Federal Register Vol. 83, No.191,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 191 (October 2, 2018)

Page Range49459-49768
FR Document

83_FR_191
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 49556 - Sunshine Act Meeting: Farm Credit Administration BoardPDF
83 FR 49581 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49533 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49596 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49603 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 49551 - Policy Statement on Developing Student Achievement Levels for the National Assessment of Educational ProgressPDF
83 FR 49563 - Update to the 2016 National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) GuidelinesPDF
83 FR 49531 - Annual MeetingPDF
83 FR 49540 - Order Temporarily Denying Export PrivilegesPDF
83 FR 49532 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the North Dakota Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49535 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Rhode Island Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49552 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho Cleanup ProjectPDF
83 FR 49530 - Notice of Availability of Revised Model Adjudication RulesPDF
83 FR 49627 - Hazardous Materials: Public Meeting Notice for International Standards on the Transport of Dangerous GoodsPDF
83 FR 49472 - Regulation A: Extensions of Credit by Federal Reserve BanksPDF
83 FR 49473 - Regulation D: Reserve Requirements of Depository InstitutionsPDF
83 FR 49577 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Digital Manufacturing Design Innovation InstitutePDF
83 FR 49576 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Space Enterprise ConsortiumPDF
83 FR 49539 - Membership of the Performance Review Board for the Office of the SecretaryPDF
83 FR 49594 - Power Resources Inc.; Smith Ranch HighlandPDF
83 FR 49581 - Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Term LicensePDF
83 FR 49498 - United States Standards for CornPDF
83 FR 49498 - United States Standards for CanolaPDF
83 FR 49498 - United States Standards for SoybeansPDF
83 FR 49499 - Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Pummelos Grown in Florida; Decreased Assessment RatePDF
83 FR 49550 - Arbitration Panel Decisions Under the Randolph-Sheppard ActPDF
83 FR 49556 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
83 FR 49583 - Notice of Permit Modification Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
83 FR 49623 - Actions Taken at September 7, 2018, MeetingPDF
83 FR 49582 - Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
83 FR 49555 - Notice of Application for Amendment of License, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests; Brookfield White Pine Hydro, LLCPDF
83 FR 49552 - DXT Commodities North America LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
83 FR 49553 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
83 FR 49554 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 49496 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
83 FR 49549 - Request for Nominations for the Interest Rate Benchmark Reform Subcommittee Under the Market Risk Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49556 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
83 FR 49543 - Strontium Chromate From Austria and France: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value InvestigationsPDF
83 FR 49547 - Oil Country Tubular Goods From People's Republic of China: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2017PDF
83 FR 49568 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; National Flood Insurance Program Call Center and Agent Referral Enrollment FormPDF
83 FR 49560 - Agency Information Collection Request. 60-Day Public Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49560 - Agency Information Collection Request; 60-Day Public Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49501 - Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Three-Phase Commercial Air-Cooled Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps With a Certified Cooling Capacity of Less Than 65,000 Btu/hPDF
83 FR 49497 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; “Other Rockfish” in the Aleutian Islands Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
83 FR 49548 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
83 FR 49575 - Large Power Transformers From Korea; DeterminationPDF
83 FR 49583 - In the Matter of Harman International Industries, Inc.; Confirmatory OrderPDF
83 FR 49485 - Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals; 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3PDF
83 FR 49508 - Kemin Industries, Inc.; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal Use)PDF
83 FR 49566 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Ship's Store DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49567 - South Carolina; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 49567 - Indiana; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49569 - Wisconsin; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49569 - Michigan; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49570 - Montana; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49570 - South Carolina; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 49574 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Reclamation on Private LandsPDF
83 FR 49535 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49571 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Permanent Regulatory Program Requirements-Standards for Certification of BlastersPDF
83 FR 49572 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Special Permanent Program Performance Standards-Operations in Alluvial Valley FloorsPDF
83 FR 49573 - Agency Information Collection Activities: General Reclamation RequirementsPDF
83 FR 49570 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Revisions; Renewals; and Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Permit RightsPDF
83 FR 49530 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49573 - Agency Information Collection Activities: State Processes for Designating Areas Unsuitable for Surface Coal Mining OperationsPDF
83 FR 49581 - Notice of Charter Renewal of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionPDF
83 FR 49557 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 49550 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; AmeriCorps Member ApplicationPDF
83 FR 49608 - BC Partners Lending Corporation, et al.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
83 FR 49604 - Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution, et al.PDF
83 FR 49530 - Public Quarterly Meeting of the Board of DirectorsPDF
83 FR 49561 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Charter RenewalPDF
83 FR 49561 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 49621 - Social Security Ruling, SSR 18-02p; Titles II and XVI: Determining the Established Onset Date (EOD) in Blindness ClaimsPDF
83 FR 49613 - Social Security Ruling, SSR 18-01p; Titles II and XVI: Determining the Established Onset Date (EOD) in Disability ClaimsPDF
83 FR 49599 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Modify the Listing Requirements Contained in Listing Rule 5635(d) To Change the Definition of Market Value for Purposes of the Shareholder Approval Rule and Eliminate the Requirement for Shareholder Approval of Issuances at a Price Less Than Book Value but Greater Than Market ValuePDF
83 FR 49596 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rules 1000, 1064, and 1069 To Allow for the Snapshot Functionality of the Floor Based Management System to be Used for All OrdersPDF
83 FR 49606 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use on Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.PDF
83 FR 49534 - Notice of Public Meetings of the New York Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49575 - Certain Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Components Thereof; Institution of InvestigationPDF
83 FR 49534 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil RightsPDF
83 FR 49559 - Redesignation of Federal BuildingsPDF
83 FR 49616 - Social Security Ruling, SSR 18-3p; Titles II and XVI: Failure To Follow Prescribed TreatmentPDF
83 FR 49532 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Oregon Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49531 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Idaho Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49533 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49579 - Importer of Controlled Substances RegistrationPDF
83 FR 49579 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances RegistrationPDF
83 FR 49578 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Rhodes TechnologiesPDF
83 FR 49579 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Cambrex Charles CityPDF
83 FR 49489 - Special Local Regulation; Breton Bay, Leonardtown, MDPDF
83 FR 49495 - Pacific Island Fisheries; Hawaii Shallow-Set Pelagic Longline Fishery; Court OrderPDF
83 FR 49578 - Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: AMPAC Fine Chemicals, LLCPDF
83 FR 49475 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS AirplanesPDF
83 FR 49562 - Current List of HHS-Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in Urine Drug Testing for Federal AgenciesPDF
83 FR 49487 - Truck Size and WeightPDF
83 FR 49624 - Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act; Solicitation for Candidate Projects in the Interstate System Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Pilot Program (ISRRPP)PDF
83 FR 49548 - Marine Mammals; File No. 20648PDF
83 FR 49581 - Importer of Controlled Substances RegistrationPDF
83 FR 49628 - Public Meeting of Citizens Coinage Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 49580 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: R & D Systems, Inc.PDF
83 FR 49492 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New York; Determination of Attainment of the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Jamestown, New York Marginal Nonattainment AreaPDF
83 FR 49506 - Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Leitchfield, KYPDF
83 FR 49483 - Amendment of Class E Airspace, Knoxville, TN; and Establishment of Class E Airspace, Madisonville, TNPDF
83 FR 49482 - Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Beaver Falls, PA; and Zelienople, PAPDF
83 FR 49509 - Air Plan Approval; Iowa; State Implementation Plan and Operating Permits ProgramPDF
83 FR 49692 - The NCUA Staff Draft 2019-2020 Budget JustificationPDF
83 FR 49459 - Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance Programs, Payment Limitation and Payment EligibilityPDF
83 FR 49513 - Medicare Program: Changes to the Medicare Claims and Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Determination Appeals ProceduresPDF
83 FR 49587 - Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Safeguards InformationPDF
83 FR 49630 - Financial Disclosures About Guarantors and Issuers of Guaranteed Securities and Affiliates Whose Securities Collateralize a Registrant's SecuritiesPDF

Issue

83 191 Tuesday, October 2, 2018 Contents Administrative Administrative Conference of the United States NOTICES Revised Model Adjudication Rules, 49530 2018-21438 African African Development Foundation NOTICES Meetings: Board of Directors, 49530 2018-21373 Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Assessment Rates: Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Pummelos Grown in Florida, 49499-49501 2018-21424 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Commodity Credit Corporation

PROPOSED RULES United States Standards: Canola, 49498 2018-21426 Corn, 49498-49499 2018-21427 Soybeans; Reopening of Comment Period, 49498 2018-21425 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49530-49531 2018-21381
Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Changes under the National Cooperative Research and Production Act: Digital Manufacturing Design Innovation Institute, 49577-49578 2018-21432 Space Enterprise Consortium, 49576-49577 2018-21431 Appalachian States Appalachian States Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission NOTICES Meetings, 49531 2018-21447 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services PROPOSED RULES Medicare Program: Changes to the Medicare Claims and Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Determination Appeals Procedures, 49513-49529 2018-21223 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Connecticut Advisory Committee, 49533-49534 2018-21356 Hawaii Advisory Committee, 49534-49535 2018-21361 Idaho Advisory Committee, 49531-49532 2018-21357 New York Advisory Committee, 49534 2018-21363 North Dakota Advisory Committee, 49532 2018-21444 Oregon Advisory Committee, 49532-49533 2018-21358 Rhode Island Advisory Committee, 49535 2018-21442 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49533 2018-21529 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Special Local Regulations: Breton Bay, Leonardtown, MD, 49489-49492 2018-21350 NOTICES Update to the 2016 National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program Guidelines, 49563-49566 2018-21450 Commerce Commerce Department See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49535-49539 2018-21386 Membership of the Performance Review Board for the Office of the Secretary, 49539-49540 2018-21430
Commodity Credit Commodity Credit Corporation RULES Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance Programs, Payment Limitation and Payment Eligibility, 49459-49472 2018-21257 Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Interest Rate Benchmark Reform Subcommittee under the Market Risk Advisory Committee, 49549-49550 2018-21408 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: AmeriCorps Member Application, 49550 2018-21376 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Bulk Manufacturers of Controlled Substances; Applications: AMPAC Fine Chemicals, LLC, 49578-49579 2018-21348 Cambrex Charles City, 49579 2018-21351 Rhodes Technologies; Correction, 49578 2018-21352 Bulk Manufacturers of Controlled Substances; Registrations, 49579 2018-21353 Importers of Controlled Substances; Applications: R and D Systems, Inc., 49580-49581 2018-21334 Importers of Controlled Substances; Registrations, 49579-49581 2018-21336 2018-21354 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Arbitration Panel Decisions under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 49550-49551 2018-21423 Policy Statement on Developing Student Achievement Levels for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 49551-49552 2018-21451 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

PROPOSED RULES Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Three-Phase Commercial Air-Cooled Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps with a Certified Cooling Capacity of Less than 65,000 Btu/h, 49501-49506 2018-21401 NOTICES Meetings: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho Cleanup Project, 49552 2018-21439
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: New York; Determination of Attainment of the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Jamestown, NY Marginal Nonattainment Area, 49492-49495 2018-21329 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Iowa; State Implementation Plan and Operating Permits Program, 49509-49513 2018-21287 Farm Credit Farm Credit Administration NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49556 2018-21580 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus SAS Airplanes, 49475-49482 2018-21347 Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace: Beaver Falls, PA; and Zelienople, PA, 49482-49483 2018-21305 Amendment of Class E Airspace; and Establishment of Class E Airspace: Knoxville, TN; and Madisonville, TN, 49483-49485 2018-21316 PROPOSED RULES Establishment of Class E Airspace: Leitchfield, KY, 49506-49508 2018-21318 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Flood Insurance Program Call Center and Agent Referral Enrollment Form, 49568-49569 2018-21404 Major Disaster and Related Determinations: South Carolina, 49567-49568 2018-21393 Major Disaster Declarations: Indiana; Amendment No. 3, 49567 2018-21392 Michigan; Amendment No. 1, 49569 2018-21390 Montana; Amendment No. 1, 49570 2018-21389 South Carolina; Amendment No. 1, 49570 2018-21388 Wisconsin; Amendment No. 1, 49569 2018-21391 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 49553-49555 2018-21411 2018-21412 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: DXT Commodities North America, LLC, 49552-49553 2018-21413 License Applications; Amendments: Brookfield White Pine Hydro, LLC, 49555-49556 2018-21414 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration RULES Truck Size and Weight, 49487-49489 2018-21341 NOTICES Requests for Applications: Candidate Projects in the Interstate System Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Pilot Program; Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, 49624-49627 2018-21340 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 49556 2018-21407 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Extensions of Credit by Federal Reserve Banks (Regulation A), 49472-49473 2018-21436 Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions (Regulation D), 49473-49475 2018-21435 NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 49556-49557 2018-21419 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49557-49559 2018-21377 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals: 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3, 49485-49487 2018-21396 PROPOSED RULES Filing of Food Additive Petitions: Kemin Industries, Inc., 49508-49509 2018-21395 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Redesignation of Federal Buildings, 49559-49560 2018-21360 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 49560-49561 2018-21402 2018-21403
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Denial of Export Privileges: Eastline Technologies OU, Adimir OU, Valery Kosmachov, et al., 49540-49543 2018-21446 Interior Interior Department See

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Oil Country Tubular Goods from People's Republic of China, 49547-49548 2018-21405 Determinations of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Strontium Chromate from Austria and France, 49543-49547 2018-21406 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Components Thereof, 49575-49576 2018-21362 Large Power Transformers from Korea, 49575 2018-21398 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

See

Drug Enforcement Administration

See

Justice Programs Office

See

Parole Commission

Justice Programs Justice Programs Office NOTICES Charter Renewals: Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 49581 2018-21379 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Intent to Grant Exclusive Term License, 49581-49582 2018-21428 National Credit National Credit Union Administration NOTICES Staff Draft 2019-2020 Budget Justification, 49692-49768 2018-21282 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Charter Renewals: National Cancer Institute, 49561-49562 2018-21372 Meetings: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 49561 2018-21371 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska: Other Rockfish in the Aleutian Islands Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 49497 2018-21400 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 49496-49497 2018-21409 Pacific Island Fisheries: Hawaii Shallow-set Pelagic Longline Fishery; Court Order, 49495-49496 2018-21349 NOTICES Meetings: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 49548 2018-21399 Permit Applications: Marine Mammals; File No. 20648, 49548-49549 2018-21339 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Permit Applications Received under the Antarctic Conservation Act, 49582-49583 2018-21415 Permit Modification Received under the Antarctic Conservation Act, 49583 2018-21417 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications and Amendments Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations, etc., 49587-49594 2018-20182 Confirmatory Orders: Harman International Industries, Inc., 49583-49587 2018-21397 License Renewals: Power Resources Inc., Smith Ranch Highland, 49594-49596 2018-21429 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49596 2018-21527 Parole Parole Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49581 2018-21566 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Meetings: Hazardous Materials: International Standards on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, 49627-49628 2018-21437 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission PROPOSED RULES Financial Disclosures about Guarantors and Issuers of Guaranteed Securities and Affiliates Whose Securities Collateralize a Registrant's Securities, 49630-49689 2018-19456 NOTICES Applications: BC Partners Lending Corp., et al., 49608-49613 2018-21375 Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution, et al., 49604-49606 2018-21374 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 49603-49604 2018-21502 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., 49606-49608 2018-21364 Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, 49596-49599 2018-21365 The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, 49599-49603 2018-21366 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Rulings: Titles II and XVI: Determining the Established Onset Date in Blindness Claims, 49621-49623 2018-21369 Titles II and XVI: Determining the Established Onset Date in Disability Claims, 49613-49616 2018-21368 Titles II and XVI: Failure to Follow Prescribed Treatment, 49616-49621 2018-21359 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities: Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies, 49562-49563 2018-21345 Surface Mining Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: General Reclamation Requirements, 49573 2018-21383 Permanent Regulatory Program Requirements Standards for Certification of Blasters, 49571-49572 2018-21385 Reclamation on Private Lands, 49574-49575 2018-21387 Revisions; Renewals; and Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Permit Rights, 49570-49571 2018-21382 Special Permanent Program Performance Standards—Operations in Alluvial Valley Floors, 49572-49573 2018-21384 State Processes for Designating Areas Unsuitable for Surface Coal Mining Operations, 49573-49574 2018-21380 Susquehanna Susquehanna River Basin Commission NOTICES Meetings: Actions Taken September 7, 2018, 49623-49624 2018-21416 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

United States Mint

Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Ship's Store Declaration, 49566-49567 2018-21394 U.S. Mint United States Mint NOTICES Meetings: Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee, 49628 2018-21335 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Securities and Exchange Commission, 49630-49689 2018-19456 Part III National Credit Union Administration, 49692-49768 2018-21282 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.

83 191 Tuesday, October 2, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Commodity Credit Corporation 7 CFR Parts 1400 and 1416 RIN 0560-AH69 Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance Programs, Payment Limitation and Payment Eligibility AGENCY:

Commodity Credit Corporation and Farm Service Agency, USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule implements changes to the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP); Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP); and Tree Assistance Program (TAP) as required by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (BBA), including changes to the payment limitations, the funding limitation for ELAP, and losses for injured livestock sold at a reduced price under LIP. An application period for ELAP, LIP, TAP and the Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP) is included in this rule to allow additional time for producers to apply. Additionally, FSA implements changes to TAP for 2017 losses to pecan trees as specified in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. This rule also includes several clarifying amendments and corrections to the regulations for the programs.

DATES:

Effective date: October 2, 2018.

Deadline for reopened 2017 and 2018 application period: December 1, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lisa Berry; (202) 720-7641. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication should contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

The disaster assistance programs, payment limits, and payment eligibility provisions in this rule are Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) programs and provisions; the Farm Service Agency (FSA) administers the programs and provisions for CCC. Specific requirements for supplemental agricultural disaster assistance programs will be implemented as authorized by BBA (Pub. L. 115-123), which amended the Agricultural Act of 2014 (the 2014 Farm Bill, Pub. L. 113-79), and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub. L. 115-141), which expanded TAP eligibility for producers with losses to pecan trees during the 2017 calendar year. FSA is also making minor clarifying amendments and corrections to the regulations in 7 CFR part 1416.

