Court granted Commerce's motion for a voluntary remand to reevaluate its application of the China-wide entity rate to Evonik in Final Results 13-14. In the Final Results of Redetermination, Commerce selected as the China-wide rate for the 2013/2014 review the China-wide rate stemming from the underlying less-than-fair-value investigation.8 This rate, set at 155.89 percent, had been in effect prior to the China-wide rate being set at 453.79 percent in Final Results 12-13. On September 7, 2018, the Court sustained the Final Results of Redetermination.9

    8SeeFinal Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,” dated June 5, 2018 (Final Results of Redetermination). See also “Antidumping Duty Order: Glycine from the People's Republic of China,” 60 FR 16,116, (March 29, 1995).

    9See Pharm-Rx Chemical Corporation v. United States, Court No. 17-00268, Slip Op. 18-113 (CIT September 7, 2018).

    Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 10 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 11 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's September 7, 2018, final judgment sustaining the Final Results of Redetermination constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with Final Results 13-14. This notice is published in fulfillment of the Timken publication requirements. Accordingly, Commerce will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending a final and conclusive court decision.

    10See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).

    11See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).

    Amended Final Results of Review

    Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending Final Results 13-14 with respect to the China-wide rate previously assigned to the exporter. Based on the Final Results of Redetermination, as sustained by the CIT, the revised China-wide rate, for the period March 1, 2013, through February 28, 2014, is as follows:

    Producer or exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • China-wide Entity 155.89

    In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise with respect to Evonik.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    As the China-wide entity's cash deposit rate has not been subject to subsequent administrative reviews, Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to CBP adjusting the rate for the China-wide entity to 155.89 percent, effective September 17, 2018.

    Notification to Interested Parties

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

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21246 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Membership of the International Trade Administration Performance Review Board AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of membership on the International Trade Administration's Performance Review Board.

    SUMMARY:

    The International Trade Administration (ITA), Department of Commerce (DOC), announces the appointment of those individuals who have been selected to serve as members of ITA's Performance Review Board. The Performance Review Board is responsible for (1) reviewing performance appraisals and ratings of Senior Executive Service (SES) members and (2) making recommendations to the appointing authority on other performance management issues, such as pay adjustments, bonuses and Presidential Rank Awards for SES. The appointment of these members to the Performance Review Board will be for a period of twenty-four (24) months.

    DATES:

    The period of appointment for those individuals selected for ITA's Performance Review Board begins on October 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joan Nagielski, U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Human Resources Management, Department of Commerce Human Resources Operations Center, Office of Employment and Compensation, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Room 50013, Washington, DC 20230, at (202) 482-6342.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), the International Trade Administration (ITA), Department of Commerce (DOC), announces the appointment of those individuals who have been selected to serve as members of the ITA Performance Review Board. The Performance Review Board is responsible for (1) reviewing performance appraisals and ratings of Senior Executive Service (SES) members and (2) making recommendations to the appointing authority on other Performance management issues, such as pay adjustments, bonuses and Presidential Rank Awards for SES. The Appointment of these members to the Performance Review Board will be for a period of twenty-four (24) months.

    The name, position title, and type of appointment of each member of the Performance Review Board are set forth below:

    1. Andre Mendes, Chief Information Officer, Career SES 2. Diane Farrell, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Asia, Career SES 3. James Sullivan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Services, Noncareer SES 4. Carole Showers, Executive Director for Antidumping & Policy Negotiation, Career SES 5. Veronica LeGrande, HR Director, Enterprise Services, Career SES 6. Anne Driscoll, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Industry and Analysis, Career SES 7. Timothy Rosado, Chief Financial and Administrative Officer, Career SES 8. Praveen Dixit, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Trade Policy and Analysis, Career SES 9. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, Career SES 10. Stephen Renna, Director, Advocacy Center, Noncareer SES 11. John Cooney, Chief of Staff, Noncareer SES 12. Kurt Bersani, Chief Financial Officer, Enterprise Services, Career SES Dated: September 26, 2018. Joan M. Nagielski, Human Resources Specialist, Office of Employment and Compensation, Department of Commerce Human Resources Operations Center, Office of Human Resources Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Commerce.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21268 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Advance Notification of Sunset Review AGENCY:

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

    Background

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

    Upcoming Sunset Reviews for November 2018

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

    Department contact Antidumping duty proceedings Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from China (A-570-910) (2nd Review) Matthew Renkey, (202) 482-2312. Low Enriched Uranium from France (A-427-818) (3rd Review) Jacqueline Arrowsmith, (202) 482-5255. Countervailing duty proceedings Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from China (C-570-911) (2nd Review) Joshua Poole, (202) 482-1293. Suspended Investigations

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Dated: September 25, 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. 2018-21294 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-836] Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On September 7, 2018, the Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the final results of remand redetermination pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from the People's Republic of China (China), covering the period of March 1, 2015, through February 29, 2016. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce's final results of the administrative review and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned to the China-wide entity.

    DATES:

    Applicable September 17, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Edythe Artman or Brian Davis, 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) 482-3931 or (202) 482-7924, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In the underlying 2015/2016 administrative review, Commerce selected Jizhou City Huayang Chemical Co., Ltd. (Huayang Chemical) as a mandatory respondent and issued an antidumping duty questionnaire to the company. Huayang Chemical did not respond to the questionnaire and, as a result, Commerce found it ineligible for a separate rate and that it would remain part of the China-wide entity, for which no review was requested.1 At that time, the rate for the China-wide entity was 453.79 percent, as established in Final Results 12-13. 2 The rate of 453.79 percent was originally calculated in Final Results 10-11 for respondent Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. (Baoding Mantong).3 Baoding Mantong challenged that rate in Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Ct. No. 12-00362. In that separate proceeding, this Court twice remanded the calculation of the rate to Commerce, sustaining Commerce's second remand redetermination, which reduced Baoding Mantong's calculated margin to 0.00 percent for the Final Results 10-11. 4

    1See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of Administrative Review, In Part; 2015-2016; 82 FR 47,474 (October 12, 2017) (Final Results 15-16) and accompanying issues and decision memorandum at Comment 3.

    2See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 64,746, 64,748 (October 31, 2014) (Final Results 12-13).

    3See Glycine from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 64,100, 64,101 (October 18, 2012) (Final Results 10-11).

    4See Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd., Slip Op. 17-169, 279 F. Supp. 3d 1321 (Ct. Int'l Trade Dec. 20, 2017) (Baoding Mantong). In an earlier decision, Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd., 41 CIT ___, 222 F. Supp. 3d 1231 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2017), the Court sustained an initial revision by Commerce of Baoding Mantong's rate to 64.97 percent.

    During the 2015/2016 administrative review, Pharm-Rx Chemical Corporation (Pharm-Rx) challenged Commerce's application of the rate of 453.79 percent to the China-wide entity in Final Results 15-16. 5 However, Commerce declined to change the rate, as the litigation concerning Final Results 10-11 had not yet resulted in a final judgment, and the China-wide entity was not under review for the 2015/2016 period.6

    5See Final Results 15-16 at Comment 3.

    6Id.

    In light of the final judgment issued in Baoding Mantong, the Court granted Commerce's motion for a voluntary remand to reevaluate its application of the China-wide entity rate to Huayang Chemical in Final Results 15-16. In the Final Results of Redetermination, Commerce selected as the China-wide rate for the 2015/2016 review review the China-wide rate stemming from the underlying less-than-fair-value investigation.7 This rate, set at 155.89 percent, had been in effect prior to the China-wide rate being set at 453.79 percent in Final Results 12-13. On September 7, 2018, the Court sustained the Final Results of Redetermination.8

    7SeeFinal Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,” dated June 4, 2018 (Final Results of Redetermination). See also “Antidumping Duty Order: Glycine from the People's Republic of China,” 60 FR 16,116, (March 29, 1995).

    8See Pharm-Rx Chemical Corporation v. United States, Court No. 17-00268, Slip Op. 18-113 (CIT September 7, 2018).

    Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 9 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 10 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's September 7, 2018, final judgment sustaining the Final Results of Redetermination constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with Final Results 15-16. This notice is published in fulfillment of the Timken publication requirements. Accordingly, Commerce will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending a final and conclusive court decision.

    9See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).

    10See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).

    Amended Final Results of Review

    Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending Final Results 15-16 with respect to the China-wide rate previously assigned to the exporter. Based on the Final Results of Redetermination, as sustained by the CIT, the revised China-wide rate, for the period March 1, 2015, through February 28, 2016, is as follows:

    Producer or exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • China-wide Entity 155.89

    In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise with respect to Pharm-Rx.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    As the China-wide entity's cash deposit rate has not been subject to subsequent administrative reviews, Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to CBP adjusting the rate for the China-wide entity to 155.89 percent, effective September 17, 2018.

    Notification to Interested Parties

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

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21247 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG520 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings and partially closed meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold its 130th Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) meeting and its 174th Council meeting to take actions on fishery management issues in the Western Pacific Region. A portion of the 174th Council meeting will be closed to the public. The Council will also hold meetings of the following advisory groups and standing committees: Mariana Archipelago Advisory Panel (AP); Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) Regional Ecosystem Advisory Committee (REAC); Pelagic and International Standing Committee (P&I SC); Fishery Data Collection and Research Committee (FDCRC); Executive and Budget Standing Committee (E&B SC); and Guam REAC.

    DATES:

    The meetings will be held between October 15 and October 27, 2018. For specific times and agendas, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The 130th SSC will be held at the Naniloa Hotel DoubleTree by Hilton, 93 Banyan Dr, Hilo, HI 96720. The Mariana Archipelago AP and Guam REAC will be held at Hilton Guam Resort and Spa, 202 Hilton Road, Tumon Bay, Guam 96913, phone: (671) 646-1835. The CNMI REAC, P&I SC, FDCRC, and E&B SC will be held at the Saipan Fiesta Resort and Spa, P.O. Box 501029, Saipan, MP 96950, telephone: (670) 234-6412. The first two days of the 174th Council meeting and the CNMI Fishers Forum will be held at Saipan Fiesta Resort and Spa, P.O. Box 501029, Saipan, MP 96950, telephone: (670) 234-6412 and the last two days of the Council meeting and the Guam Fishers Forum will be held at the Hilton Guam Resort and Spa, 202 Hilton Road, Tumon Bay, Guam 96913, telephone: (671) 646-1835.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

    Contact Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; phone: (808) 522-8220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The 130th SSC meeting will be held between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on October 15-17, 2018. The Mariana Archipelago AP will be held between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. on October 20, 2018. The CNMI REAC and P&I SC will be held between 8:30 a.m. and 12 p.m. on October 22, 2018. The FDCRC will be held between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. on October 22, 2018. The E&B SC will be held between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m. on October 22, 2018. The Guam REAC will be held between 1 p.m. and 4 p.m. on October 25, 2018. The first two days of the 174th Council Meeting will be held between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on October 23 and 24, 2018. The portion of the 174th Council meeting from 1 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 23, 2018, will be closed to the public in accordance with section 302(i)(3) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). The CNMI Fishers Forum will be held between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. on October 23, 2018. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items will be held between 4 p.m. and 5 p.m. on October 24, 2018. The last two days of the 174th Council Meeting will be held between 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on October 26 and 27, 2018. The Guam Fishers Forum will be held between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. on October 26, 2018. All times listed are local island times. Agenda items noted as “Final Action Items” refer to actions that result in Council transmittal of a proposed fishery management plan, proposed plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of the MSA. In addition to the agenda items listed here, the Council and its advisory bodies will hear recommendations from Council advisors. Opportunities to submit public comment will be provided throughout the agendas. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change and will be announced in advance at the Council meeting. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business. Background documents will be available from and written comments should be sent to Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, phone: (808) 522-8220 or fax: (808) 522-8226.

    Agenda for 130th SSC Meeting Monday, October 15, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 1. Introductions 2. Approval of Draft Agenda and Assignment of Rapporteurs 3. Status of the 129th SSC Meeting Recommendations 4. Report from the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) Director A. Pacific Islands Ecosystem Based Fishery Management Regional Implementation Plan B. Large Marine Ecosystems Initiative 5. Insular Fisheries A. Review of the Western Pacific Stock Assessment Review Terms of Reference for the Territory Bottomfish Benchmark Stock Assessment B. Specification of Acceptable Biological Catches (ABC) for the Following Management Unit Species/Complexes (MUS) (Action Item) 1. Hawaii Non-Deep 7 Bottomfish for Fishing Year 2019 to 2021 2. Hawaii Kona Crab for Fishing Year 2019 3. Hawaii Deep Water Shrimp and Precious Corals for Fishing Year 2019 to 2021 4. Territory Bottomfish for Fishing Year 2019 C. Refinement of the Precious Coral Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) D. Public Comment E. SSC Discussion and Recommendations 6. Program Planning and Research A. Discussion Paper on the Applicability of the National Standard 1 (NS1) Carry-Over Provisions to the Western Pacific Archipelagic Fisheries B. Re-authorized Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSRA) Five Year Research Priority 2020-24 1. Report on the MSRA Five Year Research Priority Workshop 2. SSC Work Session to Refine the MSRA Research Priority C. Public Comment D. SSC Discussion and Recommendations Tuesday, October 16, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 7. Pelagic Fisheries A. American Samoa Longline Fishery Report B. Hawaii Longline Report Fishery Report C. Mandatory Electronic Reporting for the Hawaii Longline Fishery (Action Item) D. Hawaii Shallow-Set Longline Fishery 1. ESA Consultation for the Hawaii Shallow-set Longline Fishery a. Status of the ESA Consultation and Overview of the Draft Biological Opinion b. Loggerhead and Leatherback Turtle Population Vulnerability Assessments c. SSC Working Group Input on the Biological Opinion Analysis Plan 2. Managing Loggerhead and Leatherback Sea Turtle Interactions in the Hawaii-based Shallow-set Longline Fishery (Action Item) C. International Fisheries Meetings 1. International Scientific Committee 2018 2. 93rd Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) meeting 3. Western Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) a. Electronic Monitoring Working Group b. 14th Scientific Committee (SC) c. Northern Committee (NC) d. Technical Compliance Committee (TCC) e. Permanent Advisory Committee (PAC) D. Public Comment E. SSC Discussion and Recommendations 8. Protected Species A. Factors Influencing Olive Ridley Turtle Interaction Patterns in the Hawaii Deep-set Longline Fishery B. Report of the Seabird Bycatch Mitigation Workshop C. Status of the False Killer Whale Take Reduction Team Recommendations D. Updates on Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act Actions E. Public Comment F. SSC Discussion and Recommendations Wednesday, October 17, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 9. Other Business A. 131st SSC Meeting 10. Summary of SSC Recommendations to the Council Agenda for the Mariana Archipelago Advisory Panel Joint Meeting Saturday, October 20, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. 1. “Hafa Adai”—Welcome and Introductions 2. Guest Speaker: Advocating for Mariana Fisheries 3. Review of Recent AP Meeting Recommendations 4. Review of Council Action Items a. Specification for Bottomfish Annual Catch Limits for 2019 b. Alternatives for Aquaculture Management c. Update on Marine Conservation Plans Projects d. Refining Precious Coral EFH 5. Marianas AP Community Issues a. Update on Mandatory Licensing and Reporting b. Update on Commercial Reporting System and Spearfishing Projects c. Guam Marine Resource Import Database d. Guam Ocean Fishery Management Council Update 6. Marianas Fishery Ecosystem Plans (FEP) AP Issues a. CNMI b. Guam 7. The AP and the Council's Five-Year Program Plan 8. Public Comments 9. Discussion and Recommendations 10. “At the End of the Day”—Other Business Agenda for the CNMI REAC Meeting Monday, October 22, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Review of 2017 REAC Meeting 3. Mandatory Permit and Reporting 4. Mariana Small-boat Economic Survey 5. Council Projects a. Improving the Commercial Reporting System b. Outcomes of the Noncommercial Spearfishing Project 6. Council 5-year Program Plan a. Drivers, Programs and Priorities b. Research Priorities 7. Aquaculture 8. Public Comment 9. Other Business 10. Discussion and Recommendations Agenda for the Pelagics and International Standing Committee Monday, October 22, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. 1. Introduction and Opening of Committee Meeting 2. Hawaii and American Samoa Longline Fisheries Reports 3. Managing Sea Turtle Interactions in the Hawaii Shallow-set Longline Fishery (Action Item) 4. Mandatory Electronic Reporting for Hawaii Longline Fishery (Action Item) 5. 93rd IATTC meeting 6. WCPFC meetings a. Science Committee b. Northern Committee c. Technical and Compliance Committee d. US WCPFC PAC recommendations e. Council recommendations for WCPFC15 7. Advisory Groups Reports and Recommendations a. Advisory Panels b. Scientific & Statistical Committee 8. Other Issues 9. Public Comment 10. Committee Discussion and Action Agenda for FDCRC Meeting Monday, October 22, 2018, 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. 1. Welcome Remarks and Introductions 2. Update on previous FDCRC recommendations 3. Update on the reorganization of Western Pacific Fishery Information Network (WPacFIN) and implications to the Territories 4. Regulations for mandatory license and reporting A. Guam B. CNMI 5. Data collection improvement updates A. American Samoa Department of Marine and Wildlife Resources (DMWR) B. Guam Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources (DAWR) C. CNMI Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR)—Division Fish and Wildlife (DFW) D. Hawaii DLNR—Division Aquatic Resources (DAR) E. Guam Bureau of Statistics and Plans (BSP) F. Council G. NMFS-PIFSC 6. Report on FDCRC-Technical Committee 7. Public Comment 8. Discussions and Recommendations Agenda for the Executive and Budget Standing Committee Meeting Monday, October 22, 2018, 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. 1. Financial Report 2. Administrative Report 3. Funding Request 4. Status of Marine Conservation Plans 5. Council Family Changes A. Advisory Panel Selection B. Advisory Group Changes 6. Legislative Status of Fisheries 7. Meetings and Workshops 8. EFH Workshop on Non-Fishing Impacts 9. Membership Appointments to Election Committee 10. Other Issues 11. Public Comment 12. Discussion and Recommendations Agenda for the Guam REAC Meeting Thursday, October 25, 2018, 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Review of 2017 Guam REAC Meeting 3. Guam Marine Product Import Database 4. Umatac Community Management 5. Fishing Community Perceptions on Marine Preserve Siting Process 6. Mandatory Permit and Reporting 7. Mariana Small-boat Economic Survey 8. Council 5-year Program Plan a. Drivers, Programs and Priorities b. Research Priorities 9. Aquaculture 10. Public Comment 11. Other Business 12. Discussion and Recommendations Agenda for 174th Council Meeting Tuesday, October 23, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. (1 p.m.-1:30 p.m. CLOSED Session) 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Oath of Office 3. Approval of the 174th Agenda 4. Approval of the 173rd Meeting Minutes 5. Executive Director's Report 6. Agency Reports A. National Marine Fisheries Service 1. Pacific Islands Regional Office 2. Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center a. Ecosystem Based Fishery Management Regional Implementation Plan b. Large Marine Ecosystem Initiative B. NOAA Office of General Counsel, Pacific Islands Section C. US State Department D. US Fish and Wildlife Service E. Enforcement 1. US Coast Guard 2. NOAA Office of Law Enforcement 3. NOAA Office of General Counsel, Enforcement Section F. Public Comment G. Council Discussion and Action 7. Mariana Archipelago-CNMI A. Arongol Falú B. Legislative Report C. Enforcement Issues D. Community Activities and Issues E. Education and Outreach Initiatives F. Marine Conservation Plan Projects G. SPC Fisheries Development Adviser H. Specification of CNMI Bottomfish MUS Annual Catch Limits for Fishing Year 2019 (Final Action) I. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Regional Ecosystem Advisory Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee J. Public Hearing K. Council Discussion and Action 8. Protected Species A. Report of the Seabird Bycatch Mitigation Workshop B. Status of the False Killer Whale Take Reduction Team Recommendations C. Updates on ESA and MMPA Act Actions D. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Regional Ecosystem Advisory Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee E. Public Comment F. Council Discussion and Action Tuesday, October 23, 2018, 1 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. Update on Litigation (Closed Session—pursuant to MSA § 302(i)(3)) Tuesday, October 23, 2018, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Fishers Forum—One Shot, One Fish: CNMI Non-Commercial Spear Fishery Wednesday, October 24, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 9. Pelagic & International Fisheries A. Hawaii & American Samoa Longline Fisheries Reports B. Hawaii Shallow-Set Longline Fishery 1. Status of the Hawaii Shallow-set Longline ESA Consultation 2. Managing Loggerhead and Leatherback Sea Turtle Interactions in the Hawaii-based Shallow-set Longline Fishery (Final Action) C. Electronic Monitoring/Electronic Reporting in Hawaii Longline Fishery D. Mandatory Electronic Reporting for Hawaii Longline Fishery (Initial Action) E. International Fisheries Meetings 1. International Science Committee 2. 93rd IATTC 3. WCPFC a. Electronic Monitoring Working Group b. Scientific Committee c. Northern Committee d. Technical and Compliance Committee e. US WCPFC Permanent Advisory Committee 4. North Pacific Fisheries Commission F. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Regional Ecosystem Advisory Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee G. Standing Committee Recommendations H. Public Hearing I. Council Discussion and Action 10. American Samoa Archipelago A. Motu Lipoti B. Fono Report C. Enforcement Issues D. Community Activities and Issues E. Education and Outreach Initiatives F. Marine Conservation Plan Projects G. Specification of American Samoa Bottomfish MUS Annual Catch Limits for Fishing Year 2019 (Final Action) H. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee I. Public Hearing J. Council Discussion and Action Wednesday, October 24, 2018, 4 p.m. to 5 p.m. Public Comment on Non-agenda Items Friday, October 26, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 11. Mariana Archipelago-Guam A. Isla Informe B. Legislative Report C. Enforcement Issues D. Community Activities and Issues E. Education and Outreach Initiatives F. Marine Conservation Plan G. Guam Marine Resource Import Database H. Fishing Community Perceptions on Marine Preserve Siting Process I. Guam Bottomfish MUS Specification of Annual Catch Limits for Fishing Year 2019 (Final Action) J. Guam Ocean Fishery Management Council Update K. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Regional Ecosystem Advisory Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee L. Public Hearing M. Council Discussion and Action 12. Program Planning and Research A. Update on Aquaculture Management Program B. Refining Precious Coral Essential Fish Habitat (Initial Action) C. Discussion Paper on the Applicability of the NS1 Carry-Over Provisions to the Western Pacific Fisheries D. Terms of Reference for the Benchmark Territory Bottomfish Management Unit Species Stock Assessment Review E. Regional, National and International Outreach & Education F. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Regional Ecosystem Advisory Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee G. Public Hearing H. Council Discussion and Action Friday, October 26, 2018, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Fishers Forum: One Shot, One Fish: Guam Non-Commercial Spear Fishery Saturday, October 27, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 13. Hawaii Archipelago & Pacific Remote Island Areas A. Moku Pepa B. Legislative Report C. Enforcement Issues D. Report of Removal of Bottomfish Restricted Fishing Areas E. Specification of Annual Catch Limits (Final Action) 1. Hawaii Precious Corals for Fishing Year 2019 to 2021 2. Hawaii Deep Water Shrimp for Fishing Year 2019 to 2021 3. Main Hawaiian Islands Non-deep 7 bottomfish for Fishing Year 2019 to 2021 4. Hawaii Kona crab for Fishing Year 2019 F. Education and Outreach Initiatives G. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee H. Public Hearing I. Council Discussion and Action 14. Administrative Matters A. Council Member and Staff Annual Training on Standards of Conduct B. Financial Reports C. Administrative Reports D. Funding Requests E. Council Family Changes 1. Advisory Panel Selection 2. Advisory Group Changes F. Meetings and Workshops G. Standing Committee Recommendations H. Public Comment I. Council Discussion and Action 15. Election of Officers 16. Other Business

    Non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Council for discussion and formal Council action during the 174th meeting. However, Council action on regulatory issues will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any regulatory issue arising after publication of this document that requires emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21302 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMITTEE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE AGREEMENTS Limitations of Duty- and Quota-Free Imports of Apparel Articles Assembled in Beneficiary Sub-Saharan African Countries From Regional and Third-Country Fabric AGENCY:

    Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements (CITA).

    ACTION:

    Publishing the new 12-month cap on duty- and quota-free benefits.

    DATES:

    October 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rebecca Geiger, International Trade Specialist, Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, (202) 482-3117.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority: Title I, Section 112(b)(3) of the Trade and Development Act of 2000 (TDA 2000), Public Law (Pub. L.) 106-200, as amended by Division B, Title XXI, section 3108 of the Trade Act of 2002, Public Law 107-210; Section 7(b)(2) of the AGOA Acceleration Act of 2004, Public Law 108-274; Division D, Title VI, section 6002 of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (TRHCA 2006), Public Law 109-432, and section 1 of The African Growth and Opportunity Amendments (Pub. L. 112-163), August 10, 2012; Presidential Proclamation 7350 of October 2, 2000 (65 FR 59321); Presidential Proclamation 7626 of November 13, 2002 (67 FR 69459); and Title I, Section 103(b)(2) and (3) of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114-27, June 29, 2015.

    Title I of TDA 2000 provides for duty- and quota-free treatment for certain textile and apparel articles imported from designated beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries. Section 112(b)(3) of TDA 2000 provides duty- and quota-free treatment for apparel articles wholly assembled in one or more beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries from fabric wholly formed in one or more beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries from yarn originating in the United States or one or more beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries. This preferential treatment is also available for apparel articles assembled in one or more lesser-developed beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries, regardless of the country of origin of the fabric used to make such articles, subject to quantitative limitation. Public Law 114-27 extended this special rule for lesser-developed countries through September 30, 2025.

    The AGOA Acceleration Act of 2004 provides that the quantitative limitation for the twelve-month period beginning October 1, 2018 will be an amount not to exceed 7 percent of the aggregate square meter equivalents of all apparel articles imported into the United States in the preceding 12-month period for which data are available. See Section 112(b)(3)(A)(ii)(I) of TDA 2000, as amended by Section 7(b)(2)(B) of the AGOA Acceleration Act of 2004. Of this overall amount, apparel imported under the special rule for lesser-developed countries is limited to an amount not to exceed 3.5 percent of all apparel articles imported into the United States in the preceding 12-month period. See Section 112(b)(3)(B)(ii)(II) of TDA 2000, as amended by Section 6002(a)(3) of TRHCA 2006. The Annex to Presidential Proclamation 7350 of October 2, 2000 directed CITA to publish the aggregate quantity of imports allowed during each 12-month period in the Federal Register. For the one-year period, beginning on October 1, 2018, and extending through September 30, 2019, the aggregate quantity of imports eligible for preferential treatment under these provisions is 2,048,357,135 square meters equivalent. Of this amount, 1,024,178,567 square meters equivalent is available to apparel articles imported under the special rule for lesser-developed countries. Apparel articles entered in excess of these quantities will be subject to otherwise applicable tariffs.

    These quantities are calculated using the aggregate square meter equivalents of all apparel articles imported into the United States, derived from the set of Harmonized System lines listed in the Annex to the World Trade Organization Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC), and the conversion factors for units of measure into square meter equivalents used by the United States in implementing the ATC.