Payment Limitation and Extension of Application Periods

The payment limitations for supplemental disaster programs are being changed in §§ 1400.1 and 1416.6, retroactive to the 2017 program year. Under the previous payment limitation established by the 2014 Farm Bill, the total amount of payments that a person or legal entity could receive under LIP, LFP, and ELAP combined, directly or indirectly, could not exceed $125,000 in any program year, and TAP had a separate payment limit of $125,000 per person or legal entity for any crop year. As authorized by BBA, and effective with the 2017 program year, the payment limits for LIP and TAP are being removed. Effective with the 2017 program year, for LFP and ELAP, the total amount of payments that a person or legal entity can receive, directly or indirectly, in any crop year cannot exceed $125,000 under the two programs combined.

Producers may have chosen not to apply for losses under ELAP, LFP, LIP, and TAP for which the 2017 or 2018 deadlines have passed if they had reached the payment limitation under the previous rules. Therefore, the 2017 application periods for these four programs are being re-opened until December 3, 2018, and the 2018 sign-up periods are extended for any 2018 applications that would have had a sign-up deadline earlier than December 3, 2018. Producers who previously submitted an application and received a decision that was administratively final are not eligible to reapply during the extended sign-up period, unless their application was denied only because their application or notice of loss, if required, was filed after the applicable deadline. Additionally, producers that previously applied for disaster assistance and earned payments up to the applicable payment limit under the prior payment limit for such disaster program or programs will automatically have their applications reprocessed to determine if they are now entitled to receive additional payments under the new payment limit, in which case the additional payment will automatically issue to such producer. Benefits for lower threshold mortality pecan tree losses for eligible orchardists and nursery tree growers under TAP, made available under the 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act provisions are limited to losses on acres that were previously reported on the FSA-578, Report of Acreage. Nothing in this rule or the 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act opened an opportunity for persons and legal entities to now file 2017 pecan acreage reports. Persons or legal entities are not required to re-apply for assistance under the programs in order for new payment limitation provisions to take effect. FSA will apply the new payment limitation and payment eligibility provisions to all applications for each program year regardless of time of filing.

Supplemental Disaster General Provisions

This rule removes duplicative provisions at § 1416.6(d) that provided that producers who are eligible to receive benefits for the same loss under both 7 CFR part 1416 and any other program, including indemnities under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501-1524), could not receive benefits under both and had to elect whether to receive benefits under part 1416 or the other program. There is, however, a similar statutory provision that remains in effect under the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) that precludes a producer from receiving assistance under NAP and assistance for the same loss under any other program—including TAP, LIP, ELAP and LFP—administered by the Secretary, subject to certain exceptions. In addition, the rule clarifies provisions at § 1416.6(c) that allows the Deputy Secretary to take action to avoid the duplication of benefits between these programs and other programs to prevent a person or legal entity from being paid the total value of their loss.

The provisions related to direct attribution and adjust gross income limitations are removed from § 1416.6(f) because those provisions are also included in 7 CFR part 1400, which applies to the programs in part 1416; therefore, repeating those provisions in § 1416.6 is unnecessary. Application of direct attribution and adjusted gross income limits provisions at 7 CFR 1400 are not affected by this rule.

The provisions related to eligible producers in § 1416.3; misrepresentation in § 1416.7; offsets, assignments, and debt settlement in § 1416.9; and miscellaneous provisions in § 1416.14 are clarified. These changes are only intended to make the regulation easier to understand and do not affect the administration of the programs. The provisions related to deceased individuals and dissolved entities in § 1416.13 are removed, and the provisions in 7 CFR part 707, Payments Due Persons Who Have Died, Disappeared, or Have Been Declared Incompetent, will apply to the programs in part 1416 to be consistent with how such payments are treated under other FSA programs.

Specific Provisions for ELAP

Effective with the 2017 program year, BBA removes the annual funding limitation for ELAP of $20 million per program year; this rule implements this change and removes provisions regarding availability of funds and application of a national payment factor in § 1416.108. However, as all program payments are generally subject to availability of funds under Federal law, § 1416.2 has been amended to specify the actions FSA will take in response to changes in availability or incidence.

In § 1416.102, the definitions of “adult beefalo bull,” “adult beefalo cow,” “adult buffalo or bison bull,” “adult buffalo or bison cow,” “blizzard,” “grazing animals,” “newborn livestock,” “non-adult beefalo,” and “non-adult buffalo or bison,” are being added. This rule clarifies the definitions of “commercial use,” “eligible adverse weather,” “livestock owner,” “non-adult beef cattle,” and “normal grazing period”. This rule removes the definitions of “adult buffalo and beefalo bull,” “adult buffalo and beefalo cow”, and “non-adult buffalo or beefalo” because this rule is changing the categories and different terms are being used. This rule removes the definition of “Deputy Administrator or DAFP” because these definitions are now included at 7 CFR part 718, which applies to the programs in part 1416.

In § 1416.103, this rule clarifies that eligible losses must have been apparent during a program year to be an eligible loss in that year. In § 1416.104(a)(1), FSA specifies that to be eligible for losses relating to livestock grazing and feed, transporting water, or gathering livestock to treat for cattle fever, the livestock must be grazing animals, which is consistent with the intent of the program. Poultry and swine are removed from the listing of livestock types eligible for grazing and feed losses and losses from transporting water in § 1416.104(b) to be consistent with the amended requirement that eligible livestock be grazing animals. Poultry, and swine were added to the livestock types ineligible for those categories of assistance in § 1416.104(c).

The provisions related to eligible death losses are amended to correct livestock types for beefalo and bison in § 1416.104(d) and § 1416.104(b), add a separate livestock type for “chickens, pullets, and Cornish hens (small size),” and clarify two previously included poultry categories at § 1416.104(d) and (e). The rule clarifies when eligible livestock must have died and adds a separate provision for newborn livestock, which must have died within 7 calendar days from the ending date of the eligible loss condition. It also clarifies the requirement that livestock be produced or maintained for commercial use or for a commercial operation for producing livestock products, consistent with similar changes in § 1416.104(a)(1) and (c)(9).

This rule also clarifies provisions regarding length of time of ownership in § 1416.105 and updates applicable program years and the deadline in §§ 1416.106 and 1416.107, including dates for the extension of the 2017 application period.

Specific Provisions for LFP

This rule amends the definitions in § 1416.202 for beefalo, buffalo, and bison to be consistent with changes made to ELAP and LIP provisions and makes technical corrections to the definition of “Federal Agency.” This rule clarifies the LFP provisions related to contract growers by removing provisions from the definition of covered livestock and adding a separate definition of “contract grower” in § 1416.202 and clarifying provisions in § 1416.203(a). This rule clarifies the provisions related to grazing animals by adding a definition of “grazing animals” and amending the definition of “normal grazing period” to clarify that it is the time period when grazing animals receive daily nutrients and satisfy net energy requirements without supplemental feed. In § 1416.204, the section is amended to specify that covered livestock must be grazing animals and do not include poultry and swine, consistent with similar changes under ELAP. The requirement that eligible livestock must have been produced or maintained for commercial use or for producing livestock products in § 1416.204 is clarified, and categories for beefalo, bison, and buffalo are amended to be consistent with the clarifications for ELAP and LIP.

This rule updates the applicable program years and deadlines in § 1416.206 and makes technical corrections in § 1416.202 to the definition of “Federal Agency.” It also makes changes in § 1416.205, to specify that eligible grazing losses include losses occurring on land planted to annual planted ryegrass and annual planted crabgrass, and in § 1416.207 to correct paragraph references and numbering.

Specific Provisions for LIP

In addition to removing the payment limitation for LIP benefits, this rule adds provisions in § 1416.301 to provide LIP benefits for the sale of animals at a reduced price if the sale occurred due to injury that was a direct result of an eligible adverse weather event or due to an attack by an animal reintroduced into the wild by the Federal Government or protected by Federal law, including wolves or avian predators, as authorized by the BBA. It also amends provisions throughout part 1416 to include conforming language regarding the sale of animals at a reduced price where applicable, and amends § 1416.306(e) to specify that payments for sales of injured animals at a reduced price will be calculated by multiplying the national payment rate for each livestock category by the number of eligible livestock sold at a reduced price, minus the amount the producer received for the livestock. If the reduced sale price of the livestock is greater than the national payment rate, the producer will not receive a payment for that livestock.

The definitions in § 1416.302 for beefalo, buffalo, and bison are amended to be consistent with changes made to ELAP and LFP. This rule clarifies the existing definitions of “Commercial use,” “Eligible adverse weather event,” and “Winter storm.” To clarify existing regulations, this rule adds definitions of “acceptable animal husbandry,” “blizzard,” “eligible attack,” “eligible disease,” “eligible loss condition,” “livestock unit,” and “newborn livestock.” This rule removes definitions of “CCC,” “Deputy Administrator,” “Secretary,” “State committee, State office, county committee, or county office” and “United States” because these definitions are included at 7 CFR part 718, which applies to the programs in part 1416.

In § 1416.303, the eligibility of livestock owners and contract growers is clarified. This rule adds the provision at § 1416.303(c) to specify that a livestock owner's interest must be summarized by livestock unit for a county when determining payment eligibility. It amends § 1416.304 to clarify that ostriches are included as eligible livestock. It amends the time period in § 1416.304(c) during which an animal must have died due to an eligible adverse weather event or attack, from 60 days to 30 days, and within 7 days for newborn animals. The provisions in § 1416.304 regarding commercial use and categories for beefalo, buffalo, bison, and poultry are clarified. This rules updates applicable program years and notice of loss and application requirements in § 1416.305, including changes to extend the 2017 application period, to change the deadline for filing an application for payment and livestock inventory reports to 60 calendar days after the end of the calendar year, and to allow a licensed veterinarian to provide a certification of livestock deaths due to disease in cases where reliable beginning inventory data is available and the veterinarian personally observed the animals, had knowledge of how the deaths due to disease were caused or exacerbated by an eligible adverse weather event and were not avoidable or preventable by using good animal husbandry and management practices.

Specific Provisions for TAP

In additional to removing the TAP payment limitation of $125,000 per year, BBA required increases in the number of acres for which a producer can receive payment from 500 to 1,000 acres per year, which is being implemented by this final rule in § 1416.406(j). Growers who previously received TAP benefits for the 2017 or 2018 program years that were limited to only 500 acres may receive benefits on additional acres, up to 1,000 acres. If those growers already filed applications for their entire stand and received an administrative decision for that stand, there is no need to re-file those applications because the extent of eligibility decisions were all based on the entire stand. To the extent that payments were limited merely because the acreage limitation was reached, the previously limited payments will automatically issue without any action required by the participant.

The provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 are being implemented to expand coverage under TAP by providing $15 million for 2017 pecan tree losses for growers who suffered a pecan stand mortality loss that exceeds 7.5 percent (rather than a mortality loss that exceeds 15 percent) due to an eligible natural disaster. The provisions only apply to producers with mortality losses that exceed 7.5 percent. Pecan growers who had more than a 15 percent mortality loss are already eligible under regular 2017 TAP provisions and are not affected by this change. Accordingly, this rule only changes the eligibility provisions to allow pecan growers with lower stand mortality losses that exceed 7.5 percent to be eligible; it does not change the payment calculation for TAP benefits. If TAP applications for these losses exceed the available $15 million, FSA may factor payments. Pecan growers who suffered eligible 2017 losses can apply for these benefits through December 3, 2018.

TAP provisions are revised to make technical corrections and clarifications in the rule. The 2014 Farm Bill established a qualifying loss threshold of greater than 15 percent mortality; a person or legal entity who is otherwise eligible for payment qualifies for TAP only if the tree, bush, or vine mortality of the eligible orchardist or nursery tree grower, as a result of damaging weather or related condition, exceeds 15 percent (adjusted for normal mortality). Growers may receive payment for damage losses in excess of 15 percent (adjusted for normal damage) only if they meet the qualifying loss threshold of 15 percent mortality. This rule amends §§ 1416.403, 1416.404, and 1416.406 to correct and clarify the qualifying mortality loss threshold. Growers who only sustain damage, and no mortality in excess of the requisite 15 percent loss threshold for mortality, adjusted for normal mortality, are not eligible. In § 1416.406(d)(3), this rule also clarifies that if someone other than the orchardist or nursery tree grower bore or incurred costs or expenses, or the orchardist or nursery tree grower was reimbursed for expenses under another program, those expenses are not eligible for cost share under TAP.

In addition, the terms of “individual stand” and “eligible stand” have been changed to “stand” in §§ 1416.403 and 1416.406(h). This change was made for clarity and consistency to use the defined term “stand” because “individual stand” and “eligible stand” are not defined in the rule. The definitions in §§ 1416.402 of “county committee,” “Deputy Administrator,” and “State committee” are being removed because those definitions are included in 7 CFR part 718, which applies to the programs in part 1416.

Notice and Comment

In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking be published in the Federal Register and interested persons be given an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or without opportunity for oral presentation, except when the rule involves a matter relating to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts. The regulations to implement the provisions of Title I and the administration of Title I of the 2014 Farm Bill are exempt from the notice and comment provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553 and the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), as specified in section 1601(c)(2) of the 2014 Farm Bill.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13771 and 13777

Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” and Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” 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 emphasized the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” established a federal policy to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens on the American people.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated this rule as not significant under Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” and therefore, OMB has not reviewed this rule.

Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” requires that in order to manage the private costs required to comply with Federal regulations that for every new significant or economically significant regulation issued, the new costs must be offset by the elimination of at least two prior regulations. This rule does not rise to the level required to comply with Executive Order 13771; however, the cost savings will be accounted for through the USDA regulatory reform initiative and will be banked to be used as needed for future offsetting costs.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). This rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act since FSA is not required to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule.

Environmental Review

The environmental impacts of this rule have been considered in a manner consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 799). This rule change is a technical amendment and is solely administrative in nature. Accordingly, this action is covered by the Categorical Exclusion, found at 7 CFR part 799.31(b)(3)(i), that applies to the issuance of minor technical corrections to regulations. No Extraordinary Circumstances (§ 799.33) exist. As such, the implementation of the technical corrections provided in this rule does not constitute a major Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment, individually or cumulatively. Therefore, FSA will not prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement for this regulatory action and this rule serves as documentation of the programmatic environmental compliance decision for this federal action.

Executive Order 12372

Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” requires consultation with State and local officials. The objectives of the Executive Order are to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened Federalism, by relying on State and local processes for State and local government coordination and review of proposed Federal Financial assistance and direct Federal development. For reasons specified in the Notice to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), the programs and activities within this rule are excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372 which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials.

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform.” This rule would not preempt State and or local laws, and regulations, or policies unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. Before any judicial action may be brought concerning the provisions of this rule, appeal provisions of 7 CFR parts 11 and 780 must be exhausted. This rule would not preempt a State or tribal government law, including any State or tribal government liability law.

Executive Order 13132

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132, “Federalism.” The policies contained in this rule do not have any substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor does this rule impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, consultation with the States is not required.

Executive Order 13175

This rule has been reviewed for compliance with Executive Order 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.” The Executive Order 13175 requires to consult and coordinate with tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies that have tribal implications, including regulations, legislative comments proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects 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.

FSA has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian tribes and determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have tribal implications that required tribal consultation under Executive Order 13175. If a tribe requests consultation, FSA will work with USDA Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful consultation is provided.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, Pub. L. 104-4) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with Federal mandates that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any 1 year for State, local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector. UMRA generally requires agencies to consider alternatives and adopt the more cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. This rule contains no Federal mandates as defined by Title II of UMRA for State, local, or Tribal governments or for the private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.

SBREFA

This rule is not a major rule under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, SBREFA). Therefore, FSA is not required to delay the effective date for 60 days from the date of publication to allow for Congressional review and this rule is effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register. Therefore, the rule is effective when published in the Federal Register, as discussed above.

Federal Assistance Programs

The titles and numbers of the Federal assistance programs as found in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to which this rule applies are:

10.088—Livestock Indemnity Program 10.089—Livestock Forage Disaster Program 10.091—Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program 10.092—Tree Assistance Program Paperwork Reduction Act

The regulations in this rule are exempt from the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), as specified in section 1601(c) of the 2014 Farm Bill, which provides that these regulations be promulgated and administered without regard to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

E-Government Act Compliance

FSA 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.

List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 1400

Agriculture, Loan programs—agriculture, Conservation, Price support programs.

7 CFR Part 1416

Dairy products, Indemnity payments, Pesticide and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons discussed above, CCC amends 7 CFR parts 1400 and 1416 as follows:

PART 1400—PAYMENT LIMITATION AND PAYMENT ELIGIBILITY 1. The authority citation for part 1400 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 1308, 1308-1, 1308-2, 1308-3, 1308-3a, 1308-4, and 1308-5; and Title I, Pub. L. 115-123.