    Terry Labat, Acting Chairman, Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21259 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION [Docket No. CFPB-2018-0032] Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is requesting to renew the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing information collection titled, “Generic Information Collection Plan for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on the Service Delivery of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.”

    DATES:

    Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before November 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:

    Electronic: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected] Include Docket No. CFPB-2018-0032 in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Comment intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Comment intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.

    Please note that comments submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will become public records, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, should not be included.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at www.regulations.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435-9575, or email: [email protected] If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact [email protected] Please do not submit comments to these email boxes.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: Generic Information Collection Plan for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on the Service Delivery of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    OMB Control Number: 3170-0024.

    Type of Review: Extension without change of a currently approved collection of information.

    Affected Public: Individuals; Private sector; and State, Local, or Tribal governments.

    Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 5,000.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,000.

    Abstract: This generic information collection plan provides for the collection of qualitative feedback from consumers, financial institutions, and stakeholders on a wide range of services the Bureau provides in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Bureau's commitment to improving service delivery. By qualitative feedback, the Bureau means information that provides useful insights on, for example, comprehension, usability, perceptions, and opinions, but are not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study. The Bureau expects this feedback to include insights into consumer, financial institution, or stakeholder perceptions, experiences, and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative, and actionable communications between the Bureau and consumers, financial institutions, and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

    Request for Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the Bureau's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Darrin A. King, Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21301 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION [Docket No. CFPB-2018-0033] Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is requesting to renew the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing information collection titled, “Regulation F: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, State Application for Exemption (12 CFR 1006.2).”

    DATES:

    Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before November 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:

    Electronic: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected] Include Docket No. CFPB-2018-0033 in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Comment intake, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Comment intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.

    Please note that comments submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will become public records, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, should not be included.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at www.regulations.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435-9575, or email: [email protected] If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact [email protected] Please do not submit comments to these email boxes.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: Regulation F: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, State Application for Exemption (12 CFR 1006.2).

    OMB Control Number: 3170-0056.

    Type of Review: Extension without change of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: State governments.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2.

    Abstract: Regulation F contains procedures and criteria whereby states may apply to the Bureau for an exemption of a class of debt collection practices within the applying state from the provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act as provided in section 817 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692. The information collection request seeks OMB approval for the state application requirements as contained in 12 CFR 1006.2.

    Request for Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the Bureau's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Darrin A. King, Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21300 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION [Docket No. CFPB-2018-0027] Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is requesting to renew the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing information collection, titled, “Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Regulation P).”

    DATES:

    Written comments are encouraged and must be received on or before November 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection, OMB Control Number (see below), and docket number (see above), by any of the following methods:

    Electronic: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected]. Include Docket No. CFPB-2018-0027 in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Comment intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Comment intake, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552.

    Please note that comments submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. In general, all comments received will become public records, including any personal information provided. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, should not be included.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Documentation prepared in support of this information collection request is available at www.regulations.gov. Requests for additional information should be directed to the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435-9575, or email: [email protected] If you require this document in an alternative electronic format, please contact [email protected] Please do not submit comments to these email boxes.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Regulation P) 12 CFR 1016.

    OMB Control Number: 3170-0010.

    Type of Review: Renewal without change of an existing information collection.

    Affected Public: Businesses and other for-profit entities.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 462,760.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 312,916.

    Abstract: Section 502 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) (Pub. L. 106-102) generally prohibits a financial institution from sharing nonpublic personal information about a consumer with nonaffiliated third parties unless the institution satisfies various disclosure requirements (including provision of initial privacy notices, annual notices, notices of revisions to the institution's privacy policy, and opt-out notices) and the consumer has not elected to opt out of the information sharing. The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection promulgated Regulation P 12 CFR 1016 to implement the GLB Act's notice requirements and restrictions on a financial institution's ability to disclose nonpublic personal information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. The Bureau is not proposing any new or revised collections of information pursuant to this request.

    Request for Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the Bureau's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Darrin A. King, Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21267 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2015-OS-0004] 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 30, 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Military Community and Family Policy, ATTN: Casualty Affairs, 1500 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000 or call (571) 372-0870.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Mortuary Affairs Forms; Statement of Disposition of Military Remains, DD Form 3045; Disposition of Remains Election Statement Initial Notification of Identified Partial Remains, DD Form 3046; Disposition of Remains Election Statement Notification of Subsequently Identified Partial Remains, DD Form 3047; Disposition of Organs Retained for Extended Examination, DD Form 3048; Advanced Restorative Art of Remains, DD Form 3049; Election for Air Transportation of Remains of Casualties Dying in a Theater of Combat Operations, DD Form 3050; OMB Control Number 0704-XXXX.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to obtain the selection (as applicable) of the Person Authorized to Direct Disposition (PADD) or the Person Authorized to Effect Disposition (PAED) of the remains of the decedent. These forms were directed by the Secretary of Defense for transparency and standardization of the mortuary procedures as part of the Final Report of the Dover Port Mortuary Independent Review Subcommittee Implementation Plan and 180-day study. The applicable form(s) is included in the individual case file of the decedent.

    Affected Public: Business or Other For-Profit; Individuals or Households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 225.

    Number of Respondents: 900.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 900.

    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    The respondents are the PADD or PAED of the decedent and the witness to that selection. The PADD or PAED document their election, sign the applicable form to formalize this process and document the election of the PADD or PAED as applicable. These forms become a part of the Official Individual Deceased Personnel File. If the PADD or PAED do not sign these forms, then the Department cannot provide mortuary and transportation services as requested by the PADD or PAED. Currently, there is a lack of standardization across the Military Services as each Service currently utilizes different forms for these elections and they do not all capture the same information even on similar forms. Standardizing the information collected is essential in maintaining the transparency and integrity of the mortuary affairs process.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Shelly E. Finke, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21274 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy Notice of Availability of Government-Owned Inventions; Available for Licensing AGENCY:

    Department of the Navy, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of the Navy (DoN) announces the availability of the inventions listed in this notice, assigned to the United States Government, as represented by the Secretary of the Navy, for domestic and foreign licensing by the Department of the Navy.

    ADDRESSES:

    Requests for copies of the patents cited should be directed to Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Div, Code OOL, Bldg. 2, 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522-5001.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Christopher Monsey, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Div, Code OOL, Bldg 2, 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522-5001, Email [email protected], 812-854-2777.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following patents are available for licensing: Patent No. 10,047,731 (Navy Case No. 200222): PLASMA PROPELLANT ABLATION/SUBLIMATION BASED SYSTEMS//Patent No. 10,054,383 (Navy Case No. 200417): RETRACTABLE SUPPRESSOR//Patent No. 10,054,414 (Navy Case No. 200465): EXPLOSIVE ASSEMBLY SYSTEMS INCLUDING A LINEAR SHAPED CHARGE END PRIME CAP APPARATUS AND RELATED METHODS//Patent No. 10,055,525 (Navy Case No. 102512): MULTI AGENT RADIO FREQUENCY PROPAGATION SIMULATOR//Patent No. 10,059,445 (Navy Case No. 200239): REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE (ROV) AND DATA COLLECTION PROTECTION SYSTEM//Patent No. 10,060,962 (Navy Case No. 103111): SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TUNING TRANSFORMERS//Patent No. 10,061,880 (Navy Case No. 103076): MULTI AGENT RADIO FREQUENCY PROPAGATION SIMULATOR//Patent No. 10,062,554 (Navy Case No. 200390): METAMATERIAL PHOTOCATHODE FOR DETECTION AND IMAGING OF INFRARED RADIATION//Patent No. 10,063,025 (Navy Case No. 200412): CABLE CONNECTOR HAND TOOLS//Patent No. 10,067,655 (Navy Case No. 102556): VISUAL AND QUANTITATIVE FACTORS ANNALYSIS SYSTEMS FOR RELATING A HIERARCHY OF FACTORS INCLUDING ONE OR MORE RESOURCES, TASKS, AND COGNITIVE MODELS DISPLAYED IN A HIERARCHICAL GRAPHICAL INTERFACE ENABLING VISUAL AND QUANTITATIVE EVALUATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF SUCH FACTORS IN RELATION TO ONE OR MORE PROBLEM/SOLUTION SETS//Patent No. 10,070,532 (Navy Case No. 200229): PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD FABRICATION PROCESSES AND ARCHITECTURE INCLUDING POINT-OF-USE DESIGN AND FABRICATION CAPACITY EMPLOYING ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING//Patent No. 10,080,531 (Navy Case No. 200268): TRAUMATIC INJURY SELF-TREATMENT AND MEDICAL INFORMATION APPARATUS AND RELATED METHODS//and Patent No. 10,082,657 (Navy Case No. 200428): DUAL MAGNIFICATION APPARATUS AND SYSTEM FOR EXAMINING A SINGLE OBJECTIVE IN A SCANNING OPTICAL MICROSCOPE USING TWO WAVELENGTHS OF LIGHT.

    Authority:

    35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Meredith Steingold Werner, Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21297 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy [Docket ID: USN-2018-HQ-0016] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    The Office of the Secretary of the Navy, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Information collection notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Commander Navy Installation Command 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 30, 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 Commander Navy Installations Command, 716 Sicard Street SE, Suite 1000, Washington Navy Yard, Washington DC 20374-5140, or call the Family Readiness Lead at 202-433-3165.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Navy Ombudsman; OMB Control Number 0703-XXXX.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to identify all Navy ombudsmen; provide them with program information; communicate during natural disasters and crisis; collect program contact numbers and workload data; and maintain records of program training received. Numbers provided from the collection help identify the issues and concern of the families, trends during deployment and identify training which may be beneficial to the command families.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 2,250.

    Number of Respondents: 4,500.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 4,500.

    Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondents are the spouses of active duty members of the command or selected reserves of the command. They may also be the parent or family member of a single service member or retired service members of the command that meet certain requirements. The information obtained from the worksheets assists CNIC in identifying resources and/or trainings to assist ombudsmen in supporting and maintaining family readiness, which enables commands to focus on mission readiness. Statistics provided from collection shows commanding officers the issues and concerns of command families, trends during deployment versus non-deployment periods, and training which may be beneficial to the command and families. The worksheet information shows Navy leadership the cost avoidance benefit to the Navy for having ombudsmen perform the types of services that they deliver.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Shelly E. Finke, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21273 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2018-ICCD-0100] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Case Service Report (RSA-911) AGENCY:

    Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), 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 30, 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-0100. 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 9088, Washington, DC 20202-0023.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Melinda Giancola, 202-245-7312.

    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: Case Service Report (RSA-911).

    OMB Control Number: 1820-0508.

    Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 78.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 8,112.

    Abstract: The RSA-911 is used to collect individual level data on Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) program participants on a quarterly basis. The data collected in this report are manadated by section 101(a)(10) and 607 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Act), as amended by title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) and section 116(d) of WIOA. In addition, RSA uses data reported through this data collection to support its other responsibilities under the Act. Section 14(a) of the Act calls for the evaluation of programs authorized under the Act, as well as an assessment of the programs' effectiveness in relation to cost. Many of these evaluation studies have utilized RSA-911 data. RSA also uses data captured through the RSA-911 during the conduct of both the annual review and periodic onsite monitoring of VR agencies required by section 107 of the Act to examine the effectiveness of program performance.

    Other important management activities, such as the provision of technical assistance, program planning, and budget preparation and development, are greatly enhanced through the use of RSA-911 data. In addition, RSA uses RSA-911 data in the exchange of data under a data sharing agreement with the Social Security Administration as required by section 131 of the Act. Finally, the RSA-911 is considered to be one of the most robust databases in describing the demographics of the disabled population in the country and as such is used widely in researchers' disability-related analyses and reports.

    The revisions to this instrument include the removal of duplicative data elements as well as those not specifically required by statute or used for statutorily required activities. RSA is proposing to remove 66 elements from the current collection. RSA proposed the addition of 15 elements, 7 of which are related to adding a new service to track VR participant participation in Apprenticeships. RSA is also adding several elements by request of the VR agencies: Date of Initial IPE, Date of IPE Extension, and Date all Pre-Employment Transition Services Were Discontinued. These changes yield a net decrease in 251,000 burden hours in data collection and 1,488 burden hours in data reporting nationally.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21225 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FE Docket No. 18-137-LNG] Cheniere Marketing, LLC and Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC; Application for Blanket Authorization To Export Liquefied Natural Gas to Non-Free Trade Agreement Countries on a Short-Term Basis AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

    ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) gives notice (Notice) of receipt of an application (Application), filed on September 14, 2018, by Cheniere Marketing, LLC and Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC (collectively, Corpus Christi). Corpus Christi filed a supplement to the Application on September 24, 2018. The Application requests blanket authorization to export domestically produced liquefied natural gas (LNG) in an amount up to the equivalent of 767 billion cubic feet (Bcf) of natural gas on a cumulative basis over a two-year period commencing on the earlier of the date of first export or December 31, 2018. Corpus Christi seeks to export this LNG from the Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project (Liquefaction Project), which is currently under construction in Corpus Christi, Texas. Corpus Christi requests authorization to export the LNG to any country with the capacity to import LNG via ocean-going carrier and with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy, including both countries with which the United States has entered into a free trade agreement (FTA) requiring national treatment for trade in natural gas (FTA countries) and all other countries (non-FTA countries). Corpus Christi requests this authorization on its own behalf and as agent for other entities who hold title to the LNG at the time of export. Corpus Christi filed the Application under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Additional details can be found in Corpus Christi's Application, posted on the DOE/FE website at: https://www.energy.gov/fe/cheniere-marketing-llc-and-corpus-christi-liquefaction-llc-18-137-lng-3. Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments are invited.

    DATES:

    Protests, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention, as applicable, requests for additional procedures, and written comments are to be filed using procedures detailed in the Public Comment Procedures section no later than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Electronic Filing by Email: [email protected]

    Regular Mail: U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, Washington, DC 20026-4375.

    Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.): U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benjamin Nussdorf or Larine Moore, U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-7893 or (202) 586-9478 Cassandra Bernstein or Ronald (R.J.) Colwell, U.S. Department of Energy (GC-76), Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Electricity and Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9793 or (202) 586-8499
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Corpus Christ requests a short-term blanket authorization to export LNG from its Liquefaction Project located in Corpus Christi, Texas, to both FTA and non-FTA countries. Corpus Christi commits that the short-term volumes to be exported under the requested authorization, when added to any volumes exported under Corpus Christi's existing long-term export authorizations, will not exceed the maximum volumes approved under those DOE/FE authorizations in any annual (i.e., consecutive 12-month) period.

    DOE/FE Evaluation

    This Notice applies only to the portion of the Application requesting authority to export LNG to non-FTA countries pursuant to section 3(a) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(a). DOE/FE will review Corpus Christi's request for a FTA export authorization separately pursuant to section 3(c) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(c).

    In reviewing Corpus Christ's request for a non-FTA export authorization, DOE will consider any issues required by law or policy. DOE will consider domestic need for the natural gas, as well as any other issues determined to be appropriate, including whether the arrangement is consistent with DOE's policy of promoting competition in the marketplace by allowing commercial parties to freely negotiate their own trade arrangements. As part of this analysis, DOE will consider one or more of the following studies examining the cumulative impacts of exporting domestically produced LNG:

    Effect of Increased Levels of Liquefied Natural Gas on U.S. Energy Markets, conducted by the U.S. Energy Information Administration upon DOE's request (2014 EIA LNG Export Study); 1

    1 The 2014 EIA LNG Export Study, published on Oct. 29, 2014, is available at: https://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/fe/.

    The Macroeconomic Impact of Increasing U.S. LNG Exports, conducted jointly by the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy and Oxford Economics, on behalf of DOE (2015 LNG Export Study); 2 and

    2 The 2015 LNG Export Study, dated Oct. 29, 2015, is available at: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/12/f27/20151113_macro_impact_of_lng_exports_0.pdf.

    Macroeconomic Outcomes of Market Determined Levels of U.S. LNG Exports, conducted by NERA Economic Consulting on behalf of DOE (2018 LNG Export Study).3

    3 The 2018 LNG Export Study, dated June 7, 2018, is available at: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/06/f52/Macroeconomic%20LNG%20Export%20Study%202018.pdf. DOE is currently evaluating public comments received on this Study (83 FR 27314).

    Additionally, DOE will consider the following environmental documents:

    Addendum to Environmental Review Documents Concerning Exports of Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 48132 (Aug. 15, 2014); 4 and

    4 The Addendum and related documents are available at: http://energy.gov/fe/draft-addendum-environmental-review-documents-concerning-exports-natural-gas-united-states.

    Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United States, 79 FR 32260 (June 4, 2014).5

    5 The Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Report is available at: http://energy.gov/fe/life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-perspective-exporting-liquefied-natural-gas-united-states.

    Parties that may oppose this Application should address these issues and documents in their comments and/or protests, as well as other issues deemed relevant to the Application.

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., requires DOE to give appropriate consideration to the environmental effects of its proposed decisions. Corpus Christi states that no changes to the Liquefaction Project will be required for the short-term exports requested in the Application. No final decision will be issued in this proceeding until DOE has met its environmental responsibilities.

    Public Comment Procedures

    In response to this Notice, any person may file a protest, comments, or a motion to intervene or notice of intervention, as applicable. Interested parties will be provided 30 days from the date of publication of this Notice in which to submit comments, protests, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention.

    Any person wishing to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. The filing of comments or a protest with respect to the Application will not serve to make the commenter or protestant a party to the proceeding, although protests and comments received from persons who are not parties will be considered in determining the appropriate action to be taken on the Application. All protests, comments, motions to intervene, or notices of intervention must meet the requirements specified by the regulations in 10 CFR part 590.

    Filings may be submitted using one of the following methods: (1) Emailing the filing to [email protected], with FE Docket No. 18-137-LNG in the title line; (2) mailing an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) hand delivering an original and three paper copies of the filing to the Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement at the address listed in ADDRESSES. All filings must include a reference to FE Docket No. 18-137-LNG. PLEASE NOTE: If submitting a filing via email, please include all related documents and attachments (e.g., exhibits) in the original email correspondence. Please do not include any active hyperlinks or password protection in any of the documents or attachments related to the filing. All electronic filings submitted to DOE must follow these guidelines to ensure that all documents are filed in a timely manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted greater in length than 50 pages must also include, at the time of the filing, a digital copy on disk of the entire submission.

    A decisional record on the Application will be developed through responses to this Notice by parties, including the parties' written comments and replies thereto. Additional procedures will be used as necessary to achieve a complete understanding of the facts and issues. If an additional procedure is scheduled, notice will be provided to all parties. If no party requests additional procedures, a final Opinion and Order may be issued based on the official record, including the Application and responses filed by parties pursuant to this Notice, in accordance with 10 CFR 590.316.

    The Application is available for inspection and copying in the Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement docket room, Room 3E-042, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. The docket room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Application and any filed protests, motions to intervene, notices of interventions, and comments will also be available electronically by going to the following DOE/FE Web address: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/gasregulation/index.html.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on September 24, 2018. Amy Sweeney, Director, Division of Natural Gas, Office of Fossil Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21269 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Adjustment of Indemnification Amount for Inflation AGENCY:

    Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of adjusted indemnification amount.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is announcing the adjusted amount of indemnification provided under subsection 170d. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), commonly known as the Price-Anderson Act. Subsection 170t. of the AEA requires an inflation adjustment of the indemnification amount at least once during each 5-year period following July 1, 2003, in accordance with the aggregate percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) . This notice announces $13,703,464,000 as the third inflation-adjusted indemnification amount based on the aggregate percentage change in the CPI during the 5-year period from July 1, 2013 to July 1, 2018.

    DATES:

    This action is effective on October 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Heather Thacker, Attorney Advisor (GC-72), Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-6924.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Price-Anderson Act (PAA), section 170 of the AEA (42 U.S.C. 2210), establishes a system of financial protection for persons who may be liable for a “nuclear incident,” as defined in section 11q. of the AEA (42 U.S.C. 2014q.). The Price-Anderson Act is administered by DOE with respect to the nuclear activities of contractors acting on DOE's behalf. Subsection 170d. provides that the Secretary of Energy shall enter into agreements of indemnification with any person who may conduct activities under a contract with DOE that involve the risk of public liability and that are not subject to the financial protection requirements of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission system. DOE's Price-Anderson Act indemnification contract provisions are codified in the Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR), which sets forth a standard nuclear indemnification clause, the Nuclear Hazard Indemnity Clause at 48 CFR 952.250-70, that is incorporated into all DOE contracts and subcontracts in which the contractor is under risk of public liability for a nuclear incident or precautionary evacuation, as those terms are defined in the PAA.

    Subsection 170t.(2) of the AEA requires that the Secretary adjust for inflation the amount of indemnification provided under an indemnification agreement pursuant to subsection 170d. at least once during each 5-year period following July 1, 2003, in accordance with the aggregate percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI is defined in subsection 170t.(3) to mean the CPI for all urban consumers published by the Secretary of Labor. DOE's initial adjustment increased the indemnification amount to $11.961 billion. 74 FR 52793 (October 14, 2009). The second inflation adjustment, for the period following July 1, 2013, increased the indemnification amount to $12,697,798,000. 78 FR 56868 (September 16, 2013).

    This notice announces DOE's third periodic inflation adjustment for the 5-year period following July 1, 2018 based on the aggregate percentage change in the CPI between July 1, 2013 and July 1, 2018.

    The CPI used to calculate the inflation adjustment for the period following July 1, 2013 was 233.504 (June 2013). The CPI used to calculate the inflation adjustment that is the subject of this Notice is 251.989 (June 2018). This difference represents an increase of approximately 7.92%. Application of this increase to the current DOE indemnification amount results in an inflation-adjusted indemnification amount rounded to the nearest thousand of $13,703,464,000.

    The inflation adjustment under AEA, subsection 170t., applies only to a nuclear incident within the United States. There is no corresponding inflation adjustment for a nuclear incident outside the United States. Accordingly, the indemnification amount for a nuclear incident outside the United States continues to be $500 million.

    This notice of adjusted indemnification amount is a “rule” as defined in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551(4)). However, the APA (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)) does not require an agency to seek comment on a proposed rule prior to publishing a final rule “when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” In this instance, DOE has concluded that solicitation of public comment is unnecessary. Congress has required DOE to adjust the amount of indemnification provided under an agreement of indemnification pursuant to section 170d. to reflect inflation in the initial and each subsequent 5-year period following July 1, 2003. The statute provides no discretion regarding the substance of the adjustment. DOE is required only to perform a ministerial computation to determine the relevant amount. On the same basis, DOE finds good cause, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the requirement for a 30-day delay in the effective date for this rule. As such, this rule is effective October 1, 2018.

    DOE has determined that this notice of adjusted indemnification amount is the type of action that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant impact on the human environment as set forth in DOE's regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Specifically, the rule is covered under the categorical exclusion in paragraph A6 of Appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021, which applies to rulemakings that are strictly procedural. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order 13272, “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,” 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly considered during the rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. The Department has made its procedures and policies available on the Office of General Counsel's website: http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. Because DOE, in this final rule, is performing only a ministerial computation to determine the relevant indemnification amount as required by Congress, a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required, and the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act do not apply to this rulemaking.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on September 24, 2018. Theodore J. Garrish, General Counsel, Acting.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21293 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 September 25, 2018.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC18-161-000.

    Applicants: Voyager Wind II, LLC.

    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Voyager Wind II, LLC.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5151.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER12-162-020; ER11-2044-025; ER13-1266-017 ER15-2211-014.

    Applicants: Bishop Hill Energy II LLC, CalEnergy, LLC, MidAmerican Energy Company, MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the Berkshire Hathaway Central Parties.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5168.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2074-003.

    Applicants: Burney Forest Products, A Joint Venture.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change of Status of Burney Forest Products, A Joint Venture.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5174.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2075-002.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2018-09-24_SA 3135 ELL-ELL GIA (J484) 2nd Sub GIA to be effective 7/13/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5123.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2076-002.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2018-09-24_SA 3136 Entergy Texas, Inc-Entergy Texas, Inc GIA (J472) 2nd Sub to be effective 7/13/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5133.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2219-002.

    Applicants: System Energy Resources, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: SERI Settlement Compliance Filing to be effective 10/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5135.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2468-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Rayburn Revised PSA to be effective 8/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5118.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2469-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to ISA SA No. 3333; Queue No. W3-003 to be effective 6/24/2014.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5127.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2470-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of ISA SA No. 4061; Queue No. X1-027A_AT12 to be effective 9/24/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5143.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2471-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 2923; Queue No. W3-063 to be effective 10/15/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5000.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2472-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 4597, Queue No. AB2-048 to be effective 10/4/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5001.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2473-000.

    Applicants: GridLiance West LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: GLW-WAPA IA to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5003.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    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 25, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21310 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER18-2466-000] Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization; Federal Way Powerhouse LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Federal Way Powerhouse LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is October 15, 2018.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21307 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER18-2465-000] Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization; Potter Road Powerhouse LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Potter Road Powerhouse LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is October 15, 2018.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21312 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 3442-028] Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing Process; City of Nashua

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.

    b. Project No.: 3442-028.

    c. Date Filed: July 26, 2018.

    d. Submitted By: City of Nashua.

    e. Name of Project: Mine Falls Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: On the Nashua River, in Hillsborough County, New Hampshire. No federal lands are occupied by the project works or located within the project boundary.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.

    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Sarah Marchant, Director of Community Development Division, City of Nashua, 229 Main Street, P.O. Box 2019, Nashua, NH 03060; (603) 589-3075; email—[email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Khatoon Melick at (202) 502-8433; or email at [email protected]

    j. City of Nashua filed its request to use the Traditional Licensing Process on July 26, 2018. City of Nashua provided public notice of its request on July 26, 2018. In a letter dated September 24, 2018, the Director of the Division of Hydropower Licensing approved City of Nashua's request to use the Traditional Licensing Process.

    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating consultation with the New Hampshire State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.

    l. City of Nashua filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.

    m. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website (http://www.ferc.gov), using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in paragraph h.

    n. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an application for a new license for Project No. 3442. Pursuant to 18 CFR 16.8, 16.9, and 16.10 each application for a new license and any competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All applications for license for this project must be filed by July 31, 2021.

    o. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: September 24, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21279 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL18-204-000] Notice of Amended Complaint; Louisiana Public Service Commission v. System Energy Resources, Inc.; Entergy Services, Inc.

    Take notice that on September 24, 2018, pursuant to Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 and sections 206, 306, and 309 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e, 825e, and 825h, the Louisiana Public Service Commission (Complainant) filed an amended complaint (Amended Complaint) against System Energy Resources, Inc. and Entergy Services, Inc., (collectively, Respondents). The Amended Complaint provides additional facts alleging that System Energy Resources, Inc. does not qualify under the Commission's capital structure test for acceptance of its actual capital structure, as more fully explained in the Complaint.

    The Complainant certifies that copies of the Complaint were served on contacts for the Respondents.

    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 Respondents' answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondents' 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: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on October 15, 2018.