2. In § 1400.1, revise the table in paragraph (f) to read as follow:
§ 1400.1 Applicability.

(f) * * *

Payment or benefit Limitation per
  • person or legal
  • entity, per
  • crop, program,
  • or fiscal year
  • (1) Price Loss Coverage, Agricultural Risk Coverage, Loan Deficiency Program, and Marketing Loan Gain payments (other than Peanuts) $125,000 (2) Price Loss Coverage, Agricultural Risk Coverage, Loan Deficiency Program, and Marketing Loan Gain payments for Peanuts 125,000 (3) Transition Assistance for Producers of Upland Cotton 1 40,000 (4) CRP annual rental payments 2 50,000 (5) NAP payments 125,000 (6) TAP 3 125,000 (7) LIP, LFP, and ELAP 4 125,000 (8) CSP 5 200,000 (9) EQIP 6 450,000 (10) AMA program 7 50,000 1 Transition Assistance for Producers of Upland Cotton is only available in the 2014 and 2015 program years. 2 CRP contracts approved prior to October 1, 2008 may exceed the limitation, subject to payment limitation rules in effect on the date of contract approval. 3 A separate limitation applies to TAP payments for 2011 through 2016 program years. Lastly, there is no program payment limitation for either LIP or TAP in 2017 and subsequent program years. 4 Total payments received through LIP, LFP, and ELAP may not exceed $125,000 for each of the 2011 through 2016 program years. For the 2017 and subsequent program years, LIP is no longer included in the combined program limitation. 5 The $200,000 limit is the total limit under all CSP contracts entered into subsequent to enactment of the 2014 Farm Bill during fiscal years 2014 through 2018. 6 The $450,000 limit is the total limit under all EQIP contracts entered into subsequent to enactment of the 2014 Farm Bill during fiscal years 2014 through 2018. 7 The $50,000 limit is the total limit that a participant may receive under the AMA program in any fiscal year.
    PART 1416—EMERGENCY AGRICULTURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS 3. The authority citation for part 1416 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    Title I, Pub. L. 113-79, 128 Stat. 649; Title I, Pub. L. 115-123; Title VII, Pub. L. 115-141.

    Subpart A—General Provisions for Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance Programs 4. In § 1416.2, add paragraph (f) to read as follows:
    § 1416.2 Administration of ELAP, LFP, LIP, and TAP.

    (f) Payments issued under this part are subject to the availability of funds under Federal law. Within whatever funding limitation that may exist under law, the only funds that will be considered available to pay eligible losses will be that amount approved by the Secretary. If funds are limited, for a particular program year payments may be delayed until the time for applying for the payment for that program year has passed. In the event that, within the limits of the funding made available by the Secretary, approval of eligible applications would result in expenditures in excess of the amount available, FSA will prorate the available funds by a national factor to reduce the total expected payments to the amount made available by the Secretary. FSA will make payments based on the factor for the national rate determined by FSA. FSA will prorate the payments in such manner as it determines necessary and appropriate and reasonable. Applications for payment that are unpaid or prorated for a program year for any reason will not be carried forward for payment under other funds for later years or otherwise, but will be considered, as to any unpaid amount, void and nonpayable.

    5. In § 1416.3, revise paragraphs (a), (b) introductory text, and (b)(4) to read as follows:
    § 1416.3 Eligible Producer.

    (a) Eligible producer means, in addition to other requirements as may apply, an individual or legal entity who is an owner, operator, landlord, tenant, or sharecropper, who shares in the risk of producing a crop or livestock and who is entitled to share in the crop or livestock available for marketing from the farm, or would have shared had the crop or livestock been produced, and who also meets the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section. The term eligible producer can include a livestock owner or contract grower who satisfies other requirements of this part.

    (b) An individual or legal entity seeking to be an eligible producer under this part must submit a farm operating plan in accordance with part 1400 of this chapter and be a:

    (4) Corporation, limited liability company, or other organizational structure organized under State law.

    6. Revise § 1416.6 to read as follows:
    § 1416.6 Payment eligibility and limitation.

    (a) For 2017 and subsequent program years, a person or legal entity, excluding a joint venture or general partnership, as determined in part 1400 of this chapter, must not receive ELAP and LFP payments combined, directly or indirectly, in excess of $125,000 per program year.

    (b) The Deputy Administrator may take such actions as needed to avoid a duplication of benefits under the programs provided for in this part, or duplication of benefits received in other programs, and may impose such cross-program payment limitations as may be consistent with the intent of this part in order to help prevent a person or legal entity being paid more than the total value of their loss.

    (c) For losses incurred beginning on October 1, 2011, and for the purposes of administering LIP, LFP, ELAP, and TAP, the average adjusted gross income (AGI) limitation provisions in part 1400 of this chapter relating to limits on payments for persons or legal entities, excluding joint ventures and general partnerships, apply under this subpart and will apply to each applicant for ELAP, LFP, LIP, and TAP. Specifically, a person or legal entity with an average AGI that exceeds $900,000 will not be eligible to receive benefits under this part.

    (d) The direct attribution provisions in part 1400 of this chapter apply to ELAP, LFP, LIP, and TAP.

    7. Revise § 1416.7 to read as follows:
    § 1416.7 Misrepresentation.

    (a) A person or legal entity who is determined to have deliberately misrepresented any fact affecting a program determination made in accordance with this part, or any other part that is applicable to this part, to receive benefits for which that person or legal entity would not otherwise be entitled, is ineligible for program payments under this part and must refund all such payments received, plus interest as determined in accordance with part 1403 of this chapter. The person or legal entity is ineligible and will be denied program benefits under this part for the immediately subsequent period of at least 2 crop years, and up to 5 crop years. Interest will run from the date of the original disbursement by CCC.

    (b) For each year of ineligibility determined according to paragraph (a) of this section, a person or legal entity will refund to CCC all program payments, in accordance with § 1416.11, received by such person or legal entity with respect to all applications under this part, as may be applicable, if the person or legal entity is determined to have knowingly misrepresented any fact affecting a program determination.

    § 1416.9 [Amended]
    8. Amend § 1416.9 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), remove the words “to any participant”, and b. In paragraph (b), remove the words “Any participant entitled to any payment” and add the words “A participant” in their place, and add the words “under this part” immediately before the words “in accordance”. 9. Revise § 1416.13 to read as follows:
    § 1416.13 Deceased individuals or dissolved entities.

    (a) The provisions of part 707 of this chapter apply to the programs of this part.

    (b) [Reserved].

    § 1416.14 [Amended]
    10. In § 1416.14, in paragraph (a), remove “to receive benefits” and add “of payment eligibility” in its place, and remove “from receiving benefits” and add the word “from receiving payments” in its place. Subpart B—Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program 11. Amend § 1416.102 as follows: a. Remove the definitions of “Adult buffalo and beefalo bull” and “Adult buffalo and beefalo cow”; b. Add definitions for “Adult beefalo bull”, “Adult beefalo cow”, “Adult buffalo or bison bull”, “Adult buffalo or bison cow”, and “Blizzard” in alphabetical order; c. In the definition of “Commercial use”, remove “by the eligible producer”; d. Remove the definition of “Deputy Administrator or DAFP”; e. In the definition of “eligible adverse weather”, remove ” extreme or” and add “extreme and” in its place; f. Add a definition for “Grazing animals” in alphabetical order; g. Revise the definition of “Livestock owner”; h. Add a definition for “Newborn livestock” in alphabetical order; i. In the definition of “Non-adult beef cattle”, remove “at the time they died” and add “on or before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition that caused death” in its place; j. Remove the definition of “Non-adult buffalo or beefalo”; k. Add definitions for “Non-adult beefalo” and “Non-adult buffalo or bison” in alphabetical order; l. In the definition of “Non-adult dairy cattle”, remove “at the time they died” and add “on or before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition that caused death” in its place; and m. Revise the definition of “Normal grazing period”.

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1416.102 Definitions.

    Adult beefalo bull means a male hybrid of beef and bison that was used for breeding purposes and was at least 2 years old before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Adult beefalo cow means a female hybrid of beef and bison that had delivered one or more offspring before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition. A first-time bred beefalo heifer is also considered an adult beefalo cow if it was pregnant by the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Adult buffalo or bison bull means a male animal of those breeds that was used for breeding purposes and was at least 2 years old before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Adult buffalo or bison cow means a female animal of those breeds that had delivered one or more offspring before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition. A first-time bred buffalo or bison heifer is also considered an adult buffalo or bison cow if it was pregnant by the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Blizzard means, as defined by the National Weather Service, a storm which contains large amounts of snow or blowing snow with winds in excess of 35 miles per hour and visibility of less than one-fourth of a mile for an extended period of time.

    Grazing animals mean those species of livestock that, from a nutritional and physiological perspective, satisfy more than 50 percent of their net energy requirement through the consumption of growing forage grasses and legumes. Species of livestock for which more than 50 percent of their net energy requirements are not recommended to be met from consumption of forage grasses and legumes, such as poultry and swine, are excluded regardless of whether those species are grazing or are present on grazing land or pastureland.

    Livestock owner means one having legal ownership of the livestock for which benefits are being requested on the day of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Newborn livestock means livestock that are within 10 calendar days of the date of birth.

    Non-adult beefalo means a hybrid of beef and bison that does not meet the definition of adult beefalo cow or bull. Non-adult beefalo are further delineated by weight categories of either less than 400 pounds or 400 pounds or more on or before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition that caused death. For a loss other than death, means an animal of those breeds that is less than 2 years old that weighed 500 pounds or more on or before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Non-adult buffalo or bison means an animal of those breeds that does not meet the definition of adult buffalo or adult bison cow or bull. Non-adult buffalo or bison are further delineated by weight categories of either less than 400 pounds or 400 pounds or more on or before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition that caused death. For a loss other than death, means an animal of those breeds that is less than 2 years old that weighed 500 pounds or more on or before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition.

    Normal grazing period means, as determined by FSA, with respect to a specific type of grazing land or pastureland in the county, the period during the calendar year when grazing animals receive daily nutrients and satisfy net energy requirements without supplemental feed.

    12. In § 1416.103, revise paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:
    § 1416.103 Eligible losses, adverse weather, and other loss conditions.

    (a) An eligible loss covered under this subpart is a loss that an eligible producer, livestock owner, or contract grower of livestock, or eligible producer of honeybees or farm-raised fish incurs due to an eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as determined by the Deputy Administrator.

    (c) To be an eligible loss in a program year, the loss must have been apparent to the person or legal entity providing the notice and to FSA in the program year for which payment is being requested.

    13. In § 1416.104, revise paragraphs (a) through (f) to read as follows:
    § 1416.104 Eligible livestock, honeybees, and farm-raised fish.

    (a) To be considered eligible livestock for livestock grazing and feed, losses resulting from transporting water, and gathering livestock to treat for cattle tick fever, livestock must meet all the following conditions:

    (1) Be grazing animals such as alpacas, adult or non-adult dairy cattle, adult or non-adult beef cattle, adult or non-adult beefalo, adult or non-adult buffalo or bison, deer, elk, emus, equine, goats, llamas, reindeer, or sheep;

    (2) Except for livestock losses resulting from gathering livestock to treat cattle tick fever, be livestock that would normally have been grazing the eligible grazing land or pastureland during the normal grazing period for the specific type of grazing land or pastureland for the county where the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition occurred;

    (3) Be livestock that is owned, cash-leased, purchased, under contract for purchase, or been raised by a contract grower or an eligible livestock owner, for not less than 60 days before the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition;

    (4) Be livestock produced or maintained for commercial use or be livestock that is produced or maintained for producing livestock products for commercial use, such as milk from dairy, as part of the contract grower's or livestock owner's farming operation on the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition;

    (5) Be livestock that was not in a feedlot, on the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as a part of the normal business operation of the producer, as determined by the Deputy Administrator.

    (b) The eligible livestock types for grazing and feed losses, losses resulting from transporting water, and gathering livestock to treat for cattle tick fever, are:

    (1) Adult beef cows or bulls,

    (2) Adult beefalo cows or bulls,

    (3) Adult buffalo or bison cows or bulls,

    (4) Adult dairy cows or bulls,

    (5) Alpacas,

    (6) Deer,

    (7) Elk,

    (8) Emus,

    (9) Equine,

    (10) Goats,

    (11) Llamas,

    (12) Non-adult beef cattle,

    (13) Non-adult beefalo,

    (14) Non-adult buffalo or bison,

    (15) Non-adult dairy cattle,

    (16) Reindeer, and

    (17) Sheep.

    (c) Ineligible livestock for grazing and feed losses, and losses resulting from transporting water, include, but are not limited to:

    (1) Livestock that were or would have been in a feedlot, on the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as a part of the normal business operation of the producer, as determined by FSA;

    (2) Animals that are not grazing animals;

    (3) Yaks;

    (4) Ostriches;

    (5) Poultry;

    (6) Swine;

    (7) All beef and dairy cattle, and buffalo or bison and beefalo that weighed less than 500 pounds on the beginning date of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition;

    (8) Any wild free roaming livestock, including horses and deer; and

    (9) Livestock that are not produced for commercial use or those that are not produced or maintained in a commercial operation for livestock products, such as milk from dairy, including, but not limited to, livestock produced or maintained exclusively for recreational purposes, such as:

    (i) Roping,

    (ii) Hunting,

    (iii) Show,

    (iv) Pleasure,

    (v) Use as pets, or

    (vi) Consumption by owner.

    (d) For death losses, the livestock must meet all of the following conditions:

    (1) Be alpacas, adult or non-adult dairy cattle, beef cattle, beefalo, buffalo or bison, deer, elk, emus, equine, goats, llamas, poultry, reindeer, sheep, or swine, and meet all the conditions in paragraph (f) of this section.

    (2) Be one of the following categories of animals for which calculations of eligibility for payments will be calculated separately for each producer with respect to each category:

    (i) Adult beef bulls;

    (ii) Adult beef cows;

    (iii) Adult beefalo bulls;

    (iv) Adult beefalo cows;

    (v) Adult buffalo or bison bulls;

    (vi) Adult buffalo or bison cows;

    (vii) Adult dairy bulls;

    (viii) Adult dairy cows;

    (ix) Alpacas;

    (x) Chickens, broilers, pullets (regular size);

    (xi) Chickens, chicks;

    (xii) Chickens, layers;

    (xiii) Chickens, pullets or Cornish hens (small size);

    (xiv) Deer;

    (xv) Ducks;

    (xvi) Ducks, ducklings;

    (xvii) Elk;

    (xviii) Emus;

    (xix) Equine;

    (xx) Geese, goose;

    (xi) Geese, gosling;

    (xii) Goats, bucks;

    (xxiii) Goats, nannies;

    (xxiv) Goats, kids;

    (xxv) Llamas;

    (xxvi) Non-adult beef cattle;

    (xxvii) Non-adult beefalo;

    (xxviii) Non-adult buffalo or bison;

    (xxix) Non-adult dairy cattle;

    (xxx) Reindeer;

    (xxxi) Sheep, ewes;

    (xxxii) Sheep, lambs;

    (xxxiii) Sheep, rams;

    (xxxiv) Swine, feeder pigs under 50 pounds;

    (xxxv) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts 50 to 150 pounds;

    (xxxvi) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts over 150 pounds;

    (xxxvii) Turkeys, poults; and

    (xxxviii) Turkeys, toms, fryers, and roasters.

    (e) Under ELAP, “contract growers” only includes producers of livestock, other than feedlots, whose income is dependent on the survival of the livestock and any of the following: Actual weight gain of the livestock, number of offspring produced from the livestock, or quantity of products (eggs, milk, etc.) produced from the livestock. For death losses for contract growers to be eligible, the livestock must meet all of the following conditions:

    (1) Be poultry or swine and meet all the conditions in paragraph (f) of this section.

    (2) Be one of the following categories of animals for which calculations of eligibility for payments will be calculated separately for each contract grower with respect to each category:

    (i) Chickens, broilers, pullets (regular size);

    (ii) Chickens, layers;

    (iii) Chickens, pullets or Cornish hens (small size);

    (iv) Geese, goose;

    (v) Swine, boars, sows;

    (vi) Swine, feeder pigs;

    (vii) Swine, lightweight barrows, gilts;

    (viii) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts; and

    (ix) Turkeys, toms, fryers, and roasters.

    (f) For livestock death losses in the 2017 and subsequent program years, livestock must meet all of the following conditions:

    (1) They must have died:

    (i) On or after the beginning date of the eligible loss condition; and

    (ii) Within 30 calendar days from the ending date of the eligible loss condition, or for newborn livestock within 7 calendar days from the ending date of the eligible loss condition; and

    (iii) As a direct result of an eligible loss condition.

    (2) Been produced for commercial use or maintained in a commercial operation for producing livestock products, such as milk from dairy or eggs from poultry, on the day of the eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition that caused the livestock to die; and

    (3) Before dying, not have been produced or maintained for reasons other than commercial use as part of a farming operation, such non-eligible uses being understood to include, but not be limited to, any uses of wild free roaming animals or use of the animals for recreational purposes, such as pleasure, hunting, roping, pets, or for show.

    § 1416.105 [Amended]
    14. In § 1416.105, in paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1), remove the words “during the 60 days prior to” and add the words “for not less than 60 days before” in their places.
    § 1416.106 [Amended]
    15. Amend § 1416.106 as follows: a. In paragraph (b) introductory text, remove the first sentence, and remove “2015” and add “2017” in its place; b. In paragraph (e), remove “2015” and add “2017” in its place; c. Remove paragraph (f); and d. Redesignate paragraph (g) as paragraph (f). 16. Revise § 1416.107 to read as follows:
    § 1416.107 Notice of loss and application period.

    (a) Notices of loss and applications for payment that had been filed under the regulations in effect at the time of filing and which had been issued an administrative decision for either a 2017 or 2018 program year loss are not eligible for consideration under paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, unless the decision was based only on failure to submit the notice of loss or application for payment by the prior applicable deadline.

    (b) In addition to submitting an application for payment at the appropriate time, the participant that suffered eligible livestock, honeybee, or farm-raised fish losses that create or could create a claim for benefits must:

    (1) For losses in the 2017 and subsequent program years, provide a notice of loss to FSA by the later of 30 calendar days of when the loss of livestock is first apparent or December 3, 2018;

    (2) Submit the notice of loss required in paragraph (b) of this section to the administrative FSA county office, unless additional options are otherwise provided for by the Deputy Administrator.

    (c) In addition to the notices of loss required in paragraph (b) of this section, a participant must also submit a completed application for payment by the later of November 1 following the program year for which benefits are being requested or December 3, 2018.