    DATED: September 25, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21278 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2520-076] Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment; Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for license for the Mattaceunk Hydroelectric Project, located on the Penobscot River in Aroostook and Penobscot Counties, Maine, and has prepared a Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) for the project. The project does not occupy federal land.

    The FEA contains Commission staff's analysis of the potential environmental effects of the project, and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

    A copy of the FEA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room, or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field, to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY).

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    For further information, contact Adam Peer at (202) 502-8449.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21277 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL18-205-000] Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order; Sunrun, Inc.

    Take notice that on September 24, 2018, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a), Sunrun, Inc. (Sunrun or Petitioner) filed a petition for declaratory order (petition) requesting waiver of qualifying facility (QF) certification filing requirements for residential solar photovoltaic systems, irrespective of whether such systems aggregate to over one megawatt (1 MW) within one mile, all as more fully explained in the petition.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding 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) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also 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: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on October 24, 2018.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21311 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EF18-5-000] Notice of Filing; Western Area Power Administration

    Take notice that on September 19, 2018, Western Area Power Administration submitted tariff filing per: DSW_Intertie_WAPA181-20180918 to be effective 10/11/2018.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on October 19, 2018.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21308 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9984-76—Region 3] Notice of Tentative Approval and Opportunity for Public Comment and Public Hearing for Public Water System Supervision Program Revision for Maryland AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of approval and solicitation of requests for public hearing.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the State of Maryland is revising its approved Public Water System Supervision Program. Maryland has adopted drinking water regulations for the Revised Total Coliform Rule. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that Maryland's Revised Total Coliform Rule meets all minimum federal requirements, and that it is no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulation. Therefore, EPA has tentatively decided to approve the State program revisions.

    DATES:

    Comments or a public hearing must be submitted by October 31, 2018. This determination shall become final and effective on October 31, 2018, if no timely and appropriate request for a hearing is received, and the Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, and if no comments are received which cause EPA to modify its tentative approval.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments or a request for a public hearing must be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029. All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the following offices:

    • Drinking Water Branch, Water Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.

    • Water Supply Program, Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kelly Moran, Drinking Water Branch (3WP21) at the Philadelphia address given above, via email at [email protected], or telephone (215) 814-2331 or fax (215) 814-2302.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    All interested parties are invited to submit written comments on this determination and may request a hearing. All comments will be considered, and if necessary EPA will issue a response. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing will be denied by the Regional Administrator. If a substantial request for a public hearing is made by October 31, 2018, a public hearing will be held. A request for public hearing shall include the following: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; (2) a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's determination and of information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; and (3) the signature of the individual making the request; or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.

    Dated: September 18, 2018. Cosmo Servidio, Regional Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21330 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0575; FRL-9984-82-OAR] Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application From Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is requesting comment on an application from Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (“Volkswagen”) for off-cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. “Off-cycle” emission reductions can be achieved by employing technologies that result in real-world benefits, but where that benefit is not adequately captured on the test procedures used by manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with emission standards. EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas program acknowledges these benefits by giving automobile manufacturers several options for generating “off-cycle” CO2 credits. Under the regulations, a manufacturer may apply for CO2 credits for off-cycle technologies that result in off-cycle benefits. In these cases, a manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed methodology for determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Volkswagen has submitted an application that describes methodologies for determining off-cycle credits from technologies described in their application. Pursuant to applicable regulations, EPA is making the Volkswagen's off-cycle credit calculation methodologies available for public comment.

    DATES:

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

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ- OAR-2018-0575, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Roberts French, Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone: (734) 214-4380. Fax: (734) 214-4869. Email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies that may be used beginning in model year 2014.1 This pathway allows manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as “5-cycle” testing because the methodology uses five different testing procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2 credits.2 The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-cycle CO2 credits.3 This option is only available if the benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the 5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option for model years prior to 2014 to demonstrate off-cycle CO2 reductions for technologies that are on the predetermined list, or to demonstrate reductions that exceed those available via use of the predetermined list.

    1 See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).

    2 See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).

    3 See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).

    Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the following criteria:

    • Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or other approved analytical or engineering methods;

    • Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;

    • Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;

    • Result in data on a model type basis unless the manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and adequate.

    Further, the regulations specify the following requirements regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:

    • A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-cycle technology, and carry out any necessary testing and analysis required to support that methodology.

    • A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use durability of the technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.

    • The application must contain a detailed description of the off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2 emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.

    • The application must contain a list of the vehicle model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.

    • The application must contain a detailed description of the test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the selection of those vehicles for testing.

    • The application must contain all testing and/or simulation data required under the regulations, plus any other data the manufacturer has considered in the analysis.

    Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.4 EPA will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve or deny the request for off-cycle credits.

    4 See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).

    II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications

    Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, Volkswagen Group of America (“Volkswagen”) is applying for credits for model years prior to 2014, and thus prior to when the list of default credits became available. Volkswagen has applied for off-cycle credits using the alternative demonstration methodology pathway for the following technologies: High efficiency exterior lighting, active aerodynamics, active transmission warmup, active engine warmup, and several thermal control technologies. EPA has already approved credits for these technologies for several other manufacturers, and Volkswagen's request is consistent with previously approved methodologies and credits. The application covers 2010-2011 model year vehicles. These technologies are described in the predetermined list of credits available in the 2014 and later model years. The methodologies described by Volkswagen are consistent with those used by EPA to establish the predetermined list of credits in the regulations, and would result in the same credit values as described in the regulations. The magnitude of these credits is determined by specification or calculations in the regulations based on vehicle-specific measurements (e.g., the area of glass or the lighting locations using the specified technologies), but would be no higher than the following established regulatory values:

    Technology Off-cycle
  • credit—cars
  • (grams/mile)
  • Off-cycle
  • credit—trucks
  • (grams/mile)
  • High efficiency lighting 1.0 1.0 Active seat ventilation 1.0 1.3 Active aerodynamics Based on measured reduction in the coefficient of drag. Active transmission warm-up 1.5 3.2 Active engine warm-up 1.5 3.2 Solar reflective glass/glazing 2.9 3.9 Solar reflective paint 0.4 0.5
    III. EPA Decision Process

    EPA has reviewed the application for completeness and is now making the application available for public review and comment as required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit application submitted by the manufacturer (with confidential business information redacted) have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section above) and on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards.

    EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications for off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final decision regarding the credit requests. EPA will make its decision available to the public by placing a decision document (or multiple decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's website at the same manufacturer-specific pages shown above. While the broad methodologies used by these manufacturers could potentially be used for other vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle specific data needed to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions would likely be different. In such cases, a new application would be required, including an opportunity for public comment.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. Byron J. Bunker, Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21333 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [[EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0298; FRL-9984-74-OEI] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (EPA ICR No. 2253.04, OMB Control No. 2060-0668) 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 October 31, 2018. 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 30, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0298 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:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; 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. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b). 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 NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers Area Sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJJJJ) affects new and existing industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers that are located at or part of area sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP). The standard contains six subcategories: existing boilers designed to burn biomass, coal, or liquid fuels and new boilers designed to burn biomass, coal, or liquid fuels. The information collection activities include initial and annual stack tests, fuel analyses, operating parameter monitoring, biennial tune-ups, one-time energy audits, one-time and periodic reports, and maintenance of records. Varying levels of requirements apply to each subcategory. The information collection activities will enable EPA to determine initial and continuous compliance with emission standards for regulated pollutants, and ensure that facilities conduct proper planning, operation, and unit maintenance. The provisions of Section 114(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S. C Section 7414(a)(1) provide the broad authority for the reporting of compliance monitoring and enforcement information, along with Subpart Q-Reports in 40 CFR 51: Sections 51.324(a) and (b), and 51.327.

    Respondents: Owners and operators of industrial, commercial, or institutional boilers.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR 63, Subpart JJJJJJ).

    Estimated number of respondents: 96,985 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially, biennially, semiannually and annually.

    Annual estimated burden: 1,656,984 hours.

    Annual estimated cost: $280.4 million, includes $125.5 million annualized capital or operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.

    Changes in Estimates: There is a projected increase in burden due to continued growth rates for certain subcategories of equipment subject to the standard.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21261 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365; FRL-9984-73-ORD] Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Air and Energy Subcommittee Meeting—November 2018 AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (ORD), gives notice of a meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Air and Energy Subcommittee.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, November 13, 2018, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and will continue on Wednesday, November 14, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. All times noted are Eastern Time. The meeting may adjourn early if all business is finished. Attendees should register by November 6, 2018. Requests for the draft agenda or for making oral presentations at the meeting will be accepted up to one business day before the meeting.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the EPA's RTP Main Campus Facility, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365, by one of the following methods:

    www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: Send comments by electronic mail (email) to: [email protected], Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365.

    Fax: Fax comments to: (202) 566-0224, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365.

    Mail: Send comments by mail to: Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Air and Energy Subcommittee Docket, Mail Code: 2822T, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC, 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365.

    Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Room 3334, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365. Note: This is not a mailing address. Deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2015-0365. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Air and Energy Subcommittee Docket, EPA/DC, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the ORD Docket is (202) 566-1752.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The Designated Federal Officer via mail at: Tim Benner, Mail Code 8104R, Office of Science Policy, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; via phone/voice mail at: (202) 564-6769; via fax at: (202) 565-2911; or via email at: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    General information: The meeting is open to the public. Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft agenda, attending the meeting, or making a presentation at the meeting may contact Tim Benner, the Designated Federal Officer, via any of the contact methods listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. In general, each individual making an oral presentation will be limited to a total of three minutes. For security purposes, all attendees must provide their names to the Designated Federal Officer or register online at https://epa-bosc-airenergy-subcommittee.eventbrite.com by November 6, 2018, and must go through a metal detector, sign in with the security desk, and show REAL ID Act-compliant government-issued photo identification to enter the building. Attendees are encouraged to arrive at least 15 minutes prior to the start of the meeting to allow sufficient time for security screening. Proposed agenda items for the meeting include, but are not limited to, the following: Overview of materials provided to the subcommittee; Update on ORD's Air and Energy Research Program and the draft Strategic Research Action Plan; Review of charge questions; and Subcommittee discussion.

    Information on services for individuals with disabilities: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Tim Benner at (202) 564-6769 or [email protected] To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Tim Benner, preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting, to give the EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: September 21, 2018. Fred S. Hauchman, Director, Office of Science Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21332 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9984-60-ORD] Human Studies Review Board; Notification of Public Meetings AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of the Science Advisor announces two separate public meetings of the Human Studies Review Board (HSRB) to advise the Agency on the ethical and scientific review of research involving human subjects.

    DATES:

    A virtual public meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 23, 2018, from 1:00 p.m. to approximately 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time. A separate, subsequent teleconference meeting is planned for Thursday, December 13th, 2018, from 2 p.m. to approximately 3:30 p.m. Eastern Time for the HSRB to finalize its Report of the October 23, 2018 meeting and review other possible topics.

    ADDRESSES:

    All of these meetings will be conducted entirely by telephone and on the internet using Adobe Connect. For detailed access information visit the HSRB website: http://www2.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Any member of the public who wishes to receive further information should contact the HSRB Designated Federal Official (DFO), Thomas O'Farrell on telephone number (202) 564-8451; fax number: (202) 564-2070; email address: [email protected]; or mailing address: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the Science Advisor, Mail code 8105R, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Meeting access. These meetings will be open to the public. The full Agenda and meeting materials will be available at the HSRB website: http://www2.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board . For questions on document availability, or if you do not have access to the internet, consult with the DFO, Thomas O'Farrell, listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Special accommodations. For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, or to request accommodation of a disability, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    How may I participate in this meeting?

    The HSRB encourages the public's input. You may participate in these meetings by following the instructions in this section.

    1. Oral comments. To pre-register to make oral comments, please contact the DFO, Thomas O'Farrell, listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Requests to present oral comments during the meeting will be accepted up to Noon Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 16, 2018, for the October 23, 2018 meeting and up to Noon Eastern Time on Thursday, December 6, 2018 for the December 13, 2018 meeting. To the extent that time permits, interested persons who have not pre-registered may be permitted by the HSRB Chair to present oral comments during either meeting at the designated time on the agenda. Oral comments before the HSRB are generally limited to five minutes per individual or organization. If additional time is available, further public comments may be possible.

    2. Written comments. Submit your written comments prior to the meetings. For the Board to have the best opportunity to review and consider your comments as it deliberates, you should submit your comments via email or Fax by Noon Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 16, 2018, for the October 23, 2018 meeting and by Noon Eastern Time on Thursday, December 6, 2018 for the December 13, 2018 meeting. If you submit comments after these dates, those comments will be provided to the HSRB members, but you should recognize that the HSRB members may not have adequate time to consider your comments prior to their discussion. You should submit your comments to the DFO, Thomas O'Farrell listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. There is no limit on the length of written comments for consideration by the HSRB.

    Background

    The HSRB is a Federal advisory committee operating in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act 5 U.S.C. App. 2 section 9. The HSRB provides advice, information, and recommendations on issues related to scientific and ethical aspects of third-party human subjects research that are submitted to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) to be used for regulatory purposes.

    Topic for discussion. On October 23, 2018, the Human Studies Review Board will consider a protocol titled “A Study for Measurement of Potential Dermal and Inhalation Exposure During Antimicrobial Applications Involving Immersion, Dip, and Soak” submitted by the Antimicrobial Exposure Assessment Task Force.

    The Agenda and meeting materials for this topic will be available in advance of the meeting at http://www2.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board.

    On December 13, 2018, the HSRB will review and finalize their draft Final Report from the October 23, 2018 meeting, in addition to other topics that may come before the Board. The HSRB may also discuss planning for future HSRB meetings. The agenda and the draft report will be available prior to the meeting at http://www2.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board.