    § 1416.108 [Removed and Reserved]
    17. Remove and reserve § 1416.108. Subpart C—Livestock Forage Disaster Program 18. Amend § 1416.202 as follows: a. Remove the definitions of “Adult buffalo and beefalo bull” and “Adult buffalo and beefalo cow”; b. Add definitions for “Adult beefalo bull”, “Adult beefalo cow”, “Adult buffalo or bison bull”, “Adult buffalo or bison cow”, and “Contract grower” in alphabetical order; c. In the definition of “Covered livestock”, remove the words and punctuation “for “contract growers” ” from the third sentence and remove the last sentence; d. In the definition of “Federal Agency”, add a comma after “U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI)” and remove the acronym “DOI” before the words “Bureau of Land Management”; e. Add a definition for “Grazing animals” in alphabetical order; f. Remove the definition of “Non-adult buffalo or beefalo”; g. Add definitions for “Non-adult beefalo” and “Non-adult buffalo or bison” in alphabetical order; and h. Revise the definition of “Normal grazing period”.

    The additions and revision read as follows:

    § 1416.202 Definitions.

    Adult beefalo bull means a male hybrid of beef and bison that was used for breeding purposes and was at least 2 years old before the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire.

    Adult beefalo cow means a female hybrid of beef and bison that had delivered one or more offspring before the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire. A first-time bred beefalo heifer is also considered an adult beefalo cow if it was pregnant by the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire.

    Adult buffalo or bison bull means a male animal of those breeds that was used for breeding purposes and was at least 2 years old before the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire.

    Adult buffalo or bison cow means a female animal of those breeds that had delivered one or more offspring before the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire. A first-time bred buffalo or bison heifer is also considered an adult buffalo or bison cow if it was pregnant by the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire.

    Contract grower means a person or legal entity, other than a feedlot, that was engaged in a farming operation not as an owner of covered livestock but in a business whose income is dependent on the survival of the livestock and either the actual weight gain of the livestock or number of offspring produced from the livestock.

    Grazing animals mean those species of livestock that, from a nutritional and physiological perspective, satisfy more than 50 percent of their net energy requirement through the consumption of growing forage grasses and legumes. Species of livestock for which more than 50 percent of their net energy requirements are not recommended to be met from consumption of forage grasses and legumes, such as poultry and swine, are excluded regardless of whether those species are present on grazing land or pastureland.

    Non-adult beefalo means a hybrid of beef and bison that weighed 500 pounds or more on or before the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire, but does not meet the definition of adult beefalo cow or bull.

    Non-adult buffalo or bison means an animal of those breeds that weighed 500 pounds or more on or before the beginning date of beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire, but does not meet the definition of adult buffalo or bison cow or bull.

    Normal grazing period means, as determined by FSA, with respect to a specific type of grazing land or pastureland in the county, the period during the calendar year when grazing animals receive daily nutrients and satisfy net energy requirements without supplemental feed.

    19. In § 1416.203, revise the section heading and paragraph (a) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 1416.203 Eligibility.

    (a) In addition to meeting all other requirements, to be eligible for benefits under this subpart, an individual or legal entity with an eligible producer interest in grazing land acreage who is either an owner or contract grower of grazing animals, must:

    20. In § 1416.204, revise paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4), (b), and (c)(2) through (6) and add paragraphs (c)(7) through (9) to read as follows:
    § 1416.204 Covered livestock.

    (a) * * *

    (1) Be grazing animals such as adult or non-adult beef cattle, adult or non-adult beefalo, adult or non-adult buffalo or bison, adult or non-adult dairy cattle, alpacas, deer, elk, emus, equine, goats, llamas, reindeer, or sheep;

    (4) Been livestock produced or maintained for commercial use or be livestock that is produced and maintained for producing livestock products for commercial use, such as milk from dairy, as part of the contract grower's or livestock owner's farming operation on the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire;

    (b) The covered livestock categories are:

    (1) Adult beef cows or bulls,

    (2) Adult beefalo cows or bulls,

    (3) Adult buffalo or bison cows or bulls,

    (3) Adult dairy cows or bulls,

    (4) Alpacas,

    (5) Deer,

    (6) Elk,

    (7) Emu,

    (8) Equine,

    (9) Goats,

    (10) Llamas,

    (11) Non-adult beef cattle,

    (12) Non-adult beefalo,

    (13) Non-adult buffalo or bison,

    (14) Non-adult dairy cattle,

    (15) Reindeer, and

    (16) Sheep.

    (c) * * *

    (2) Animals that are not grazing animals;

    (3) Yaks;

    (4) Ostriches;

    (5) Poultry;

    (6) Swine;

    (7) All beef and dairy cattle, beefalo, buffalo and bison that weighed less than 500 pounds on the beginning date of the qualifying drought or fire;

    (8) Any wild free roaming livestock, including horses and deer; and

    (9) Livestock produced or maintained for reasons other than commercial use as part of a farming operation, including, but not limited to, livestock produced or maintained for recreational purposes, such as:

    (i) Roping,

    (ii) Hunting,

    (iii) Show,

    (iv) Pleasure,

    (v) Use as pets, or

    (vi) Consumption by owner.

    § 1416.205 [Amended]
    21. In the first § 1416.205, entitled “Eligible grazing losses,” in paragraph (a)(2), remove “sorghum or small grains,” and add ” sorghum, small grains, annual planted ryegrass, or annual planted crabgrass,” in their place.
    § 1416.205 [Redesignated as § 1416.206]
    22. Redesignate the second § 1416.205, entitled “Application for payment” as § 1416.206. 23. Amend newly redesignated § 1416.206 as follows: a. Redesignate paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) as (b), (c), and (d), respectively; b. Add new paragraph (a); c. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (b)(1) and (2); d. In newly redesignated paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(B), add the word “and” at the end; e. Remove newly redesignated paragraph (c)(5)(iii); and f. Redesignate paragraph (c)(5)(iv) as (c)(5)(iii) and remove “calendar” and add “program” in its place.

    The addition and revisions read as follows:

    § 1416.206 Application for payment.

    (a) A completed application for payment that had been filed under the regulations that were in effect at the actual time of the filing of that application and which had been issued an administrative decision for either a 2017 or 2018 program year loss is not eligible for consideration under paragraph (b) of this section, unless the decision was based only on failure to submit the application for payment by the prior applicable deadline.

    (b) * * *

    (1) For the 2017 program year, must submit a completed application for payment and required supporting documentation as specified in this part, including some supporting documentation such as an acreage report that may have been required at an earlier date as determined by FSA, to the administrative FSA county office by December 3, 2018; or

    (2) For the 2018 and subsequent program years, must submit a completed application for payment and required supporting documentation, including some supporting documentation such as an acreage report that may have been required at an earlier date, to the administrative FSA county office no later than 30 calendar days after the end of the calendar year in which the grazing loss occurred.

    § 1416.207 [Amended]
    24. Amend § 1416.207 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), remove the reference to “paragraphs (e) or (f)” and add the reference to “paragraphs (f) or (h)” in its place; b. In paragraph (f) introductory text, remove the reference to “paragraph (g)” and add the reference to “paragraph (h)” in its place; c. In paragraph (f)(1), remove the reference “paragraph (h)” and add the reference “paragraph (i)” in its place; d. In paragraph (f)(2), remove the reference “paragraph (j)” and add the reference “paragraph (l)” in its place; e. In paragraph (i)(2), remove “referred to in paragraph (h) of this section as” and add “of” in its place, and remove “under paragraph (h)” and add “under paragraph (j)” in its place; f. In paragraph (i)(3), remove the reference “paragraph (i)” and add the reference “paragraph (k)” in its place; g. In paragraph (l)(3), remove the reference “paragraph (i)” and add the reference “paragraph (k)” in its place; h. In paragraph (m)(1) introductory text, remove the words and punctuation “, subject to paragraph (l)(2) of this section”; and i. In paragraph (m)(3), remove the reference “§ 1416.208(i)” and add “paragraph (i) of this section” in its place. Subpart D—Livestock Indemnity Program 25. Revise § 1416.301 to read as follows:
    § 1416.301 Applicability.

    (a) This subpart establishes the terms and conditions under which the Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) is administered under Title I of the 2014 Farm Bill (Pub. L. 113-79), as amended by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-123).

    (b) Eligible livestock owners and contract growers will be compensated in accordance with § 1416.306 for eligible livestock deaths in excess of normal mortality, or livestock owners will be compensated for sales of injured livestock for a reduced price, if either the death or injury that results in sale at a reduced price occurred as a direct result of an eligible cause of loss. The eligible cause of loss is one, as determined by FSA, that directly results in the death of livestock or injury and sale of livestock at a reduced price, despite the livestock owner's or contract grower's performance of expected and normal preventative or corrective measures and acceptable animal husbandry practices.

    26. Amend § 1416.302 as follows: a. Add a definition for “Acceptable animal husbandry” in alphabetical order, b. In the definition of “Adult beef bull”, remove the words “before it died”; c. In the definition of “Adult beef cow”, remove the words “before dying” and in the last sentence, after the word “died”, add the words “or was sold at a reduced price”; d. Remove the definitions of “Adult buffalo and beefalo bull” and “Adult buffalo and beefalo cow”; e. Add definitions for “Adult beefalo bull”, “Adult beefalo cow”; “Adult buffalo or bison bull”; and “Adult buffalo or bison cow” in alphabetical order; f. In the definition of “Adult dairy bull”, remove the words “before it died”; g. In the definition of “Adult dairy cow”, remove the words “before dying” and in the last sentence, after the word “died”, add the words “or was injured and sold at a reduced price”; h. Add a definition for “Blizzard” in alphabetical order; i. Remove the definition of “CCC”; j. In the definition of “Commercial use”, remove the words “by the eligible producer”; k. Remove the definition of “Deputy Administrator or DAFP”; l. Revise the definition of “Eligible adverse weather event”; m. Add definitions for “Eligible attack”, “Eligible disease”, and “Eligible loss condition” in alphabetical order; n. In the definition of “Livestock owner”, add the words “or were sold at a reduced sale price” at the end; n. Add definitions for “Livestock unit” and “Newborn livestock” in alphabetical order; o. In the definition of “Non-adult beef cattle”, add the words “or were sold at a reduced price” at the end; o. Remove the definition of “Non-adult buffalo or beefalo”; p. Add definitions for “Non-adult beefalo” and “Non-adult buffalo or bison” in alphabetical order; q. In the definition of “Non-adult dairy cattle”, add the words “or were sold at a reduced price” at the end; r. Remove the definitions of “Secretary” and “State committee, State office, county committee, or county office”; s. Add a definition for “State office or county office” in alphabetical order; t. Remove the definition of “United States”; and u. Revise the definition of “Winter storm”.

    The additions and revisions read as follows:

    § 1416.302 Definitions.

    Acceptable animal husbandry means animals raised and cared for to produce offspring, meat, fiber, milk, eggs, or other products. Includes day-to-day care and selective breeding and raising of livestock. The practices are those that are generally recognized by the commercial livestock industry.

    Adult beefalo bull means a male hybrid of beef and bison that was at least 2 years old and used for breeding purposes.

    Adult beefalo cow means a female hybrid of beef and bison that had delivered one or more offspring before dying or being injured and sold at a reduced price. A first-time bred beefalo heifer is also considered an adult beefalo cow if it is pregnant at the time it died or was sold at a reduced price.

    Adult buffalo or bison bull means a male animal of those breeds that was at least 2 years old and used for breeding purposes.

    Adult buffalo or bison cow means a female animal of those breeds that had delivered one or more offspring before it died or was injured and sold at a reduced price. A first-time bred buffalo or bison heifer is also considered an adult buffalo or bison cow if it was pregnant at the time it died or was sold at a reduced price.

    Blizzard means, as defined by the National Weather Service, a storm which contains large amounts of snow or blowing snow with winds in excess of 35 miles per hour and visibility of less than one-fourth of a mile for an extended period of time.

    Eligible adverse weather event means extreme and abnormal damaging weather in the calendar year for which benefits are being requested that is not expected to occur during the loss period for which it occurred, which directly results in eligible livestock death losses in excess of normal mortality or injury and sale of livestock at a reduced price. Eligible adverse weather events include, but are not limited to, as determined by the Deputy Administrator or designee, earthquake; hail; lightning; tornado; tropical storm; typhoon; vog if directly related to a volcanic eruption; winter storm if the winter storm meets the definition provided in this section; hurricanes; floods; blizzards; wildfires; extreme heat; extreme cold; and straight-line wind. Drought is not an eligible adverse weather event except when associated with anthrax, a condition that occurs because of drought and results in the death of eligible livestock.

    Eligible attack means an attack by animals reintroduced into the wild by the Federal government or protected by Federal law, including wolves and avian predators, that directly results in the death of eligible livestock in excess of normal mortality or injury and sale of eligible livestock at reduced price. Eligible livestock owners or contract growers are responsible for showing to FSA's satisfaction that eligible attacks are substantiated according to § 1416.305 in order to be considered eligible for payment.

    Eligible disease means a disease that, as determined by the Deputy Administrator, is exacerbated by an eligible adverse weather event that directly results in the death of eligible livestock in excess of normal mortality, including, but not limited to anthrax, cyanobacteria, and larkspur poisoning. Eligible diseases are not an eligible cause of loss for benefits based on injury and sales of eligible livestock at reduced price.

    Eligible loss condition means any of the following that occur in the calendar year for which benefits are requested: Eligible adverse weather event, eligible attack, and eligible disease. Eligible disease is not an eligible loss condition for injured livestock.

    Livestock unit means all eligible livestock in the physical location county where the livestock losses occurred for the program year:

    (1) In which a person or legal entity has 100 percent share interest; or

    (2) Which is owned individually by more than one person or legal entity on a shared basis.

    Newborn livestock means livestock that are within 10 calendar days of date of birth.

    Non-adult beefalo means a hybrid of beef and bison that does not meet the definition of adult beefalo cow or bull. Non-adult beefalo are further delineated by weight categories of either less than 400 pounds or 400 pounds or more at the time they died or were sold at a reduced price.

    Non-adult buffalo or bison means an animal of those breeds that does not meet the definition of adult buffalo or bison cow or bull. Non-adult buffalo or bison are further delineated by weight categories of either less than 400 pounds or 400 pounds or more at the time they died or were sold at a reduced price.

    State office or county office means the respective FSA office.

    Winter storm means, for an eligible adverse weather event, an event that so severe as to directly cause injury to livestock and lasts in duration for at least 3 consecutive days and includes a combination of high winds, freezing rain or sleet, heavy snowfall, and extremely cold temperatures. For a determination of winter storm, the wind, precipitation, and extremely cold temperatures must occur with the 3-day period, with wind and extremely cold temperatures occurring in each of the 3 days.

    27. In § 1416.303, revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) and add paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
    § 1416.303 Eligible owners and contract growers.

    (a) * * *

    (1) Livestock owner for benefits with respect to the death of an animal or sale of an injured animal at a reduced price under this subpart, the applicant must have had legal ownership of the eligible livestock on the day the livestock died or was injured and sold at a reduced price and under conditions in which no contract grower could have been eligible for benefits with respect to the animal. Eligible types of animal categories for which losses can be calculated for an owner are specified in § 1416.304(a).

    (b) A livestock owner or contract grower seeking payment must be an eligible producer as defined in subpart A of this part and other applicable USDA regulations.

    (c) All of an eligible livestock owner's or contract grower's interest in livestock in a physical location county must be taken into account and summarized by livestock unit when determining the extent of payment eligibility.

    (d) Livestock owners are eligible for benefits for injured animals sold at reduced price only when those animals are not in a contract grower's inventory for which a contract grower seeks benefits for death losses. Contract growers are not eligible for benefits for injured animals sold at a reduced price.

    28. Revise § 1416.304 to read as follows:
    § 1416.304 Eligible livestock.

    (a) To be considered eligible livestock for livestock owners, the kind of livestock must be alpacas, adult or non-adult dairy cattle, beef cattle, beefalo, bison, buffalo, elk, emus, equine, llamas, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, deer, ostriches, or reindeer and meet all the conditions in paragraph (c) of this section.

    (b) To be considered eligible livestock for contract growers, the kind of livestock must be poultry or swine and meet all the conditions in paragraph (c) of this section.

    (c) To be considered eligible livestock for the purpose of generating payments under this subpart, livestock must have:

    (1) Died as a direct result of an eligible loss condition:

    (i) With the eligible loss condition occurring in the program year for which benefits are sought;

    (ii) No later than 30 calendar days for livestock, or 7 calendar days for newborn livestock, from the ending date of the eligible adverse weather event or the date of the attack by animals reintroduced into the wild by the Federal Government or protected by Federal law, including wolves and avian predators; or

    (2) Been injured and sold at a reduced price as a direct result of an eligible adverse weather event or attack by animals reintroduced into the wild by the Federal Government or protected by Federal law, including wolves and avian predators:

    (i) On or after January 1, 2017;

    (ii) No later than 30 calendar days for livestock, or 7 calendar days for newborn livestock, from the ending date of the eligible adverse weather event or the date of the attack by animals reintroduced into the wild by the Federal Government or protected by Federal law, including wolves and avian predators;

    (3) Been maintained for commercial use for livestock sale or for the production of livestock products such as milk or eggs as part of a farming operation on the day they died or until the event that resulted in their sale at a reduced price; and

    (4) Not be produced or maintained for reasons other than commercial use for livestock sale or for the production of livestock products such as milk or eggs. Livestock excluded from being eligible include, but are not limited to, wild free roaming animals and animals maintained for recreational purposes, such as pleasure, hunting, roping, pets, or for show.