    Meeting minutes and final reports. Minutes of these meetings, summarizing the matters discussed and recommendations made by the HSRB, will be released within 90 calendar days of the meeting. These minutes will be available at http://www2.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board. In addition, information regarding the HSRB's Final Report, will be found at http://www2.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board or from Thomas O'Farrell listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: September 19, 2018. Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, EPA Science Advisor.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21331 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-MA-2018-09; Docket No. 2018-0002, Sequence No. 22] Federal Travel Regulation: Calculating Actual Expense Reimbursement AGENCY:

    Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) Bulletin 18-09, calculating actual expense reimbursement.

    SUMMARY:

    The FTR allows agencies to reimburse employees up to 300 percent of the applicable maximum per diem rate under various circumstances including, but not limited to, when lodging and/or meals are not available within the prescribed allowances for a given temporary duty location. The General Services Administration is notifying agencies that the FTR permits two methods of calculating actual expense reimbursement. The information outlined in FTR Bulletin 18-09 demonstrates how agencies may calculate actual expense reimbursement under each method while staying within the bounds of the current 300 percent actual expense ceiling. This Bulletin also provides clarity and promotes consistency across the Government. This Bulletin is located at www.gsa.gov/ftr under the “FTR & Related Files” tab.

    DATES:

    Applicable Date: October 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For clarification of content, please contact Mr. Cy Greenidge, Program Analyst, Office of Government-wide Policy, Office of Asset and Transportation Management, at 202-219-2349, or by email at [email protected] Please cite Notice of FTR Bulletin 18-09.

    Dated: August 24, 2018. Jessica Salmoiraghi, Associate Administrator, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21156 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
    OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Proposed Collection; Comment Request for a Modified OGE Form 450 Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report AGENCY:

    Office of Government Ethics (OGE).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for agency and public comments.

    SUMMARY:

    After publication of this second round notice, the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) plans to submit a modified OGE Form 450 Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments by the public and the agencies on this proposed modification are invited and must be received by October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this paperwork notice to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for OGE, via fax at 202-395-6974 or email at [email protected] (Include reference to “OGE Form 450 paperwork comment” in the subject line of the message.)

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sara Nekou at the U.S. Office of Government Ethics; telephone: 202-482-9229; TTY: 800-877-8339; FAX: 202-482-9237; Email: [email protected] An electronic copy of the OGE Form 450 is available in the Forms Library section of OGE's website at http://www.oge.gov. A paper copy may also be obtained, without charge, by contacting Ms. Nekou.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report.

    Agency Form Number: OGE Form 450.

    OMB Control Number: 3209-0006.

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

    Type of Review Request: Regular.

    Respondents: Prospective Government employees, including special Government employees, whose positions are designated for confidential disclosure filing and whose agencies require that they file new entrant confidential disclosure reports prior to assuming Government responsibilities.

    Estimated Annual Number of Respondents: 24,640.

    Estimated Time per Response: 3 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 73,920 hours.

    Abstract: The OGE Form 450 collects information from covered department and agency employees as required under OGE's executive branch wide regulatory provisions in subpart I of 5 CFR part 2634. The basis for the OGE reporting regulation is section 201(d) of Executive Order 12674 of April 12, 1989 (as modified by Executive Order 12731 of October 17, 1990) and section 107(a) of the Ethics in Government Act, 5 U.S.C. app. sec. 107(a). OGE proposes several modifications to the form.

    On October 5, 2016, OGE published a proposed rule for amending 5 CFR part 2634. See 81 FR 69204 (October 5, 2016). The final rule was published on July 18, 2018, and is effective on January 1, 2019. See 83 FR 33980 (July 18, 2018). The proposed modifications to the OGE Form 450 revise the instructions to reflect the changes to the financial disclosure regulation. Specifically, OGE proposes to change the reporting periods for each part completed by new entrants, change the income disclosure threshold to $1,000 of received income, eliminate the disclosure of diversified funds held within an employee benefit plan, clarify that the disclosure requirement for agreements and arrangements includes those with a current employer, eliminate the disclosure of continued participation in a defined contribution plan to which an employer is no longer making contributions, and combine gifts and travel reimbursement into a single category for purposes of applying the disclosure thresholds.

    OGE is also proposing to update the Privacy Act statement in accordance with changes to the applicable system of records, update the examples provided on the last page of the form, and make other minor technical changes.

    OGE published a first round notice of its intent to request paperwork clearance for a modified OGE Form 450 Executive Branch Confidential Financial Disclosure Report. See 83 FR 32123 (July 11, 2018). OGE received one response to that notice from a private citizen. The private citizen's response was unrelated to the notice and did not address the information collection.

    Request for Comments: Agency and public comment is again invited specifically on the need for and practical utility of this information collection, the accuracy of OGE's burden estimate, the enhancement of quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected, and the minimization of burden (including the use of information technology). Comments received in response to this notice may be included with the OGE request for approval of the modified information collection. The comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Approved: September 26, 2018. Diana Veilleux, Chief, Legal, External Affairs and Performance Branch, Office of Government Ethics.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21275 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6345-02-P
    OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Proposed Collection; Comment Request for a Modified OGE Form 278e Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report AGENCY:

    Office of Government Ethics (OGE).

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for agency and public comments.

    SUMMARY:

    After publication of this second round notice, the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) intends to submit a modified OGE Form 278e Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments by the public and the agencies on this proposed modification are invited and must be received by October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this paperwork notice to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for OGE, via fax at 202-395-6974 or email at [email protected]. (Include reference to “OGE Form 278e paperwork comment” in the subject line of the message).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sara Nekou at the U.S. Office of Government Ethics; telephone: 202-482-9229; TTY: 800-877-8339; FAX: 202-482-9237; Email: [email protected] An electronic copy of the OGE Form 278e is available in the Forms Library section of OGE's website at http://www.oge.gov. A paper copy may also be obtained, without charge, by contacting Ms. Nekou.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report.

    Form Number: OGE Form 278e.

    OMB Control Number: 3209-0001.

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

    Type of Review Request: Regular.

    Respondents: Private citizen Presidential nominees to executive branch positions subject to Senate confirmation; other private citizens who are potential (incoming) Federal employees whose positions are designated for public disclosure filing; those who file termination reports from such positions after their Government service ends; and Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates.

    Estimated Annual Number of Respondents: 4,821.

    Estimated Time per Response: 10 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 48,210 hours.

    Abstract: The OGE Form 278 collects information from certain officers and high-level employees in the executive branch for conflicts of interest review and public disclosure.

    The form is also completed by individuals who are nominated by the President for high-level executive branch positions requiring Senate confirmation and individuals entering into and departing from other public reporting positions in the executive branch. The financial information collected relates to: Assets and income; transactions; gifts, reimbursements and travel expenses; liabilities; agreements or arrangements; outside positions; and compensation over $5,000 paid by a source—all subject to various reporting thresholds and exclusions. The information is collected in accordance with section 102 of the Ethics in Government Act, 5 U.S.C. app. sec. 102, as amended by the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-105) (STOCK Act) and OGE's implementing financial disclosure regulations at 5 CFR part 2634.

    In 2013, OGE sought and received approval for the OGE Form 278e, an electronic version of the Form 278, implemented pursuant to the e-filing system mandated under section 11(b) of the STOCK Act. The OGE Form 278e collects the same information as the OGE Form 278. In 2014, OGE sought and received approval to incorporate the OGE Form 278e into its new Integrity e-filing application. Integrity has been in use since January 1, 2015, and OGE now requires filers to use a version of the OGE Form 278e rather than the old OGE Form 278. The version of the Form 278e that is produced by Integrity is a streamlined output report format that presents only the filer's inputs in given categories and does not report other categories not selected by the filer.

    On October 5, 2016, OGE published a proposed rule for amending 5 CFR part 2634. See 81 FR 69204 (October 5, 2016). The final rule was published on July 18, 2018, and is effective on January 1, 2019. See 83 FR 33980 (July 18, 2018). The proposed modifications to the OGE Form 278e revise the instructions to reflect the changes to the financial disclosure regulation. Specifically, OGE proposes to: Revise the reporting period for termination reports to include the entire preceding calendar year if a required annual report has not been filed; revise the income disclosure requirement to include only received income; revise the “widely diversified” criterion for purposes of determining whether a fund qualifies as an “excepted investment fund;” add a new feature (checkbox) for purposes of managing early termination report filing on the Integrity version of the Form 278e; clarify the Definition section of Part 2; clarify when a source of compensation need not be disclosed and the method for disclosing the existence of such sources; and eliminate the disclosure of transactions that occurred before the reporting individual became subject to the public financial disclosure requirements.

    OGE is also proposing to update the Privacy Act statement in accordance with changes to the applicable system of records and to make certain minor formatting changes and corrections to the instructions and one of the data entry fields.

    OGE published a first round notice of its intent to request paperwork clearance for a modified OGE Form 278e Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report. See 83 FR 32122 (July 11, 2018). OGE received three responses to that notice. The first response was unrelated to the notice and did not address the information collection.

    The second comment suggested eliminating the requirement to report diversified mutual funds. The financial disclosure requirements are dictated by the Ethics in Government Act (EIGA), 5 U.S.C. app. sec. 102, as amended. The commenter's suggested change could not be made without revisions to the EIGA. Accordingly, OGE declines to adopt this suggestion as a modification of the OGE Form 278e.

    The third comment was from an individual identifying himself as a former nominee to a Presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed position. The commenter made several suggestions about how the government should address potential conflicts of interest identified through the financial disclosure review and certification process, as well as ways that the government could make that process more efficient. These matters are beyond the scope of the information collection and cannot be addressed through the modification of the OGE Form 278e. The commenter also made suggestions regarding the detail with which filers are required to report certain assets, suggesting that the form requires excessive reporting of “low value” data. As discussed above, the financial disclosure requirements are dictated by the EIGA. Therefore, OGE cannot make substantive changes to the financial disclosure reporting requirements through a modification of the OGE Form 278e.

    Finally, the third commenter also stated that the government's estimate of the reporting burden vastly understates the actual burden for candidates with extensive or complicated financial holdings. In addressing this issue, the commenter noted that completing the form required “at least 40 hours of work” by him and his family. He also noted that the government's cumulative response time during the review and certification process was 114 days. As an initial matter, OGE notes that its estimate of the average reporting burden for the 278e is currently ten hours, not three as stated by the commenter. Moreover, the estimated burden properly does not include the time spent by the government in reviewing and responding to the filers' completed forms. OGE's estimated time per response is an average based on the estimated burden on all types of filers—those with complicated financial holdings and those with simpler financial holdings. While OGE recognizes that the burden for a filer with extensive or complicated financial holdings may be significantly more than ten hours, the estimated burden for the majority of filers is fewer than five hours. Accordingly, OGE declines to revise its estimated burden at this time.

    Request for Comments: Agency and public comment is again invited specifically on the need for and practical utility of this information collection, the accuracy of OGE's burden estimate, the enhancement of quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected, and the minimization of burden (including the use of information technology). Comments received in response to this notice may be included with the OGE request for approval of the modified information collection. The comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Approved: September 26, 2018. Diana Veilleux, Chief, Legal, External Affairs and Performance Branch, Office of Government Ethics.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21270 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6345-03-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Supplemental Evidence and Data Request on Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic Review AGENCY:

    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Request for Supplemental Evidence and Data Submissions

    SUMMARY:

    The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is seeking scientific information submissions from the public. Scientific information is being solicited to inform our review of Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic Review, which is currently being conducted by the AHRQ's Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPC) Program. Access to published and unpublished pertinent scientific information will improve the quality of this review.

    DATES:

    Submission Deadline on or before October 31, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Email submissions: [email protected]

    Print submissions:

    Mailing Address: Center for Evidence and Practice Improvement, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, ATTN: EPC SEADs Coordinator, 5600 Fishers Lane, Mail Stop 06E53A, Rockville, MD 20857.

    Shipping Address (FedEx, UPS, etc.): Center for Evidence and Practice Improvement, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, ATTN: EPC SEADs Coordinator, 5600 Fishers Lane, Mail Stop 06E77D, Rockville, MD 20857.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jenae Benns, Telephone: 301-427-1496 or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has commissioned the Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPC) Program to complete a review of the evidence for Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic Review. AHRQ is conducting this systematic review pursuant to Section 902(a) of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 299a(a).

    The EPC Program is dedicated to identifying as many studies as possible that are relevant to the questions for each of its reviews. In order to do so, we are supplementing the usual manual and electronic database searches of the literature by requesting information from the public (e.g., details of studies conducted). We are looking for studies that report on Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic Review, including those that describe adverse events. The entire research protocol, including the key questions, is also available online at: https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/antipsychotics/research-protocol.

    This is to notify the public that the EPC Program would find the following information on Antipsychotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Delirium: A Systematic Review helpful:

    A list of completed studies that your organization has sponsored for this indication. In the list, please indicate whether results are available on ClinicalTrials.gov along with the ClinicalTrials.gov trial number.

    For completed studies that do not have results on ClinicalTrials.gov, please provide a summary, including the following elements: study number, study period, design, methodology, indication and diagnosis, proper use instructions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, primary and secondary outcomes, baseline characteristics, number of patients screened/eligible/enrolled/lost to follow-up/withdrawn/analyzed, effectiveness/efficacy, and safety results.

    A list of ongoing studies that your organization has sponsored for this indication. In the list, please provide the ClinicalTrials.gov trial number or, if the trial is not registered, the protocol for the study including a study number, the study period, design, methodology, indication and diagnosis, proper use instructions, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and primary and secondary outcomes.

    Description of whether the above studies constitute ALL Phase II and above clinical trials sponsored by your organization for this indication and an index outlining the relevant information in each submitted file.

    Your contribution will be very beneficial to the EPC Program. Materials submitted must be publicly available or able to be made public. Materials that are considered confidential; marketing materials; study types not included in the review; or information on indications not included in the review cannot be used by the EPC Program. This is a voluntary request for information, and all costs for complying with this request must be borne by the submitter.

    The draft of this review will be posted on AHRQ's EPC Program website and available for public comment for a period of 4 weeks. If you would like to be notified when the draft is posted, please sign up for the email list at: https://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/email-updates.

    The systematic review will answer the following questions. This information is provided as background. AHRQ is not requesting that the public provide answers to these questions.

    The Key Questions

    I. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium?

    A. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium in persons aged 65 years or older?

    B. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium in persons with dementia?

    C. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium in patients in an intensive care unit?

    D. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium in patients in a post-acute care facility?

    E. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium in patients in palliative or hospice care?

    F. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to prevent delirium in patients in post-operative care?

    II. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium?

    A. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium in persons aged 65 years or older?

    B. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium in persons with dementia?

    C. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium in patients in an intensive care unit?

    D. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium in patients in a post-acute care facility?

    E. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium in patients in palliative or hospice care?

    F. What are the benefits and harms for antipsychotics compared to each other, placebo, or non-drug approaches to treat delirium in patients in post-operative care?

    PICOTS (Populations, Interventions, Comparators, Outcomes, Timing, Settings)

    Population(s):

    I. KQ 1: Hospitalized adults, adults in post-acute care, adults in palliative or hospice care, or adults in post-operative care II. KQ 2: Hospitalized adults, adults in post-acute care, adults in palliative or hospice care, or adults in post-operative care who have been diagnosed with delirium using a validated instrument

    Interventions:

    I. Antipsychotic drugs, including A. Any first-generation agent (chlorpromazine, droperidol, fluphenazine, haloperidol, loxapine, molindone, perphenazine, pimozide, prochlorperazine, thiothixene, thioridazine, trifluoperazine) B. Any second-generation agent (aripiprazole, asenapine, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, clozapine, iloperidone, lurasidone, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone)

    II. We will only include studies where the effects of the antipsychotic drugs can be isolated.

    Comparators

    I. KQ 1: Non-drug approaches to preventing delirium, placebo, active control, usual care II. KQ 2: Non-drug approaches to treating delirium, placebo, active control, usual care

    Outcomes:

    I. Intermediate outcomes A. Short-term delirium symptoms B. Delirium severity C. Delirium-free, coma-free days alive D. Duration of delirium E. Patient distress F. Use of rescue therapy G. Use of physical restraint II. Final health or patient-centered outcomes A. Mortality B. Quality of life C. Cognitive and emotional functioning (includes functioning related to memory, communication, concentration, and understanding instructions) D. Long-term cognitive impairment (Change in cognition after delirium that has a long-term duration or is possibly permanent) E. Institutionalization (living in an assisted living facility or nursing home) F. Caregiver burden/strain G. Falls H. Memory of patient distress III. Resource utilization A. Re-admissions to hospital or ICU B. Length of stay in ICU C. Length of stay in hospital D. Length of stay in skilled nursing facility E. Sitter use F. Hospice enrollment IV. Adverse effects of intervention(s) A. Sedation B. Weight gain C. Changes in appetite D. Cardiac effects E. Neurologic effects F. Paradoxical reactions G. Hypersensitivity reactions H. Inappropriate continuation of antipsychotic medication I. Swallowing difficulties J. Aspiration pneumonia III. Timing A. Any duration of follow-up IV. Settings A. Hospital setting B. Post-acute care setting C. Palliative care setting Francis D. Chesley, Jr., Deputy Director.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21242 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-90-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [Docket No. CDC-2018-0093; NIOSH-320] Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus Compressed Breathing Gas Containers; Request for Information AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Request for information.

    SUMMARY:

    In October 2017, the Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a special permit to the Digital Wave Corporation, allowing the company to extend the service life of certain carbon-fiber reinforced aluminum-lined cylinders. Some stakeholders, including respirator and cylinder manufacturers, have expressed concern to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about the safety of cylinders extended beyond the manufacturers' stated service life. NIOSH is seeking information about the potential effect of the special permit, as it may relate to the safety of self-contained breathing apparatus respirators approved by NIOSH for use in U.S. workplaces.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by November 30, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Mail: NIOSH Docket Office, Robert A. Taft Laboratories, MS-C34, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45226.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS) and docket number (CDC-2018-0093; NIOSH-320) for this action. All relevant comments, including any personal information provided, will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeffrey Peterson, NIOSH National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236; 1-888-654-2294 (this is a toll-free number); [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Transportation approves certain carbon-fiber reinforced aluminum-lined cylinders (hereinafter “DOT-CFFC”), which are commonly used to provide breathing air in the self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) respirators typically carried by firefighters and other industrial workers to protect them in atmospheres immediately dangerous to life and health. Currently, all DOT-CFFC approved cylinders that are a sub-component of NIOSH-approved SCBA have a service life of 15 years; DOT regulations require “requalification” every 5 years to ensure that each cylinder can hold its rated pressure for the duration of the 15-year service life.

    In October 2017, the DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration issued special permit, DOT-SP 16320 (Third Revision), to Digital Wave Corporation of Centennial, CO.1 Digital Wave Corporation manufactures ultrasonic examination cylinder testing equipment, modal acoustic emission testing equipment, and provides associated inspection services, including the requalification of carbon-fiber reinforced aluminum-lined cylinders. Pursuant to DOT-SP 16320, modal acoustic emission requalification testing allows DOT-CFFC cylinders to be authorized for use for 5 years after the original 15-year service life; cylinders could be requalified three times beyond the original 15-year service life, for a total service life of 30 years.

    1 DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, DOT-SP 16320, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/SP16320.pdf/offerserver/SP16320.

    Modal acoustic emission testing is an advanced, non-destructive evaluation of carbon-fiber reinforced aluminum-lined cylinders that detects structural damage which can compromise burst pressure strength in a composite overwrapped pressure vessel. The modal acoustic emission waveforms can be used to identify damage such as fiber breakage and delamination. Some stakeholders have expressed concerns regarding potential cylinder failure when the service life is extended past the service life identified on the original special permit. Since DOT-SP 16320 was issued, more than 3,500 carbon-fiber reinforced aluminum-lined cylinders have been requalified beyond their original 15-year service life using the modal acoustic emission method.

    NIOSH has published guidance advising SCBA users who may be concerned about using modal acoustic emission-requalified cylinders as part of their NIOSH-approved SCBA configuration to review the user instructions, supplemental informational inserts, safety precautions, and SCBA warranty information provided by the NIOSH approval holder.2 The guidance further encourages approval holders to provide respiratory protection program administrators and SCBA users with current recommendations regarding the DOT-SP 16320 requalification method with regard to service life limitations or other relevant matters.

    2https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/resources/pressrel/letters/respprotect/CA-2018-1006.html.

    NIOSH seeks to better understand the use of modal acoustic emission testing to requalify DOT-CFFC cylinders beyond the original 15-year service life, as permitted by DOT-SP 16320, as well as the safety and health concerns of users in industrial settings, including the fire service and first responders. Accordingly, NIOSH is seeking data and information from all interested stakeholders in response to the following questions:

    1. Are users of DOT-CFFC cylinders that have been requalified for service life beyond 15 years, pursuant to the provisions of DOT-SP 16320, exposed to any elevated safety or health risk as a result of either the modal acoustic emission requalification testing itself or the service life extension? If so, identify the concern or concerns and provide substantive data, studies, references, and information to further characterize and/or quantify the concern.

    2. Does the service-life extension offered by DOT-SP 16320 or the modal acoustic emission testing itself provide a benefit to either end users or institutional users (e.g., fire departments)? If so, please provide any relevant data, studies, references, or other corroborating information.

    3. What factors do respiratory protection program managers consider in determining whether to replace an expiring cylinder with a new replacement cylinder or requalify the expiring cylinder using modal acoustic emission testing?

    4. In which industries and operations are modal acoustic emission-requalified cylinders currently being used?

    John J. Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21256 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-10142, CMS-R-262, and CMS-179] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by November 30, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number __, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of the following:

    1. Access CMS' website address at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA-Listing.html.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Contents

    This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

    CMS-10142 Bid Pricing Tool (BPT) for Medicare Advantage (MA) Plans and Prescription Drug Plans (PDP) CMS-R-262 Contract Year 2020 Plan Benefit Package (PBP) Software and Formulary Submission CMS-179 Medicaid State Plan Base Plan Pages

    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. The term “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 requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

    Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Bid Pricing Tool (BPT) for Medicare Advantage (MA) Plans and Prescription Drug Plans (PDP); Use: The competitive bidding process defined by the “The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act” (MMA) applies to both the MA and Part D programs. It was first used for Contract Year 2006. It is an annual process that encompasses the release of the MA rate book in April, the bid's that plans submit to CMS in June, and the release of the Part D and RPPO benchmarks, which typically occurs in August.

    CMS requires that Medicare Advantage Organizations (MAOs) and Prescription Drug Plans (PDPs) complete the BPT as part of the annual bidding process. During this process, organizations prepare their proposed actuarial bid pricing for the upcoming contract year and submit them to CMS for review and approval. The purpose of the BPT is to collect the actuarial pricing information for each plan. It is an Excel workbook with multiple worksheets and special functions through which bidders present to CMS their plan pricing information. Bidders enter information, such as plan experience, projected enrollment, and risk profile, and the BPT calculates the plan premiums and other values that drive the bidding process. CMS maintains and updates each BPT file and releases new versions every April.

    The BPT files may be downloaded from the Health Plan Management System website (or HPMS), which is a restricted-access website, so users must obtain approval from CMS before using it. From HPMS, the BPT files may be downloaded as part of the Plan Benefit Package (or PBP) software, or they may be downloaded as stand-alone blank files. These files are made available to users on the first Monday of April every year and an HPMS memo is released announcing the software availability. Plan sponsors are required to upload the completed BPTs to HPMS by the first Monday in June each year.

    MAOs and PDPs use the Bid Pricing Tool (BPT) software to develop their actuarial pricing bid. The information provided in the BPT is the basis for the plan's enrollee premiums and CMS payments for each contract year. The tool collects data such as medical expense development (from claims data and/or manual rating), administrative expenses, profit levels, and projected plan enrollment information. By statute, completed BPTs are due to CMS by the first Monday of June each year. Form Number: CMS-10142 (OMB control number: 0938-0944); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Private Sector, Business or other for-profits and Not- for-profit institution; Number of Respondents: 555; Total Annual Responses: 4,995; Total Annual Hours: 149,850. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Rachel Shevland at 410-786-3026.)

    2. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Contract Year 2020 Plan Benefit Package (PBP) Software and Formulary Submission; Use: CMS requires that MA and PDP organizations submit a completed Plan Benefit Package (PBP) and formulary as part of the annual bidding process. During this process, organizations prepare their proposed plan benefit packages for the upcoming contract year and submit them to CMS for review and approval. The plan benefit package submission consists of the Plan Benefit Package (PBP) software, formulary file, and supporting documentation, as necessary. MA and PDP organizations use the PBP software to describe their organization's plan benefit packages, including information on premiums, cost sharing, authorization rules, and supplemental benefits. They also generate a formulary to describe their list of drugs, including information on prior authorization, step therapy, tiering, and quantity limits.

    Additionally, CMS uses the PBP and formulary data to review and approve the plan benefit packages proposed by each MA and PDP organization. This allows CMS to review the benefit packages in a consistent way across all submitted bids during with incredibly tight timeframes. This data is also used to populate data on Medicare Plan Finder, which allows beneficiaries to access and compare Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug plans. Form Number: CMS-R-262 (OMB control number 0938-0763); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Private Sector, Business or other for-profits and Not- for-profit institution; Number of Respondents: 570; Total Annual Responses: 6,760; Total Annual Hours: 65,354.50 (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Kristy Holtje at 410-786-2209.)

    3. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Medicaid State Plan Base Plan Pages; Use: State Medicaid agencies complete the plan pages while we review the information to determine if the state has met all of the requirements of the provisions the states choose to implement. If the requirements are met, we will approve the amendments to the state's Medicaid plan giving the state the authority to implement the flexibilities. For a state to receive Medicaid Title XIX funding, there must be an approved Title XIX state plan. Form Number: CMS-179 (OMB control number 0938-0193); Frequency: Occasionally; Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments; Number of Respondents: 56; Total Annual Responses: 1,120; Total Annual Hours: 22,400. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Annette Pearson at 410-786-6958.)

    Dated: September 21, 2018. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-20995 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Proposed Projects:

    Title: Federal Child Support Portal Registration.

    OMB No.: 0970-0370.

    Description: The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), Division of Federal Systems, maintains the Child Support Portal (Portal), through which authorized users may view, update, or upload information for child support purposes. To securely access the Portal as an authorized user, OCSE creates profiles within the Portal for employers, insurers, and multistate financial institutions (MSFIs) using information provided in the Employer Service Profile Form and the Debt Inquiry Insurer Profile Form (see OMB No: 0970-0196 for the MSFI Profile Form). State child support agencies manage and authenticate authorization for individual users via the state proxy server; therefore, a profile form is not required.

    The federal Child Support Portal Registration information collection activities are authorized by 42 U.S.C. 653(m)(2), which requires the Secretary to establish and implement safeguards to restrict access to confidential information in the Federal Parent Locator Service to authorized persons, and to restrict use of such information to authorized purposes.

    Respondents: Employers, Financial Institutions, Insurers, and Child Support Agencies.