    (d) The following categories of animals owned by a livestock owner are eligible livestock and calculations of eligibility for payments will be calculated separately for each producer with respect to each category:

    (1) Adult beef bulls;

    (2) Adult beef cows;

    (3) Adult beefalo bulls;

    (4) Adult beefalo cows;

    (5) Adult buffalo or bison bulls;

    (6) Adult buffalo or bison cows;

    (7) Adult dairy bulls;

    (8) Adult dairy cows;

    (9) Alpacas;

    (10) Chickens, broilers, pullets (regular size);

    (11) Chickens, chicks;

    (12) Chickens, layers;

    (13) Chickens, pullets or Cornish hens (small size);

    (14) Deer;

    (15) Ducks;

    (16) Ducks, ducklings;

    (17) Elk;

    (18) Emus;

    (19) Equine;

    (20) Geese, goose;

    (21) Geese, gosling;

    (22) Goats, bucks;

    (23) Goats, nannies;

    (24) Goats, kids;

    (25) Llamas;

    (26) Non-adult beef cattle;

    (27) Non-adult beefalo;

    (28) Non-adult buffalo or bison;

    (29) Non-adult dairy cattle;

    (30) Reindeer;

    (31) Sheep, ewes;

    (32) Sheep, lambs;

    (33) Sheep, rams;

    (34) Swine, feeder pigs under 50 pounds;

    (35) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts 50 to 150 pounds;

    (36) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts over 150 pounds;

    (37) Turkeys, poults;

    (38) Turkeys, toms, fryers, and roasters; and

    (39) Ostriches.

    (e) The following categories of animals are eligible livestock for contract growers and calculations of eligibility for payments will be calculated separately for each producer with respect to each category:

    (1) Chickens, broilers, pullets (regular size);

    (2) Chickens, layers;

    (3) Chickens, pullets or Cornish hens (small size);

    (4) Geese, goose;

    (5) Swine, boars, sows;

    (6) Swine, feeder pigs;

    (7) Swine, lightweight barrows, gilts;

    (8) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts; and

    (9) Turkeys, toms, fryers, and roasters.

    (f) Ineligible livestock for the purpose of generating payments under this subpart include those livestock that died due to disease that is not an eligible disease; eligible livestock suffering injury due to disease or eligible disease which are sold for reduced price; and any eligible livestock that died or were injured by anything other than an eligible cause of loss.

    29. Amend § 1416.305 as follows: a. Redesignate paragraphs (a) through (e), (f) and (g), and (h) as paragraphs (b) through (f), (h) and (i), and (k), respectively; b. Add new paragraph (a); c. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (b) through (f); d. Add new paragraph (g); e. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (h) introductory text and (i)(1) introductory text; and f. Add paragraph (j).

    The additions and revisions read as follows:

    § 1416.305 Application process.

    (a) Notices of loss and applications for payment that had been filed under the regulations in effect at the time of filing and which had been issued an administrative decision for either a 2017 or 2018 program year loss are not eligible for consideration under paragraph (b) of this section, unless the administrative decision was based only on a failure to submit the notice of loss or application for payment by the prior applicable deadline. In that instance, the owner or contract grower must file a notice under paragraph (b) to receive a new decision.

    (b) A livestock owner or contract grower that suffered livestock losses must:

    (1) For 2017 and subsequent program years, provide a notice of loss, by livestock unit, to FSA by the later of 30 calendar days of when the loss of livestock is first apparent to the livestock owner or contract grower or December 3, 2018.

    (2) Submit the notice of loss required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section to the FSA county office responsible for servicing the physical location county where the loss occurred.

    (c) In addition to the notice of loss required in paragraph (b) of this section, a participant must also submit a completed application for payment, by livestock unit:

    (1) For losses apparent in 2017, by December 3, 2018.

    (2) For losses apparent in 2018 and subsequent years, by no later than 60 calendar days after the end of the calendar year in which the eligible loss condition occurred.

    (d) A participant must provide other supporting documents required for determining eligibility as an applicant at the time the participant submits the completed application for payment. Supporting documents must include:

    (1) Evidence of loss,

    (2) Current physical location of livestock in inventory,

    (3) Physical location of claimed livestock at the time of death or injury,

    (4) Inventory numbers for the livestock unit and other inventory information necessary to establish actual mortality as required by FSA,

    (5) A farm operating plan, if a current farm operating plan is not already on file in the FSA county office,

    (6) Documentation of the adverse weather event from an official weather reporting data source that is determined by FSA to be reputable and available in the public domain such as, but not limited to, NOAA, from which State and County FSA Offices can validate the adverse weather event occurred,

    (7) Documentation to substantiate eligible attacks obtained from a source such as, but not limited to, the following:

    (i) APHIS,

    (ii) State level Department of Natural Resources, or

    (iii) Other sources or documentation, such as third parties, as determined by the Deputy Administrator, and

    (8) If livestock are injured and sold at a reduced price.

    (i) Documentation of injured livestock's gross price, and

    (ii) Documentation to substantiate injury of livestock due to an eligible adverse weather event or eligible attack.

    (9) The livestock producer may supplement additional documentation to support the eligible loss condition, as determined by the Deputy Administrator.

    (10) In addition, contract growers must provide a copy of the grower contract.

    (e) For death losses or losses resulting from injured livestock sold at a reduced price, the participant must provide adequate proof that the death or injury of the eligible livestock occurred as a direct result of an eligible loss condition, as opposed to any other possible or potential cause of loss. The quantity and kind of livestock that died as a direct result of the eligible loss condition may be documented by: Purchase records; veterinarian records; bank or other loan papers; rendering-plant truck receipts; Federal Emergency Management Agency records; National Guard records; written contracts; production records; Internal Revenue Service records; property tax records; private insurance documents; and other similar verifiable documents as determined by FSA. The quantity and kind of livestock that died or has been injured and sold at a reduced price as a direct result of an eligible attack must be substantiated by documentation of confirmed kills observed by an acceptable source as specified in paragraphs (d)(7) and (g) of this section.

    (f) If adequate verifiable proof of death or injury documentation is not available, the participant may provide reliable records, in conjunction with verifiable beginning and ending inventory records, as proof of death or injury. Reliable records may include contemporaneous producer records, dairy herd improvement records, brand inspection records, vaccination records, dated pictures, and other similar reliable documents as determined by FSA.

    (g) For 2018 and subsequent calendar years, for livestock death losses due to disease, a licensed veterinarian's certification of livestock deaths may be accepted as verifiable proof of death, if reliable beginning inventory data is available, only if the veterinarian provides a written statement containing all of the following:

    (1) Veterinarian's personal observation of the animals and knowledge of how the deaths of the livestock were because of disease caused or exacerbated by an eligible adverse weather event;

    (2) Livestock deaths were not otherwise avoidable and preventable using good animal husbandry and management protocols and practices by the livestock producer; and

    (3) Other information required by FSA to determine the certification acceptable.

    (4) Information furnished by the participant and the veterinarian will be used to determine eligibility for program benefits. Furnishing the information is voluntary; however, without all required information program benefits will not be approved or provided.

    (h) Certification of livestock deaths or injuries by third parties may be accepted if verifiable beginning and ending inventory data is available only if proof of death records in conjunction with verifiable beginning and ending inventory records are not available and both of the following conditions are met:

    (i) * * *

    (1) For 2017 and subsequent calendar years, livestock inventory reports by livestock unit must be provided to the local county FSA office by the later of December 3, 2018 or 60 calendar days after the end of the calendar year of the eligible adverse weather event. The STC may approve a waiver of the reporting deadline if a participant has not previously received benefits under this method.

    (j) When an eligible owner claims eligible livestock were injured by an eligible loss condition and were sold for a reduced price, the owner must provide verifiable evidence of the gross sale price of the livestock. The injured livestock must be sold through an independent third party (sale barn, slaughter facility, or rendering facility). Only verifiable proof of sale with price is acceptable. The gross sale price of the livestock is the amount received for the injured livestock before any reductions, such as sale yard fees. The owner must provide verifiable evidence of livestock sold at a reduced price. Documents that may satisfy this requirement include but are not limited to, any or a combination of the following: Sales receipt from a livestock auction, sale barn, or other similar livestock sales facility; bona-fide commercial sales receipts; private insurance documents; and processing plant receipts.

    30. In § 1416.306, revise paragraphs (a) and (c) and add paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 1416.306 Payment calculation.

    (a) Under this subpart, separate payment rates for eligible livestock owners and eligible livestock contract growers are specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, respectively. Payments for death losses are calculated by multiplying the national payment rate for each livestock category by the number of eligible livestock in excess of normal mortality in each category that died as a result of an eligible loss condition. Normal mortality for each livestock category will be determined by FSA on a State-by-State basis using local data sources including, but not limited to, State livestock organizations and the Cooperative Extension Service for the State. Adjustments will be applied as specified in paragraph (d) of this section.

    (c) The LIP national payment rate for eligible livestock contract growers is based on 75 percent of the average income loss sustained by the contract grower with respect to the dead livestock. The rate that applies is based on the type, class, and weight of the animal at the time of the eligible loss condition and death.

    (e) Payments to livestock owners for losses due to sale of livestock at a reduced price because of injury from an eligible loss condition are calculated by multiplying the national payment rate for each livestock category by the number of eligible livestock sold at a reduced price as a result of an eligible loss condition, minus the gross amount the eligible livestock owner received for the livestock up to the applicable national payment rate. In the event livestock sells for a reduced price that is in excess of the national payment rate, the national payment rate will be subtracted resulting in no payment for that livestock.

    Subpart E—Tree Assistance Program 31. Amend § 1416.400 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), add the words and punctuation “, as amended by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-123), and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub. L. 115-141)” at end of the paragraph; and b. Add paragraph (c).

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 1416.400 Applicability.

    (c) Eligible pecan tree losses incurred in the 2017 calendar year not meeting the mortality loss threshold of paragraph (b) of this section with a tree mortality loss in excess of 7.5 percent (adjusted for normal mortality) will be compensated for eligible losses as specified in § 1416.406, up to a maximum of $15,000,000.

    § 1416.402 [Amended]
    32. Amend § 1416.402 as follows: a. Remove the definitions of “County committee” and “Deputy Administrator or DAFP”; b. In the definitions of “normal damage” and “normal mortality”, remove the word “individual”; and c. Remove the definition of “State committee”. 33. Revise § 1416.403 to read as follows:
    § 1416.403 Eligible losses.

    (a) To qualify for any assistance under this subpart, except for assistance under § 1416.400(c), the eligible orchardist or nursery tree grower must first have suffered more than a 15 percent tree, bush, or vine mortality loss on a stand (adjusted for normal mortality) as a result of natural disaster as determined by the Deputy Administrator. For assistance for losses to pecan trees under § 1416.400(c), the eligible orchardist or nursery tree grower must first have suffered a mortality loss of more than 7.5 percent (adjusted for normal mortality) on a stand as a result of natural disaster as determined by the Deputy Administrator.

    (b) The qualifying loss of a stand of trees, bushes, or vines specified in paragraph (a) of this section will be determined based on:

    (1) Each eligible disaster event, except for losses due to plant disease;

    (2) For plant disease, the time period, as determined by the Deputy Administrator, for which the stand is infected.

    (c) Mortality or damage loss not eligible for inclusion as a qualifying loss under this section or for payment under § 1416.406 includes those losses where:

    (1) The loss or damage could have been prevented through reasonable and available measures; and

    (2) The trees, bushes, or vines, in the absence of a natural disaster, would normally have required rehabilitation or replanting within the 12-month period following the loss.

    (d) The damage or loss must be visible and obvious to the county committee representative. If the damage is no longer visible, the county committee may accept other evidence of the loss as it determines is reasonable.

    (e) The county committee may require information from a qualified expert, as determined by the county committee, to determine extent of loss in the case of plant disease or insect infestation.

    (f) The Deputy Administrator will determine the types of trees, bushes, and vines that are eligible.

    (g) A stand that did not suffer a qualifying mortality loss as specified in paragraph (a) of this section is not eligible for payment.

    § 1416.404 [Amended]
    34. In § 1416.404, in paragraph (a), remove “To” and add “Once the requisite qualifying eligible mortality loss is determined according to § 1416.403, to”. 35. Amend § 1416.405 as follows: a. Redesignate paragraphs (a) through (d) as paragraphs (b) and (e); b. Add new paragraph (a); and c. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (b).

    The addition and revision read as follows:

    § 1416.405 Application.

    (a) Applications for payment that had been filed under the regulations in effect at the time of filing and which were issued an administrative decision for either a 2017 or 2018 program year loss are not eligible for consideration under paragraph (b) of this section, unless the decision was based only on failure to submit the application for payment by the prior applicable deadline,

    (b) To apply for TAP, a producer that suffered eligible tree, bush, or vine losses that occurred during the 2017 and subsequent calendar years must provide an application for payment and supporting documentation to FSA by the later of December 3, 2018 or within 90 calendar days of the disaster event or date when the loss of trees, bushes, or vines is apparent to the producer.

    36. Amend § 1416.406 as follows: a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, remove “Payment” and add “Once the loss threshold in § 1416.403(a) is satisfied, payment” in its place; b. In paragraph (b), remove the words “damage or” in both places where they appear; c. Add paragraph (d)(3); d. In paragraph (h), remove “eligible” before the word “stand”; and e. In paragraph (j), remove the number “500” and add the number “1,000” in its place.

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 1416.406 Payment Calculation.

    (d) * * *

    (3) Costs or expenses that the eligible orchardist or nursery tree grower did not actually bear or incur because someone or some other entity bore or incurred those costs or expenses, or the costs were reimbursed under another program. For example, if under any other program the expenses are paid for on behalf of the eligible orchardist or nursery tree grower, those expenses are not eligible for cost share under this subpart.

    Richard Fordyce, Administrator, Farm Service Agency. Robert Stephenson, Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21257 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 201 [Docket No. R-1623] RIN 7100-AF 17 Regulation A: Extensions of Credit by Federal Reserve Banks AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”) has adopted final amendments to its Regulation A to reflect the Board's approval of an increase in the rate for primary credit at each Federal Reserve Bank. The secondary credit rate at each Reserve Bank automatically increased by formula as a result of the Board's primary credit rate action.

    DATES:

    Effective date: The amendments to part 201 (Regulation A) are effective October 2, 2018.

    Applicability date: The rate changes for primary and secondary credit were applicable on September 27, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sophia Allison, Senior Special Counsel (202-452-3565), Legal Division, or Lyle Kumasaka, Lead Financial Institution & Policy Analyst (202-452-2382), or Kristen Payne, Senior Financial Institution & Policy Analyst (202-452-2872), Division of Monetary Affairs; for users of Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) only, contact 202-263-4869; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets NW, Washington, DC 20551.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Reserve Banks make primary and secondary credit available to depository institutions as a backup source of funding on a short-term basis, usually overnight. The primary and secondary credit rates are the interest rates that the twelve Federal Reserve Banks charge for extensions of credit under these programs. In accordance with the Federal Reserve Act, the primary and secondary credit rates are established by the boards of directors of the Federal Reserve Banks, subject to the review and determination of the Board.

    On September 26, 2018, the Board voted to approve a 1/4 percentage point increase in the primary credit rate in effect at each of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks, thereby increasing from 2.50 percent to 2.75 percent the rate that each Reserve Bank charges for extensions of primary credit. In addition, the Board had previously approved the renewal of the secondary credit rate formula, the primary credit rate plus 50 basis points. Under the formula, the secondary credit rate in effect at each of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks increased by 1/4 percentage point as a result of the Board's primary credit rate action, thereby increasing from 3.00 percent to 3.25 percent the rate that each Reserve Bank charges for extensions of secondary credit. The amendments to Regulation A reflect these rate changes.

    The 1/4 percentage point increase in the primary credit rate was associated with an increase in the target range for the federal funds rate (from a target range of 13/4 to 2 percent to a target range of 2 to 21/4 percent) announced by the Federal Open Market Committee on September 26, 2018, as described in the Board's amendment of its Regulation D regulations published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

    Administrative Procedure Act

    In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) 1 imposes three principal requirements when an agency promulgates legislative rules (rules made pursuant to congressionally delegated authority): (1) Publication with adequate notice of a proposed rule; (2) followed by a meaningful opportunity for the public to comment on the rule's content; and (3) publication of the final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date. The APA provides that notice and comment procedures do not apply if the agency for good cause finds them to be “unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest.” 2 Section 553(d) of the APA also provides that publication at least 30 days prior to a rule's effective date is not required for (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) a rule for which the agency finds good cause for shortened notice and publishes its reasoning with the rule.3 The APA further provides that the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 do not apply “to the extent that there is involved . . . a matter relating to agency management or personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts.” 4

    1 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.

    2 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).

    3 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

    4 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) (emphasis added).

    Regulation A establishes the interest rates that the twelve Reserve Banks charge for extensions of primary credit and secondary credit. The Board has determined that the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date requirements of the APA do not apply to these final amendments to Regulation A for several reasons. The amendments involve a matter relating to loans and are therefore exempt under the terms of the APA. In addition, the Board has determined that notice, public comment, and delayed effective date would be unnecessary and contrary to the public interest because delay in implementation of changes to the rates charged on primary credit and secondary credit would permit insured depository institutions to profit improperly from the difference in the current rate and the announced increased rate. Finally, because delay would undermine the Board's action in responding to economic data and conditions, the Board has determined that “good cause” exists within the meaning of the APA to dispense with the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date procedures of the APA with respect to the final amendments to Regulation A.

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required.5 As noted previously, a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required if the final rule involves a matter relating to loans. Furthermore, the Board has determined that it is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirements relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.

    5 5 U.S.C. 603, 604.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) of 1995,6 the Board reviewed the final rule under the authority delegated to the Board by the Office of Management and Budget. The final rule contains no requirements subject to the PRA.

    6 44 U.S.C. 3506; see 5 CFR part 1320, appendix A.1.

    List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 201

    Banks, Banking, Federal Reserve System, Reporting and recordkeeping.

    Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board is amending 12 CFR part 201 to read as follows:

    PART 201—EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT BY FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS (REGULATION A) 1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 248(i)-(j) and (s), 343 et seq., 347a, 347b, 347c, 348 et seq., 357, 374, 374a, and 461.

    2. In § 201.51, paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised to read as follows:
    § 201.51 Interest rates applicable to credit extended by a Federal Reserve Bank.3

    3 The primary, secondary, and seasonal credit rates described in this section apply to both advances and discounts made under the primary, secondary, and seasonal credit programs, respectively.

    (a) Primary credit. The interest rate at each Federal Reserve Bank for primary credit provided to depository institutions under § 201.4(a) is 2.75 percent.

    (b) Secondary credit. The interest rate at each Federal Reserve Bank for secondary credit provided to depository institutions under § 201.4(b) is 3.25 percent.

    By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 27, 2018. Ann Misback, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21436 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 204 [Docket No. R-1624] RIN 7100-AF 18 Regulation D: Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”) is amending Regulation D (Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions) to revise the rate of interest paid on balances maintained to satisfy reserve balance requirements (“IORR”) and the rate of interest paid on excess balances (“IOER”) maintained at Federal Reserve Banks by or on behalf of eligible institutions. The final amendments specify that IORR is 2.20 percent and IOER is 2.20 percent, a 0.25 percentage point increase from their prior levels. The amendments are intended to enhance the role of such rates of interest in moving the Federal funds rate into the target range established by the Federal Open Market Committee (“FOMC” or “Committee”).

    DATES:

    Effective date: The amendments to part 204 (Regulation D) are effective October 2, 2018.

    Applicability date: The IORR and IOER rate changes were applicable on September 27, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sophia Allison, Senior Special Counsel (202-452-3565), Legal Division, or Kristen Payne, Senior Financial Institution & Policy Analyst (202-452-2872), or Mary-Frances Styczynski, Section Chief (202-452-3303), Division of Monetary Affairs; for users of Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) only, contact 202-263-4869; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets, NW, Washington, DC 20551.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Statutory and Regulatory Background

    For monetary policy purposes, section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act (“the Act”) imposes reserve requirements on certain types of deposits and other liabilities of depository institutions.1 Regulation D, which implements section 19 of the Act, requires that a depository institution meet reserve requirements by holding cash in its vault, or if vault cash is insufficient, by maintaining a balance in an account at a Federal Reserve Bank (“Reserve Bank”).2 Section 19 also provides that balances maintained by or on behalf of certain institutions in an account at a Reserve Bank may receive earnings to be paid by the Reserve Bank at least once each quarter, at a rate or rates not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates.3 Institutions that are eligible to receive earnings on their balances held at Reserve Banks (“eligible institutions”) include depository institutions and certain other institutions.4 Section 19 also provides that the Board may prescribe regulations concerning the payment of earnings on balances at a Reserve Bank.5 Prior to these amendments, Regulation D specified a rate of 1.95 percent for both IORR and IOER.6

    1 12 U.S.C. 461(b).

    2 12 CFR 204.5(a)(1).

    3 12 U.S.C. 461(b)(1)(A) & (b)(12)(A).

    4 See 12 U.S.C. 461(b)(1)(A) & (b)(12)(C); see also 12 CFR 204.2(y).

    5 See 12 U.S.C. 461(b)(12)(B).

    6 See 12 CFR 204.10(b)(5).

    II. Amendments to IORR and IOER

    The Board is amending § 204.10(b)(5) of Regulation D to specify that IORR is 2.20 percent and IOER is 2.20 percent. This 0.25 percentage point increase in the IORR and IOER was associated with an increase in the target range for the federal funds rate, from a target range of 13/4 to 2 percent to a target range of 2 to 21/4 percent, announced by the FOMC on September 26, 2018, with an effective date of September 27, 2018. The FOMC's press release on the same day as the announcement noted that:

    Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in August indicates that the labor market has continued to strengthen and that economic activity has been rising at a strong rate. Job gains have been strong, on average, in recent months, and the unemployment rate has stayed low. Household spending and business fixed investment have grown strongly. On a 12-month basis, both overall inflation and inflation for items other than food and energy remain near 2 percent. Indicators of longer-term inflation expectations are little changed, on balance.

    Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects that further gradual increases in the target range for the federal funds rate will be consistent with sustained expansion of economic activity, strong labor market conditions, and inflation near the Committee's symmetric 2 percent objective over the medium term. Risks to the economic outlook appear roughly balanced.

    In view of realized and expected labor market conditions and inflation, the Committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate to 2 to 21/4 percent.

    A Federal Reserve Implementation note released simultaneously with the announcement stated that the Board “voted unanimously to raise the interest rate paid on required and excess reserve balances to 2.20 percent, effective September 27, 2018.”

    As a result, the Board is amending § 204.10(b)(5) of Regulation D to change IORR to 2.20 percent and IOER to 2.20 percent.

    III. Administrative Procedure Act

    In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) 7 imposes three principal requirements when an agency promulgates legislative rules (rules made pursuant to congressionally delegated authority): (1) Publication with adequate notice of a proposed rule; (2) followed by a meaningful opportunity for the public to comment on the rule's content; and (3) publication of the final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date. The APA provides that notice and comment procedures do not apply if the agency for good cause finds them to be “unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest.” 8 Section 553(d) of the APA also provides that publication at least 30 days prior to a rule's effective date is not required for (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) a rule for which the agency finds good cause for shortened notice and publishes its reasoning with the rule.9

    7 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.

    8 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).

    9 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

    The Board has determined that good cause exists for finding that the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date provisions of the APA are unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest with respect to these final amendments to Regulation D. The rate increases for IORR and IOER that are reflected in the final amendments to Regulation D were made with a view towards accommodating commerce and business and with regard to their bearing upon the general credit situation of the country. Notice and public comment would prevent the Board's action from being effective as promptly as necessary in the public interest and would not otherwise serve any useful purpose. Notice, public comment, and a delayed effective date would create uncertainty about the finality and effectiveness of the Board's action and undermine the effectiveness of that action. Accordingly, the Board has determined that good cause exists to dispense with the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date procedures of the APA with respect to these final amendments to Regulation D.

    IV. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required.10 As noted previously, the Board has determined that it is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirements relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.

    10 5 U.S.C. 603, 604.

    V. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) of 1995,11 the Board reviewed the final rule under the authority delegated to the Board by the Office of Management and Budget. The final rule contains no requirements subject to the PRA.

    11 44 U.S.C. 3506; see 5 CFR part 1320, appendix A.1.

    List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 204

    Banks, Banking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board amends 12 CFR part 204 as follows:

    PART 204—RESERVE REQUIREMENTS OF DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS (REGULATION D) 1. The authority citation for part 204 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 248(a), 248(c), 461, 601, 611, and 3105.

    2. Section 204.10 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as follows:
    § 204.10 Payment of interest on balances.

    (b) * * *

    (5) The rates for IORR and IOER are:

    Rate
  • (percent)
  • IORR 2.20 IOER 2.20
    By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 27, 2018. Ann Misback, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21435 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0804; Product Identifier 2018-NM-129-AD; Amendment 39-19442; AD 2018-20-08] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2018-02-18, which applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, and A320 series airplanes and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2018-02-18 required revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to provide guidance to the flightcrew for certain emergency procedures. This new AD requires revising the AFM, and for certain airplanes, removing a certain AFM revision. This AD also adds airplanes to the applicability. This AD was prompted by a determination that, when two angle of attack (AoA) sensors are adversely affected by icing conditions at the same time, data displayed on the back up speed scale (BUSS) could be erroneous. This AD was also prompted by a determination that the AFM needs to be revised for certain additional airplanes, and that the AFM may have been erroneously revised on certain airplanes not equipped with a BUSS function. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective October 17, 2018.

    We must receive comments on this AD by November 16, 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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 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-2018-0804.

    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-2018-0804; 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 AD, 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:

    Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98351; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued AD 2018-02-18, Amendment 39-19171 (83 FR 5182, February 6, 2018) (“AD 2018-02-18”), which applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, and A320 series airplanes and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2018-02-18 was prompted by a determination that when two AoA sensors are adversely affected by icing conditions at the same time, data displayed on the BUSS could be erroneous. AD 2018-02-18 required revising the AFM to provide guidance to the flightcrew for emergency procedures when erroneous airspeed indications are displayed on the BUSS. We issued AD 2018-02-18 to address erroneous airspeed data displays, which could lead to an increased flightcrew workload, possibly resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

    Since we issued AD 2018-02-18, we have determined that airplanes on which Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1543 was embodied in service are also subject to the unsafe condition, and that the AFM may have been erroneously revised on certain airplanes not equipped with a BUSS function.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0189, dated August 30, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A318, A319, and A320 series airplanes and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    In extreme icing conditions, pitot probes may induce erroneous airspeed indications. To provide flight crews with reliable information on airspeed, Airbus developed a Back-up Speed Scale (BUSS and reversible BUSS, based on angle of attack (AoA) value) displayed on the Primary Flight Display (PFD), together with a PFD Back-Up Altitude Scale based on Global Positioning System (GPS) altitude. This BUSS function is intended to be used below flight level (FL) 250 only. Following new investigation related to AoA probes blockages, it was identified that, when two AoA sensors are adversely affected by icing conditions at the same time, data displayed on the BUSS could be erroneous.

    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to an increased flight crew workload, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus established specific operational instructions to be applied by the flight crew under certain defined conditions. The relevant procedure was incorporated into the applicable A320 family AFM [airplane flight manual] since 07 March 2017 (publication date). Consequently, EASA issued AD 2017-0257 (later revised) to require a one-time AFM amendment to introduce the additional operational procedure.

    Since EASA AD 2017-0257R1 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2018-02-18] was issued, it was determined that aeroplanes on which Airbus SB [service bulletin] A320-34-1543 (mod 154033) was embodied in service were inadvertently missing from the Applicability of the [EASA] AD.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2017-0257R1, which is superseded, and extends the Applicability to aeroplanes that embody Airbus SB A320-34-1543. This AD also requires removal of the AFM amendment, where it was mistakenly inserted in the AFM of an aeroplane not equipped with the BUSS function, prompted by the Applicability definition and requirements of EASA AD 2017-0257 at original issue.

    You may examine the MCAI on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0804.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This 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 issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    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 because when two AoA sensors are adversely affected by icing conditions at the same time, data displayed on the BUSS could be erroneous, leading to an increased flightcrew workload that could ultimately result in reduced control of the airplane. Therefore, we find good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable. In addition, for the reason(s) stated above, we find 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 we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0804; Product Identifier 2018-NM-129-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of 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 AD.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 1,250 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
  • 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $0 $85 $106,250
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances 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) 2018-02-18, Amendment 39-19171 (83 FR 5182, February 6, 2018), and adding the following new AD: 2018-20-08 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-19442; Docket No. FAA-2018-0804; Product Identifier 2018-NM-129-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 17, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-02-18, Amendment 39-19171 (83 FR 5182, February 6, 2018) (“AD 2018-02-18”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus SAS airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.

    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.

    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes.

    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, and -271N airplanes.

    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that, when two angle of attack (AoA) sensors are adversely affected by icing conditions at the same time, data displayed on the back-up speed scale (BUSS) could be erroneous. We are issuing this AD to address erroneous airspeed data displays, which could lead to an increased flightcrew workload, possibly resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Definitions

    (1) Group 1 airplanes are those on which Airbus modification 35871 has been embodied in production, or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1397 or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1543 has been embodied in service (introducing air data monitoring and BUSS function), except airplanes on which Airbus modification 159281 has also been embodied in production, or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1658 or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-34-1659 has also been embodied in service (installing reversible BUSS function).

    (2) Group 2 airplanes are those that are not in Group 1 and that have amended the AFM as previously specified in EASA AD 2017-0257, dated December 22, 2017.

    (h) AFM Revision

    (1) For Group 1 airplanes, except for airplanes identified in paragraph (i) of this AD: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the AFM to incorporate the procedure specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD.

    (2) For Group 2 airplanes: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the AFM by removing the procedure specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD from the AFM.++

    Billing Code 4910-13-P ER02OC18.000 ER02OC18.001 ER02OC18.002 ER02OC18.003 Billing Code 4910-13-C (i) Optional Method of Compliance

    Airplanes operated with an AFM having the NAV-ADR 1+2+3 FAULT procedure identical to the procedure specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, with an approval date on or after March 2, 2017, are compliant with the requirements of this AD, provided that the procedure is not removed from the AFM.

    (j) 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 (k)(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.

    (k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0189, dated August 30, 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-2018-0804.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98351; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.

    (l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on September 20, 2018. John P. Piccola, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21347 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0954; Airspace Docket No. 17-AEA-16] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Beaver Falls, PA; and Zelienople, PA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Beaver County Airport Beaver Falls, PA, as the University of Pittsburg Medical Center Beaver Valley Heliport has closed, and controlled airspace is no longer required. The geographic coordinates of the Ellwood City VOR/DME, (incorrectly identified as VORTAC), is amended in the associated Class E airspace. Also, the term Airport Facility Directory is replaced with Chart Supplement. This action also amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Zelienople Municipal Airport (formerly Zelienople Airport), PA, by recognizing the airport's name change and updating the airport's geographic coordinates. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at these airports.

    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:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

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

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 13708, March 30, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2017-0954 to amend Class D airspace, Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class D or E surface area, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Beaver County Airport, Beaver Falls, PA, and Zelienople Municipal Airport, Zelienople, PA.

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

    Subsequent to publication, the FAA found the navaid incorrectly listed as a VORTAC, instead of as a VOR/DME (VHF omnidirectional range/distance measuring equipment), and the navaid longitude coordinate was incorrect in the Beaver Falls, PA, designation, and is corrected in this rule.

    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11C dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11C, 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 extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Beaver Falls, PA, by removing University of Pittsburg Medical Center Beaver Valley Heliport, contained within the Beaver County Airport airspace description, as the heliport has closed.

    The Ellwood City navaid name is corrected to VOR/DME from VORTAC. The geographic coordinates of the Ellwood City VOR/DME are amended in the associated Class E airspace to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database. Also, an editorial change is made to the associated Class E airspace legal descriptions replacing Airport Facility Directory with Chart Supplement. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at these airports.

    Additionally, the airport name is changed to Zelienople Municipal Airport, Zelienople, PA, from Zelienople Airport, and the geographic coordinates of this airport are adjusted to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    Finally, the exclusionary language is removed from the airspace descriptions of both airports, as it is not needed to describe the boundaries.

    Class D and E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs 5000, 6004, and 6005, respectively, 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 designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. AEA PA D Beaver Falls, PA [Amended] Beaver County Airport, PA (Lat. 40°46′21″ N, long. 80°23′29″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,800 feet MSL within a 3.9-mile radius of Beaver County Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to Class D or E Surface Area. AEA PA E4 Beaver Falls, PA [Amended] Beaver County Airport, PA (Lat. 40°46′21″ N, long. 80°23′29″ W) Ellwood City VOR/DME (Lat. 40°49′30″ N, long. 80°12′42″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1.3 miles each side of the Ellwood City VOR/DME 248° radial extending from the 3.9-mile radius of Beaver County Airport to 1.3 miles west of the VOR/DME. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AEA PA E5 Beaver Falls, PA [Amended] Beaver County Airport, PA (Lat. 40°46′21″ N, long. 80°23′29″ W) Ellwood City VOR/DME (Lat. 40°49′30″ N, long. 80°12′42″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of Beaver County Airport, and within 1.8-miles each side of Ellwood City VOR/DME 248° radial extending from the 6.4-mile radius to the VOR/DME.

    AEA PA E5 Zelienople, PA [Amended] Zelienople Municipal Airport, PA (Lat. 40°48′07″ N, long. 80°09′39″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6-mile radius of Zelienople Municipal Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on September 24, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21305 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2017-1214; Airspace Docket No. 17-ASO-24] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class E Airspace, Knoxville, TN; and Establishment of Class E Airspace, Madisonville, TN AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action amends Class E surface airspace at Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, Knoxville, TN, by adding to the airspace description the exclusion of a 1-mile radius around University of Tennessee Medical Center Heliport, to allow helicopters departing from the heliport to no longer require a clearance. Also, the Benfi non-directional radio beacon (NDB) has been decommissioned, requiring redesign of Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at McGhee-Tyson Airport, and Monroe County Airport, Madisonville, TN, is moved to stand-alone airspace with its own designation. This action is necessary to further the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at these airports. This action also updates the geographic coordinates of Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, McGhee Tyson Airport, and Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport in the associated Class E airspace areas 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 on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11C 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:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends Class E surface airspace at Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, Knoxville, TN, and amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface by removing Monroe County Airport, Madisonville, TN, from in the legal description for McGhee-Tyson Airport, and establishing it under its own designation of Madisonville, TN, to support IFR operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 19474, May 3, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2017-1214 to amend Class E surface airspace at Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, Knoxville, TN, by adding to the airspace description the exclusion of a 1-mile radius around University of Tennessee Medical Center Heliport, and to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at McGhee-Tyson Airport, Kenansville, NC, due to the decommissioning of the Kenan NDB, and cancellation of the NDB approach. The FAA published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 39386, August 9, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2017-1214 to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface by removing Monroe County Airport, Madisonville, TN, from in the legal description for McGhee-Tyson Airport, and establishing it under its own designation of Madisonville, TN. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 6002 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11C dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, 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) amends part 71 by:

    Amending Class E surface airspace at Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, Knoxville, TN, by adding to the airspace description the exclusion of a 1-mile radius around University of Tennessee Medical Center Heliport;

    Amending Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 15.4-mile (from a 10-mile) radius of McGhee-Tyson Airport, Kenansville, NC, due to the decommissioning of the Kenan NDB, and cancellation of the NDB approach;

    Adjusting of the geographic coordinates of Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, McGhee Tyson Airport, and Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database;

    Removing Monroe County Airport, Madisonville, TN, from the Knoxville, TN, McGhee-Tyson Airport designation, and establishing it as stand-alone airspace with its own designation.

    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs 6002 and 6005, respectively, 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 designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    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 proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Area Airspace. ASO TN E2 Knoxville, TN [Amended] Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, TN (Lat. 35°57′50″ N, long. 83°52′25″ W) University of Tennessee Medical Center Heliport, TN (Lat. 35°56′30″ N, long. 83°56′38″ W)

    Within a 4.5-mile radius of Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, excluding that airspace within a 1.0-mile radius of University of Tennessee Medical Center Heliport.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO TN E5 Knoxville, TN [Amended] McGhee-Tyson Airport, TN (Lat. 35°48′34″ N, long. 83°59′43″ W) Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, TN (Lat. 35°51′28″ N, long. 83°31′43″ W) Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, TN (Lat. 35°57′50″ N, long. 83°52′25″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 15.4-mile radius of McGhee-Tyson Airport, and within a 13-mile radius of Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, and from the 080° bearing from Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport clockwise to the 210° bearing extending from the 13-mile radius southeast to the 33-mile radius centered on Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, and within an 8-mile radius of Knoxville Downtown Island Airport.