    Annual Burden Estimates:

    Information collection instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • hours per
  • response
  • Total
  • burden
  • hours
  • Employer Services Profile 2,144 1 0.08 171.52 Debt Inquiry Insurer Profile 22 1 0.08 1.76 Portal Registration Screens 2,338 1 0.15 350.70

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours (Rounded from 523.98): 524.

    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, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Attention 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.

    Emily B. Jabbour, ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21226 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-41-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Community Living Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, President's Committee for People With Intellectual Disabilities AGENCY:

    Administration for Community Living, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    DATES:

    Thursday, November 8, 2018 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; and Friday, November 9, 2018 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. These meetings will be open to the general public.

    ADDRESSES:

    These meetings will be held at the U.S. Access Board, located at 1331 F Street NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20004. Individuals who would like to participate via conference call may do so by dialing toll-free #: 1-888-949-2790, when prompted enter pass code: 1989852. Individuals whose full participation in the meeting will require special accommodations (e.g., sign language interpreting services, assistive listening devices, materials in alternative format such as large print or Braille) should notify Ms. Allison Cruz, Director, Office of Innovation, via email at [email protected], or via telephone at 202-795-7334, no later than Monday, October 19, 2018. The PCPID will attempt to accommodate requests made after this date, but cannot guarantee the ability to grant requests received after the deadline. All meeting sites are barrier free, consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Allison Cruz, Director, Office of Innovation, 330 C Street SW, Switzer Building, Room 1114, Washington, DC 20201. Telephone: 202-795-7334. Fax: 202-795-7334. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The PCPID acts in an advisory capacity to the President and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on a broad range of topics relating to programs, services and support for individuals with intellectual disabilities. The PCPID executive order stipulates that the Committee shall: (1) Provide such advice concerning intellectual disabilities as the President or the Secretary of Health and Human Services may request; and (2) provide advice to the President concerning the following for people with intellectual disabilities: (A) Expanding employment opportunities; (B) connecting people to services; (C) supporting families and caregivers; (D) strengthening the networks; and (E) protecting rights and preventing abuse.

    Agenda: The Committee Members will discuss preparation of the PCPID 2019 Report to the President, including its content and format, and related data collection and analysis required to complete the writing of the Report.

    Dated: September 24, 2018. Mary Lazare, Principal Deputy Administrator, Administration for Community Living.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21319 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4154-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-D-3275] Contents of a Complete Submission for Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to Drug and Biologic Applications; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Contents of a Complete Submission for Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to an IND, NDA, BLA, or ANDA.” The draft guidance provides recommendations to industry and FDA staff regarding the content and submission procedures for use-related risk analyses, human factors validation study protocols and reports, threshold analyses, and comparative use human factors study protocols and reports.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by November 30, 2018 to ensure that the Agency considers your comments in this review.

    ADDRESSES:

    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-D-3275 for “Contents of a Complete Submission for Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to an IND, NDA, BLA or ANDA.” Received comments 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.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).

    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or to the Office of Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Quynh Nhu Nguyen, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 22, Rm. 4408, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-6273, email: [email protected]; or Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Contents of Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to an IND, NDA, BLA, or ANDA.” This document provides guidance to industry on the content and submission procedures for human factors (HF) submissions to promote efficient Agency review.

    The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) requires that drug products submitted for approval under section 505(b) be proven safe and demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness for the product's intended use (21 U.S.C. 355(b)). Under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. 262), FDA licenses a biological product based on a demonstration that it is safe, pure, and potent, and that it is manufactured in a facility designed to ensure the product continues to be safe, pure, and potent. As part of evaluating drug and biologic products for safety and effectiveness, FDA will evaluate HF data submitted by sponsors in support of the product user interface when submission of such data is warranted. For products that sponsors intend to submit as an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA), the sponsor can rely on the Agency's previous finding that the listed drug is safe and effective so long as the sponsor can demonstrate certain findings. Certain products, including drug-device combination products, may warrant threshold analyses and additional data, such as data from comparative HF studies.

    This draft guidance provides recommendations to industry and FDA staff regarding the content and submission procedures for use-related risk analyses, human factors validation study protocols and reports, threshold analyses, and comparative use HF study protocols and reports. This draft guidance applies to submissions for the following types of products:

    • Human prescription drug products, including biologics, that are the subject of an investigational new drug application (IND), a new drug application (NDA), a biologics license application (BLA), or an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA), and supplements to these applications

    • Human nonprescription drug products that are the subject of an IND, NDA, or ANDA

    This draft guidance does not describe when threshold analyses or HF submissions are warranted for any particular application pathway, the processes or procedures associated with their review, or the methods used by the Agency for evaluation. Furthermore, this draft guidance does not describe the methods used to design, conduct, or analyze HF studies.

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent FDA's current thinking on “Contents of a Complete Submission for Threshold Analyses and Human Factors Submissions to an IND, NDA, BLA or ANDA.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 and Form FDA 1571 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 314 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 601 and Form FDA 356h have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21243 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3490] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices, Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and Records 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 provisions of the guidance entitled “Guidance for Industry: Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMPs), Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and Records and Reports.”

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by November 30, 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 30, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. midnight Eastern Time at the end of November 30, 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-3490 for “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMPs), Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and Records.” 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:

    Domini Bean, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-5733, [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.

    Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMPs), Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and Records OMB Control Number 0910-0811—Extension

    Section 412(h)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 350a(h)(1)) exempts an infant formula that is represented and labeled for use by an infant with an inborn error of metabolism, low birth weight, or who otherwise has an unusual medical or dietary problem from the requirements of section 412(a), (b), and (c) of the FD&C Act. These formulas are customarily referred to as “exempt infant formulas.” Under part 106 (21 CFR part 106), we established requirements for quality factors for infant formulas and CGMPs, including quality control procedures. This collection of information will help prevent the manufacture of adulterated infant formula, ensure the safety of infant formula, and ensure that the nutrients in infant formula are present in a form that is bioavailable.

    In the Federal Register of April 15, 2016 (81 FR 22174), we published a notice of availability for the guidance document entitled “Guidance for Industry: Exempt Infant Formula Production: Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMPs), Quality Control Procedures, Conduct of Audits, and Records and Reports.” The guidance describes our current thinking on the manufacturing of exempt infant formula in relation to the requirements in part 106 for CGMPs, quality control procedures, conduct of audits, and records and reports that apply to nonexempt infant formulas. Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances.

    Our estimate of the burden of the recordkeeping recommendations includes the one-time burden of developing production and in-process control systems and the annual burdens of developing and maintaining production aggregate production and control records, records pertaining to the distribution of infant formula, and records pertaining to regularly scheduled audits. Included in the burden estimate is the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing each collection of information.

    The guidance recommended, to the extent practicable, that respondents include records required by part 106, subparts A, B, C, D, and F for non-exempt infant formulas. Because the records and reporting requirements related to part 106, subparts E and G are not generally applicable to exempt infant formula manufacturers, FDA is not recommending in the guidance that exempt infant formula manufacturers follow these requirements. As such, the records and reporting requirements in part 106, subparts E and G are not part of this information collection.

    Description of Respondents: The respondent recordkeepers are manufacturers of exempt infant formula.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total
  • annual
  • records
  • Average
  • burden per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total
  • hours
  • First-Year Annual Burden Production and In-Process Control System 106.6(c)(5) and 106.100(e)(1) and (e)(3) 3 1 3 40 120 Controls to Prevent Adulteration due to Automatic (Mechanical or Electronic) Equipment 106.35(c) and 106.100(f)(5) 3 1 3 6,400 19,200 Total First Year Only Hourly Recordkeeping Burden 19,320 Recurring Annual Burden Controls to Prevent Adulteration Caused by Facilities—Testing for Radiological Contaminants 106.20(f)(3) 4 1 4 1.5 6 Controls to Prevent Adulteration Caused by Facilities—Recordkeeping of Testing for Radiological Contaminants 106.20(f)(4) and 106.100(f)(1) 4 1 4 0.08 (5 minutes) 0.32 Controls to Prevent Adulteration Caused by Facilities—Testing for Bacteriological Contaminants 106.20(f)(3) 3 52 156 0.08 (5 minutes) 12.48 Controls to Prevent Adulteration Caused by Facilities—Recordkeeping of Testing for Bacteriological Contaminants 106.20(f)(4) and 106.100(f)(1) 3 52 156 0.08 (5 minutes) 12.48 Controls to Prevent Adulteration by Equipment or Utensils 106.30(d)(1) and 106.100(f)(2) 3 52 156 0.21 (13 minutes) 32.76 Controls to Prevent Adulteration by Equipment or Utensils 106.30(e)(3)(iii) and 106.100(f)(3) 3 52 156 0.21 (13 minutes) 32.76 Controls to Prevent Adulteration by Equipment or Utensils 106.30(f)(2) and 106.100(f)(4) 3 52 156 0.19 (11 minutes) 29.64 Controls to Prevent Adulteration Due to Automatic (Mechanical or Electronic) Equipment 106.35(c) and 106.100(f)(5) 3 52 156 520 81,120 Controls to Prevent Adulteration Due to Automatic (Mechanical or Electronic) Equipment 106.35(c) and 106.100(f)(5) 3 2 6 640 3,840 Controls to Prevent Adulteration Caused by Ingredients, Containers, and Closures 106.40(g) and 106.100(f)(6) 3 52 156 0.17 (10 minutes) 26.52 Controls to Prevent Adulteration During Manufacturing 106.50 and 106.100(e) 3 52 156 0.23 (14 minutes) 35.88 Controls to Prevent Adulteration From Microorganisms 106.55(d), 106.100(e)(5)(ii), and 106.100(f)(7) 3 52 156 0.25 (15 minutes) 39 Controls to Prevent Adulteration During Packaging and Labeling of Infant Formula 106.60(c) 1 12 12 0.25 (15 minutes) 3 General Quality Control—Testing 106.91(b)(1), 106.91(b)(2) and 106.91(b)(3) 2 1 2 2 4 General Quality Control 106.91(b)(1), 106.91(d), and 106.100(e)(5)(i) 2 52 104 0.15 (9 minutes) 15.6 General Quality Control 106.91(b)(2) 106.91(d), and 106.100(e)(5)(i) 2 52 104 0.15 (9 minutes) 15.6 General Quality Control 106.91(b)(3) 106.91(d), and 106.100(e)(5)(i) 2 52 104 0.15 (9 minutes) 15.6 Audit Plans and Procedures 106.94—Ongoing Review and Updating of Audits 3 1 3 8 24 Audit Plans and Procedures 106.94—Regular Audits 3 52 156 4 624 Total Recurring Recordkeeping Burden 85,889.64 Total Recordkeeping Burden 105,209.64 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Based on a review of the information collection, we made a correction since the last OMB approval. While the one-time estimated recordkeeping burden remains as 19,320 hours, we increased the annual estimated recurring recordkeeping burden to 85,889.64 hours due to a calculation error (a 79,561.58 hour increase) for a total recordkeeping burden of 105,209.64 hours.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21207 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3353] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Antimicrobial Animal Drug Distribution Reports and Recordkeeping AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) 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 provisions of our reporting and recordkeeping requirements for antimicrobial animal drug sales and distribution.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by November 30, 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 30, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of November 30, 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-3353 for “Antimicrobial Animal Drug Distribution Reports and Recordkeeping.” 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.

    Antimicrobial Animal Drug Distribution Reports and Recordkeeping—21 CFR 514.87 OMB Control Number 0910-0659—Extension

    Sponsors of approved or conditionally approved applications for new animal drugs containing an antimicrobial active ingredient are required by section 512 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360b) to submit to FDA an annual report on the amount of each such ingredient in the drug that is sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals. Sponsors are also required to maintain distribution records for their animal drug products, including separate information for each month of the calendar year, under section 512(l)(3) of the FD&C Act. These provisions were enacted to assist FDA in our continuing analysis of the interactions (including drug resistance), efficacy, and safety of antimicrobials approved for use in both humans and food-producing animals for the purpose of mitigating the public health risk associated with antimicrobial resistance.

    Section 514.87 of our regulations (21 CFR 514.87) codifies the reporting requirements established in the FD&C Act. Sponsors submit antimicrobial animal drug sales and distribution reports to the Agency on Form FDA 3744. Each report must specify: (1) The amount of each antimicrobial active ingredient by container size, strength, and dosage form; (2) quantities distributed domestically and quantities exported; and (3) a listing of the target animals, indications, and production classes that are specified on the approved label of the product. The report must cover the period of the preceding calendar year and include separate information for each month of the calendar year. Each report must also provide a species-specific estimate of the percentage of each product that was sold or distributed domestically in the reporting year for use in cattle, swine, chickens, or turkeys for such species that appear on the approved label.

    Collection of information on the amount of animal antimicrobials being distributed, including species-specific information, is necessary to support our ongoing efforts to encourage the judicious use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals to help ensure the continued availability of safe and effective antimicrobials for animals and humans. We intend to use these data to supplement existing information, including data collected under the National Animal Health Monitoring System and the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System programs. Data from multiple sources are needed to provide a comprehensive and science-based picture of antimicrobial drug use and resistance in animal agriculture.

    Description of Respondents: Animal drug manufacturers (sponsors).

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 21 CFR section FDA Form Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    514.87(a) through (e)—Annual Reports for Sponsors With Active Applications—Paper Submission 3744 10 7.5 75 62 4,650 514.87(a) through (e)—Annual Reports for Sponsors With Active Applications—Electronic Submission 3744 10 7.5 75 52 3,900 514.87(a) through (e)—Annual Reports for Sponsors With Inactive Applications—Paper Submission 3744 4 26.5 106 2 212 514.87(a) through (e)—Annual Reports for Sponsors With Inactive Applications—Electronic Submission 3744 3 35 105 2 210 Total 8,972 <