    ASO TN E5 Madisonville, TN [New] Monroe County Airport, TN, (Lat. 35°32′43″ N, long. 84°22′49″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an 8.5-mile radius of Monroe County Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on September 24, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21316 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 573 [Docket Nos. FDA-2013-F-1540 and FDA-2014-F-0296] Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals; 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3 AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, we, or the Agency) is amending the regulations for food additives permitted in feed and drinking water of animals to provide for the safe use of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 as a source of vitamin D3 activity for layer and breeder chickens and turkeys. This action is in response to two food additive petitions filed by DSM Nutritional Products.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective October 2, 2018. See section V of this document for further information on the filing of objections. Submit either electronic or written objections and requests for a hearing on the final rule by November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit objections and requests for a hearing as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed objections will not be considered. Electronic objections must be submitted on or before November 1, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of November 1, 2018. Objections 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 objections in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting objections. Objections submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your objection will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your objection 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 objection, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit an objection with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the objection 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 objections submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your objection, 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-2013-F-1540 (for submissions related to FAP 2277) or FDA-2014-F-0296 (for submissions related to FAP 2279) for “Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals; 25-hydroxyvitamin D3.” Received objections, 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 an objection with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your objections only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies in 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 objections. 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 objections 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 objections received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the appropriate 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:

    Carissa Doody, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl. (HFV-228), Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-6283, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    In documents published in the Federal Register of December 23, 2013 (78 FR 77384) and March 26, 2014 (79 FR 16698), FDA announced that we had filed two food additive petitions (animal use) (FAPs 2277 and 2279) submitted by DSM Nutritional Products, 45 Waterview Blvd., Parsippany, NJ 07054. The petitions proposed that the regulations for food additives permitted in feed and drinking water of animals be amended to provide for the safe use of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 as a source of vitamin D3 activity for layer and breeder chickens (FAP 2277) and turkeys (FAP 2279).

    II. Conclusion

    FDA concludes that the data establish the safety and utility of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 as a source of vitamin D3 activity for layer and breeder chickens and turkeys and that the food additive regulations should be amended as set forth in this document. This is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 12866.

    III. Public Disclosure

    In accordance with § 571.1(h) (21 CFR 571.1(h)), the petitions and documents we considered and relied upon in reaching our decision to approve the petitions will be made available for public disclosure (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). As provided in § 571.1(h), we will delete from the documents any materials that are not available for public disclosure.

    IV. Analysis of Environmental Impact

    The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.32(r) that this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

    V. Objections and Hearing Requests

    Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may file with the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written objections. Each objection shall be separately numbered, and each numbered objection shall specify with particularity the provision of the regulation to which objection is made and the grounds for the objection. Each numbered objection on which a hearing is requested shall specifically so state. Failure to request a hearing for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered objection for which a hearing is requested shall include a detailed description and analysis of the specific factual information intended to be presented in support of the objection in the event that a hearing is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis for any particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing on the objection.

    List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 573

    Animal feeds, Food additives.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 573 is amended as follows:

    PART 573—FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN FEED AND DRINKING WATER OF ANIMALS 1. The authority citation for part 573 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348.

    2. Add § 573.550 to subpart B to read as follows:
    § 573.550 25-hydroxyvitamin D3

    The food additive, 25-hydroxyvitamin D3, may be safely used in accordance with the following prescribed conditions:

    (a) The additive is used or intended for use as a source of vitamin D3 activity in animal feed or drinking water in accordance with good manufacturing and feeding practices as follows:

    (1) In feed or drinking water of layer and breeder chickens not to exceed 69 parts per billion (ppb) in feed or 34.5 ppb in drinking water.

    (2) In feed or drinking water of turkeys not to exceed:

    (i) 92 ppb in feed; or

    (ii) In drinking water, 25 ppb for turkeys up to 3 weeks of age, 36 ppb for turkeys from 4 to 11 weeks of age, or 45 ppb for turkeys over 11 weeks of age.

    (b) The additive consists of not less than 94 percent 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (9,10-secocholesta-5,7,10(19)-triene-3β, 25-diol).

    (c) The additive meets the following specifications:

    (1) Not more than 1 percent of any individual sterol.

    (2) Not more than 5 percent water.

    (3) Not more than 20 parts per million (ppm) lead.

    (4) Not more than 20 ppm aluminum.

    (5) Not more than 1.0 percent solvents and non-detectable levels of 2′, 4′, 5′, 7′ tetraiodofluorescin.

    (6) Not more than 1 ppb 1, 25-dihydroxycholecalciferol.

    (d) To assure safe use of the additive, in addition to the other information required by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the label and labeling shall contain:

    (1) The name of the additive.

    (2) A statement to indicate the maximum use level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 must not exceed 69 ppb in feed or 34.5 ppb in drinking water for layer and breeder chickens.

    (3) A statement to indicate for turkeys the maximum use level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 must not exceed 92 ppb in feed; or in drinking water, 25 ppb for turkeys up to 3 weeks of age, 36 ppb for turkeys from 4 to 11 weeks of age, or 45 ppb for turkeys over 11 weeks of age.

    (4) Adequate use directions to ensure that 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (and all premixes) is uniformly blended throughout the feed or drinking water.

    (5) An expiration date on all premix labeling.

    (6) A statement on all premix labeling (feed and drinking water forms) that 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 cannot be used simultaneously in both feed and water.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21396 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration 23 CFR Part 658 [FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2018-0035] RIN 2125-AF81 Truck Size and Weight AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical correction.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule makes a technical correction to the regulations that govern Longer Combination Vehicles (LCV) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of Ohio. The amendments contained herein make no substantive changes to FHWA regulations, policies, or procedures.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective November 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John Berg, Truck Size and Weight Program Manager, Office of Freight Management and Operations, (202) 740-4602; or William Winne, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1397. Both are located at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Office hours for FHWA are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Access

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded by accessing the Office of the Federal Register's home page at: http://www.archives.gov or the Government Publishing Office's web page at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara.

    Background

    This rulemaking makes technical corrections to the regulations in appendix C of 23 CFR part 658 that govern length and weight of trailers in Pennsylvania and Ohio. The regulations on LCV's were frozen as of July 1, 1991, in accordance with Section 1023 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA).1

    1 Public Law 105-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 1951 (Dec. 18, 1991) (codified at 23 U.S.C. 127(d)).

    A procedure to “review and correct” the accuracy of the list mandated in 23 U.S.C. 127(d)(3)(D) is provided under 23 U.S.C. 127(d)(3)(E), and implemented under 23 CFR 658.23(f). This provision requires the FHWA Administrator to review petitions to correct any errors in Appendix C. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and State of Ohio have petitioned the Federal Highway Administrator to make corrections to items they found to be incorrect in accordance with 23 CFR 658.23(f), and certified those provisions were in effect as of July 1, 1991.

    The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation petitioned FHWA seeking to invoke the “grandfather” provisions of 23 U.S.C. 127(a)(4) to allow the operation on the Pennsylvania Turnpike of vehicles or loads with weight limitations exceeding the Federal maximums mandated in 23 U.S.C. 127(a). Pennsylvania's claim to grandfather rights is based on State statute or enforceable regulation authorizing weight limitations exceeding the Federal maximum in existence on or before July 1, 1956. The Commonwealth seeks to correct a reporting mistake under 23 U.S.C. 127(d)(3)(A) regarding the actual lawful operation on the Turnpike of LCVs up to 100,000 pounds and no longer than 28 1/2 feet for each trailer on or before, June 1, 1991. These provisions will be added to Appendix C and bring it into conformance with the Pennsylvania statutes of that time.

    The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) petitioned FHWA seeking to invoke the “grandfather” provisions of 23 U.S.C. 127(a)(4) to reflect that triple-trailers can operate on any “turnpike project” as defined in Ohio Revised Code (ORC) section 5537.01 and permitted by the Ohio Turnpike and Infrastructure Commission under the program authorized in ORC 5537.16 (The Ohio Turnpike Act of 1949 and as amended and effective prior to June 1, 1991). In addition, under ORC 4513.34, ODOT and local authorities are authorized to issue special permits for oversized vehicles (effective prior to June 1, 1991). These provisions will be added to Appendix C and bring it into conformance with the Ohio's statutes of that time.

    Rulemaking Analyses and Notice

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)), an agency may waive the normal notice and comment requirements if it finds, for good cause, that they are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. The FHWA finds that notice and comment for this rule is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest because it will have no substantive impact and is technical in nature. The amendments to the rule are based upon the explicit language of statutes that were enacted subsequent to the promulgation of the rule. The FHWA does not anticipate receiving meaningful comments. States, local governments, motor carriers, and other transportation stakeholders rely upon the regulations corrected by this action. These corrections will reduce confusion for these entities and should not be unnecessarily delayed. Accordingly, for the reasons listed above, the agencies find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) to waive notice and opportunity for comment.

    Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs), and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The FHWA has determined that this action is not a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 or significant within the meaning of DOT regulatory policies and procedures. This action complies with E.O.s 12866 and 13563 to improve regulation. It is anticipated that the economic impact of this rulemaking will be minimal. This rule only makes minor corrections that will not in any way alter the regulatory effect of 23 CFR part 658. Thus, this final rule will not adversely affect, in a material way, any sector of the economy. In addition, these changes will not interfere with any action taken or planned by another agency and will not materially alter the budgetary impact of any entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs. This action complies with E.O.s 12866, 13563, and 13771 to improve regulation. This rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354, 5 U.S.C. 601-612) FHWA has evaluated the effects of this action on small entities and has determined that the action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule will not make any substantive changes to our regulations or in the way that our regulations affect small entities; it merely corrects technical errors. For this reason, FHWA certifies that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule does not impose unfunded mandates as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, March 22, 1995, 109 Stat. 48). This rule does not impose any requirements on State, local, or Tribal governments, or the private sector and, thus, will not require those entities to expend any funds.

    Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132, and FHWA has determined that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment. The FHWA has also determined that this action does not preempt any State law or State regulation or affect the States' ability to discharge traditional State governmental functions.

    Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to these programs.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not create any new information collection requirements for which a Paperwork Reduction Act submission to the Office of Management and Budget would be needed under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    The FHWA has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has determined that this action will not have any effect on the quality of the environment.

    Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The FHWA has analyzed this action under E.O. 13175, dated November 6, 2000, and concluded that this rule will not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes; will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal government; and will not preempt Tribal law. There are no requirements set forth in this rule that directly affect one or more Indian Tribes. Therefore, a Tribal summary impact statement is not required.

    Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burdens.

    Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    Under E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks, this final rule is not economically significant and does not involve an environmental risk to health and safety that may disproportionally affect children.

    Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This final rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.

    Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    This final rule has been analyzed under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. The FHWA has determined that it is not a significant energy action under that order because it is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866 and this final rule is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

    Regulation Identification Number

    A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross reference this action with the Unified Agenda.

    List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 658

    Grant programs—transportation, Highways and roads, Motor carriers.

    Issued on: September 24, 2018. Brandye L. Hendrickson, Deputy Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 23 CFR part 658 is amended as set forth below.

    PART 658—TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT, ROUTE DESIGNATIONS—LENGTH, WIDTH AND WEIGHT LIMITATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 658 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    23 U.S.C. 127 and 315; 49 U.S.C. 31111, 31112, and 31114; sec. 347, Pub. L. 108-7, 117 Stat. 419; sec. 756, Pub L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1219; sec. 115, Pub. L. 109-115, 119 Stat. 2408; 49 CFR 1.48(b)(19) and (c)(19).

    2. Amend appendix C to part 658 by: a. Revising the entry for “State: Ohio, Combination: Truck tractor and 3 trailing units—LVC”; and b. Adding an entry in alphabetical order for State: Pennsylvania, Combination: Truck tractor and 2 trailing units”.

    The revision and addition read as follows:

    Appendix C to Part 658—Trucks Over 80,000 Pounds on the Interstate System and Trucks Over STAA Lengths on the National Network STATE: OHIO COMBINATION: Truck tractor and 3 trailing units—LCV LENGTH OF THE CARGO-CARRYING UNITS: 95 feet MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GROSS WEIGHT: 115,000 pounds OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS: Same as the OH-TT2 combination, except as follows below, and triple trailer units may operate on any “turnpike project” as defined in Ohio Revised Code (ORC) section 5537.01 and permitted by the Ohio Turnpike and Infrastructure Commission under the program authorized in ORC 5537.16 (The Ohio Turnpike Act of 1949 and as amendedand effective prior to June 1, 1991).

    WEIGHT: Gross weight for triples with an overall length greater than 90 feet but not over 105 feet in length = 115,000 pounds.

    DRIVER: The driver must have a commercial driver's license with the appropriate endorsement, be over 26 years of age, in good health, and shall have not less than 5 years of experience driving double trailer combination units. Such driving experience shall include experience throughout the four seasons. Each driver must have special training on triple combinations to be provided by the Permittee.

    VEHICLE: Triple trailer combination vehicles are allowed to operate on the Turnpike provided the combination vehicle is at least 90 feet long but less than 105 feet long and each trailer is not more than 28.5 feet in length. The minimum number of axles on the triple shall be seven and the maximum is nine.

    PERMIT: A triple trailer permit to operate on the Turnpike is required for triple trailer combinations in excess of 90 feet in length. There is an annual fee for the permit. Class A and B explosives; Class A poisons; and Class 1, 2, and 3 radioactive material cannot be transported in triple trailer combinations. Other hazardous materials may be transported in two trailers of a triple. The hazardous materials should be placed in the front two trailers unless doing so will result in the third trailer weighing more than either one of the lead trailers. In addition, under ORC 4513 .34, ODOT and local authorities are authorized to issue special permits for oversized vehicles.

    ACCESS: With two exceptions, triple trailer units shall not leave the Turnpike Project. The first exception is that triple trailer combinations are allowed on State Route 21 from I-80 Exit 11 (Ohio Turnpike) to a terminal located approximately 500 feet to the north in the town of Richfield. The second exception is for a segment of State Route 7 from Ohio Turnpike Exit 16 to 1 mile south. Triple trailer units shall not leave the Turnpike project. Section 5537.01, as discussed above defines “turnpike project” as: “(B) “Project” or “turnpike project” means . . . interchanges, entrance plazas, approaches, those portions of connecting public roads that serve interchanges and are determined by the commission and the director of transportation to be necessary for the safe merging of traffic between the turnpike project and those public roads, . . .”

    Routes From To I-76 Ohio Turnpike Turnpike Exit 15 Pennsylvania. I-80 Ohio Turnpike Turnpike Exit 8A Turnpike Exit 15. I-80/90 Ohio Turnpike Indiana Turnpike Exit 8A. OH-7 Turnpike Exit 16 Extending 1 mile south. LEGAL CITATIONS: Same as the OH-TT2 combination. STATE: PENNSYLVANIA COMBINATION: Truck tractor and 2 trailing units LENGTH OF THE CARGO-CARRYING UNITS: 57 feet OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS:

    WEIGHT: The maximum gross weight is 100,000 pounds.

    DRIVER: The driver must have a commercial driver's license with the appropriate endorsement.

    VEHICLE: A semitrailer, or the trailer of a tandem trailer combination, may not be longer than 281/2 feet. A tandem combination—including the truck tractor, semitrailer and trailer—which exceeds 85 feet in length is considered a Class 9 vehicle which requires a special permit to travel on the Turnpike System. In tandem combinations, the heaviest trailer shall be towed next to the truck tractor.

    PERMIT: None required except for a Class 9 vehicle.

    Routes From To I-76 Pennsylvania Turnpike Mainline Ohio Turnpike Exit 75. I-76/1-70 Pennsylvania Turnpike Mainline Turnpike Exit 75 Turnpike Exit 161. I-76 Pennsylvania Turnpike Mainline Turnpike Exit 161 Turnpike Exit 326. 1-276 Pennsylvania Turnpike Mainline Turnpike Exit 326 I-95 Interchange. I-95 interchange Pennsylvania Turnpike Mainline I-95 Interchange New Jersey. I-476 Pennsylvania Turnpike Northeastern Extension Turnpike Exit 20 Turnpike Exit 131. I-376 Pennsylvania Turnpike Beaver Valley Expressway Turnpike Exit 15 Turnpike Exit 31. Pennsylvania Turnpike 66 Greensburg Bypass Turnpike Exit 0 Turnpike Exit 14. Pennsylvania Turnpike 43 Mon/Fayette Expressway (I-68 to Route 43) West Virginia Turnpike Exit M8. Pennsylvania Turnpike 43 Mon/Fayette Expressway (Uniontown to Brownsville) Turnpike Exit M 15 Turnpike Exit M28. Pennsylvania Turnpike 43 Mon/Fayette Expressway (US-40 to PA-51) Turnpike Exit M30 Turnpike Exit M54. Pennsylvania Turnpike 43 Mon/Fayette Expressway (PA-51 to I-376/Monroeville) Turnpike Exit M54 I-376/Monroeville. Pennsylvania Turnpike 576 Southern Beltway (I-376 to US-22) Turnpike Exit S1 Turnpike Exit S6. Pennsylvania Turnpike 576 Southern Beltway (US-22 to I-79) Turnpike Exit S6 I-79. Pennsylvania Turnpike 576 Southern Beltway (I-79 to Mon/Fayette Expressway) I-79 Pennsylvania Turnpike 43 Mon/Fayette Expressway.

    LEGAL CITATIONS: Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 6110(a); Pennsylvania Code, 67 Pa. Code, Chapter 601.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21341 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0225] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Breton Bay, Leonardtown, MD AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing temporary special local regulations for certain waters of the Breton Bay. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters of Breton Bay, at Leonardtown, MD, on October 6, 2018, and October 7, 2018. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels from entering the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 7:30 a.m. on October 6, 2018 to 5:30 p.m. on October 7, 2018. It will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on each of those days.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2018-0225 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 MST2 Dane Grulkey, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region; telephone 410-576-2570, email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations 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

    On January 22, 2018, the Southern Maryland Boat Club notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting the club's fall regatta from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on October 6, 2018, and October 7, 2018. The regatta consists of approximately 40 boats participating in an exhibition of vintage outboard racing V-hull boats. The regatta is not a competition but rather a demonstration of the vintage race craft. Vessels may reach speeds of 90 mph. Hazards include risks of injury or death resulting from near or actual contact among participant vessels and spectator vessels or waterway users if normal vessel traffic were to interfere with the event.

    In response, on August 17, 2018, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled “Special Local Regulation; Breton Bay, Leonardtown, MD” (83 FR 41032). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this high-speed power boat racing event. During the comment period that ended September 17, 2018, we received no comments.

    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 because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the regatta.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1233. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-National Capital Region has determined that potential hazards associated with the regatta will be a safety concern for anyone intending to participate in this event or for vessels that operate within specified waters of Breton Bay at Leonardtown, MD. The purpose of this rule is to protect marine event participants, spectators and transiting vessels on specified waters of Breton Bay before, during, and after the scheduled event.

    IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published August 17, 2018. There are no substantive changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.

    This rule establishes a temporary special local regulation to be enforced from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 6, 2018 and from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 7, 2018. The regulated area covers all navigable waters within Breton Bay, from shoreline to shoreline, within an area bound by a line drawn along latitude 38°16′43″ N; and bounded to the west by a line drawn along longitude 076°38′29.5″ W, located at Leonardtown, MD. This rule provides additional information about designated areas within the regulated area, including “Race Area”, “Buffer Zone” and “Spectator Area(s).” The duration of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of event participants and vessels within the specified navigable waters before, during, and after the regatta, scheduled to occur between 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day of the event. Except for participants, no vessel or person will be permitted to enter the regulated area without obtaining permission from the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

    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 Order13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 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 and duration of the regulated area, which would impact a small designated area of Breton Bay during October 6-7, 2018, for a total of 20 enforcement-hours. The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 about the status of the regulated area. Moreover, the rule will allow vessel operators to request permission to enter the regulated area for the purpose of safely transiting the regulated area if deemed safe to do so by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

    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 0 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 regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this proposed rule would 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 Order13132.

    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 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 special local regulation to be enforced a total of 20 hours over two days. This category of marine event water activities includes but is not limited to sail boat regattas, boat parades, power boat racing, swimming events, crew racing, canoe and sail board racing. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Memorandum for Record for Categorically Excluded Actions 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 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

    PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1233; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

    2. Add § 100.501T05-0225 to read as follows:
    § 100.501T05-0225 Special Local Regulation; Breton Bay, Leonardtown, MD.

    (a) Definitions—(1) Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region or a Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.

    (2) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.

    (3) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.

    (4) Spectator means any person or vessel not registered with the event sponsor as a participant or an official patrol vessel.

    (5) Participant means any person or vessel participating in the Southern Maryland Boat Club Fall Regatta event under the auspices of the Marine Event Permit issued to the event sponsor and approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.

    (b) Regulated area. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983.

    (1) Coordinates. The following location is a regulated area: all navigable waters within Breton Bay, MD, immediately adjacent to Leonardtown, MD shoreline, from shoreline to shoreline, within an area bounded to the east by a line drawn along latitude 38°16′43″ N and bounded to the west by a line drawn along longitude 076°38′29.5″ W, located at Leonardtown, MD.

    (2) Race area. Located within the waters of Breton Bay, MD in an area bound by a line commencing at position latitude 38°17′07.2″ N, longitude 076°38′17.3″ W, thence southeast to latitude 38°16′55.3″ N, longitude 076°37′48″ W, thence southwest to latitude 38°16′50.1″ N, longitude 076°37′51.3″ W, thence northwest to latitude 38°17′01.9″ N, longitude 076°38′21″ W, thence northeast to point of origin.

    (3) Buffer zone. Located within the waters of Breton Bay, MD. The area surrounds the entire race area described in the preceding paragraph of this section. This area is rectangular in shape and provides a buffer of approximately 125 yards around the perimeter of the race area. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 38°17′12″ N, longitude 076°38′19.6″ W; thence southeast to latitude 38°16′57″ N, longitude 076°37′40.5″ W; thence southwest to latitude 38°16′44.8″ N, longitude 076°37′48.2″ W; thence northwest to latitude 38°17′00.2″ N, longitude 076°38′27.8″ W; thence northeast to point of origin.

    (4) Spectator areas—(i) Spectator area A. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 38°16′52.1″ N, longitude 076°38′14.2″ W; thence northeast to latitude 38°16′54″ N, longitude 076°38′12.5″ W; thence southeast to latitude 38°16′48.6″ N, longitude 076°37′59.3″ W; thence south to latitude 38°16′47.4″ N, longitude 076°37′59.3″ W; thence northwest along the shoreline to point of origin.

    (ii) Spectator area B. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 38°16′59.1″ N, longitude 076°37′45.6″ W; thence southeast to latitude 38°16′57.1″ N, longitude 076°37′40.2″ W; thence southwest to latitude 38°16′54.3″ N, longitude 076°37′41.9″ W; thence southeast to latitude 38°16′51.8″ N, longitude 076°37′36.4″ W; thence northeast to latitude 38°16′55.2″ N, longitude 076°37′34.2″ W; thence northwest to latitude 38°16′59.2″ N, longitude 076°37′37.2″ W; thence west to latitude 38°17′01.7″ N, longitude 076°37′43.7″ W; thence south to point of origin.

    (iii) Spectator area C. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 38°16′47.2″ N, longitude 076°37′54.8″ W; thence south to latitude 38°16′43.3″ N, longitude 076°37′55.2″ W; thence east to latitude 38°16′43.2″ N, longitude 076°37′47.8″ W; thence north to latitude 38°16′44.7″ N, longitude 076°37′48.5″ W; thence northwest to point of origin.

    (c) Special local regulations. (1) The Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or the Coast Guard Patrol Commander may forbid and control the movement of all vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the regulated area shall immediately comply with the directions given. Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.

    (2) The operator of any vessel in the regulated area shall:

    (i) Stop the vessel immediately when directed to do so by any Official Patrol and then proceed only as directed.

    (ii) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Official Patrol.

    (iii) When authorized to transit the regulated area, all vessels shall proceed at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course that minimizes wake near the race course.

    (3) The Coast Guard Patrol Commander may terminate the event, or the operation of any participant, at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of life or property.

    (4) The Race Area is an area described by a line bounded by coordinates provided in latitude and longitude that outlines the boundary of a Race Area within the regulated area defined in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. The actual placement of the race course will be determined by the marine event sponsor but must be located within the designated boundaries of the Race Area. Only participants and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the Race Area.

    (5) The Buffer Zone is an area that surrounds the perimeter of the Race Area within the regulated area defined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The purpose of a Buffer Zone is to minimize potential collision conflicts with participants and spectators or nearby transiting vessels. This area provides separation between the Race Area and Spectator Area or other vessels that are operating in the vicinity of the regulated area defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Only participants and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the Buffer Zone.

    (6) The Spectator Area is an area described by a line bounded by coordinates provided in latitude and longitude that outlines the boundary of a spectator area within the regulated area defined in paragraph (b)(4) of this section. Spectators are only allowed inside the regulated area if they remain within the Spectator Area. All spectator vessels shall be anchored or operate at a no-wake speed while transiting within the Spectator Area. Spectators may contact the Coast Guard Patrol Commander to request permission to either enter the Spectator Area or pass through the regulated area. If permission is granted, spectators must enter the Spectator Area or pass directly through the regulated area as instructed at safe speed and without loitering.

    (7) The Coast Guard Patrol Commander and official patrol vessels enforcing this regulated area can be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and channel 22A (157.1 MHz). Persons and vessels desiring to transit, moor, or anchor within the regulated area must obtain authorization from Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region can be contacted at telephone number 410-576-2693 or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard Patrol Commander can be contacted on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).

    (8) The Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio.

    (d) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 6, 2018, and from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on October 7, 2018.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Joseph B. Loring, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21350 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R02-OAR-2018-0422; FRL-9984-81—Region 2] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New York; Determination of Attainment of the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Jamestown, New York Marginal Nonattainment Area AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a determination that the Jamestown, New York Marginal Nonattainment Area (Jamestown Area or Area) has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This determination is based upon complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data that shows the Area has monitored attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for both the 2012-2014 and 2015-2017 monitoring periods. This action does not constitute a redesignation to attainment. The Jamestown Area will remain nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that the Jamestown Area meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for redesignation to attainment, including an approved maintenance plan. This action is being taken under the CAA.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2018-0422. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kirk J. Wieber, (212) 637-3381, or by email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    On March 12, 2008, EPA revised both the primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone to a level of 0.075 parts per million (ppm) (annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration, averaged over three years) to provide increased protection of public health and the environment. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).1 The 2008 ozone NAAQS retains the same general form and averaging time as the 0.08 ppm NAAQS set in 1997, but is set at a more protective level. On May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088), effective July 20, 2012, EPA designated as nonattainment any area that was violating the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent years (2008-2010) of air monitoring data. The Jamestown Area (specifically, Chautauqua County) was designated as a marginal ozone nonattainment area. See 40 CFR 81.333.

    1 For a detailed explanation of the calculation of the 3-year 8-hour average, see 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.

    Marginal areas designated in the May 21, 2012 rule are required to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable deadline of July 20, 2015. See 40 CFR 51.903. On May 4, 2016, EPA determined that complete, quality-assured, and certified air quality monitoring data from the 2012-2014 monitoring period indicated that the Jamestown Area attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS by that attainment date. See 81 FR 26697.

    Under the provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule (40 CFR 51.918), if EPA also issues a determination (as it is doing here) that an area is attaining the relevant standard through a rulemaking that includes public notice and comment (known informally as a Clean Data Determination), the requirements for a State to submit certain required planning SIPs related to attainment of the eight-hour NAAQS, such as attainment demonstrations, reasonable further progress plans and contingency measures, shall be suspended. EPA's action only suspends the requirements to submit the SIP revisions discussed above.2

    2 For more information on the EPA's Clean Data Policy, see https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/redesignation-and-clean-data-policy-cdp for documents such as the Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, “Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard” (May 10, 1995).

    This suspension remains in effect until such time, if ever, that EPA (i) redesignates the area to attainment, at which time those requirements no longer apply, or (ii) subsequently determines that the area has violated the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Although these requirements are suspended, if the State provides these submissions to EPA for review and approval at any time, EPA is not precluded from acting upon them.

    II. EPA's Evaluation

    An area may be considered to be attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured ambient air monitoring data. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations at an ozone monitor is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix P. This 3-year average is referred to as the design value. When the design value is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm at each monitor within the area, then the area is attaining the NAAQS. Also, the data meets the regulatory completeness requirement when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than or equal to 90 percent (%), and no single year has less than 75% data completeness as determined in appendix P of 40 CFR part 50. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS).

    As was discussed in EPA's July 20, 2018 (83 FR 34506) proposal, EPA has reviewed the complete, quality-assured, and certified ozone ambient air monitoring data for the monitoring periods for both 2012-2014 and 2015-2017 for the Jamestown Area. For both monitoring periods, the design values for the Jamestown monitor in Chautauqua County are less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, and the monitor meets the data completeness requirements. Based on the 2012-2014 data from the AQS database and consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA has concluded that this Area attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In addition, complete, quality-assured, and certified data through the 2017 ozone season demonstrate that the area continues to attain the standard.

    III. Comments Received in Response to EPA's Proposed Action

    On July 20, 2018 (83 FR 34506), EPA proposed to make a determination that the Jamestown Area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In response to EPA's July 20, 2018 proposed determination for the Jamestown Area, EPA received several comments from the public during the 30-day public comment period. After reviewing the comments, EPA has determined that most of the comments are outside the scope of our proposed action or fail to identify any material issue necessitating a response. The comments do not raise issues germane to EPA's proposed action. For this reason, EPA will not provide a specific response to those comments. Those comments may be viewed under Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2018-0422 on the http://www.regulations.gov website. EPA did however receive one comment that is germane to EPA's proposed action.

    Comment: Please consider keeping plans in place to monitor and follow up with the ozone level in Jamestown. Keeping a close eye on data and holding people accountable for meeting a standard of 0.075 ppm ozone may be more likely to continue the downward trend in ozone than if we just stop communicating with local leadership on this issue.

    Response: This determination of attainment is not equivalent to a redesignation under section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. The designation status of the Jamestown Area will remain nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that the Area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment, including an approved maintenance plan. While this determination of attainment for the Jamestown Area suspends the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration requirements of section 182(b)(1) and related requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, it does not suspend or rescind the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(B) and (I) for monitoring and implementing the various ozone related emissions reduction control strategies that have been adopted by New York State and approved by EPA over the years. Therefore, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and EPA will continue to assess the ozone ambient air monitoring data for the Jamestown monitor in Chautauqua County. If certified air quality data indicates issues with continuing attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the EPA will, to the extent necessary, work with NYSDEC and use appropriate CAA authorities to address those air quality issues.

    IV. Final Action

    EPA is finalizing a determination that the Jamestown Area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This determination (informally known as a Clean Data Determination) is based upon complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the Jamestown Area has monitored attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2012-2014 and 2015-2017 monitoring periods. Complete and quality assured and certified data for these periods demonstrate that the area continues to attain the standard during both time periods. As provided in 40 CFR 51.918, EPA's determination that this area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard suspends the requirements under CAA section 182(b)(1) for submission of a reasonable further progress plan and ozone attainment demonstration. In addition, this final determination means the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(9) concerning submission of contingency measures and any other planning SIP relating to attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS shall be suspended for so long as the Jamestown Area continues to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Although these requirements would be suspended, EPA would not be precluded from acting upon these elements at any time if submitted to EPA for review and approval.

    Finalizing this determination does not constitute a redesignation of the Jamestown Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS under CAA section 107(d)(3). This determination of attainment also does not involve approving any maintenance plan for the Jamestown Area and does not determine that the Jamestown Area has met all the requirements for redesignation under the CAA, including that the attainment be due to permanent and enforceable measures. Therefore, the designation status of the Jamestown Area will remain nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA takes final rulemaking action to determine that such Area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action finalizes an attainment determination based on air quality data, resulting in the suspension of certain Federal requirements. The action would not impose any additional requirements. 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 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 CAA; and

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

    In addition, the attainment determination does not 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 December 3, 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 CAA section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 19, 2018. Peter D. Lopez, Regional Administrator, Region 2.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart HH—New York 2. In § 52.1683, add paragraph (q) to read as follows:
    § 52.1683 Control strategy: Ozone.

    (q) EPA is determining that the Jamestown marginal nonattainment area (consisting of Chautauqua County) has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This determination (informally known as a Clean Data Determination) is based upon complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the Jamestown Area has monitored attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2012-2014 and 2015-2017 monitoring periods. Under the provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR 51.918), this determination suspends the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration requirements of section 182(b)(1) and related requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act for this area as long as the area does not monitor any violations of the 8-hour ozone standard. If a violation of the ozone NAAQS is monitored in this area, this determination shall no longer apply.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21329 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 665 [Docket No. 180810748-8814-01] RIN 0648-BI43 Pacific Island Fisheries; Hawaii Shallow-Set Pelagic Longline Fishery; Court Order AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule revises from 34 to 17 the annual number of allowable incidental interactions that may occur between the Hawaii shallow-set pelagic longline fishery and North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles, in compliance with an order of the U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii.

    DATES:

    Effective January 1, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bob Harman, NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office, 808-725-5170.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 30, 2012, NMFS completed a biological opinion (2012 BiOp) on the effects of the Hawaii shallow-set longline fishery on marine species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The 2012 BiOp superseded a February 23, 2004, BiOp on the effects of Pacific Island pelagic fisheries, including shallow-set longline fishing, on ESA-listed marine species (2004 BiOp). In the 2012 BiOp, NMFS concluded that the continued operation of the Hawaii shallow-set fishery, as managed under the regulatory framework of the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific (FEP), was not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any ESA-listed species or result in destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat.

    The 2012 BiOp established an annual incidental take statement authorizing the fishery to interact with up to 26 leatherback sea turtles and 34 North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles. Consistent with the 2012 BiOp, NMFS revised the annual limits on allowable incidental interactions between the fishery and leatherback and North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles (77 FR 60637, October 4, 2012, codified at 50 CFR 665.813). If the fishery reaches either of the interaction limits in a given year, the regulations require NMFS to close the fishery for the remainder of the calendar year.

    In the U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii, several plaintiffs challenged the NMFS final rule that revised the annual sea turtle interaction limits, among other things, and the Court ruled in favor of NMFS on all claims (see Turtle Island Restoration Network, et al. v. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, et al., (U.S.D.C. 2013), Civil No. 12-00594). Plaintiffs appealed the Court's decision and, on December 27, 2017, a U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel issued a split decision affirming the 2012 BiOp regarding leatherback sea turtles, but holding that NMFS was arbitrary and capricious in its no-jeopardy determination for North Pacific loggerhead turtles (see Turtle Island Restoration Network, et al. v. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, et al., 878 F.3d 725 (9th Cir. 2017)).

    All parties agreed to settle the case pursuant to the terms outlined in a May 4, 2018, Stipulated Settlement Agreement and Court Order (Court Order). As part of the agreement, the U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii, ordered NMFS to close the fishery for the remainder of the 2018 fishing year. On May 11, 2018, NMFS published a temporary rule closing the shallow-set longline fishery until December 31, 2018 (83 FR 21939).

    The Court Order also required NMFS to implement a new regulation that establishes the annual interaction limit for North Pacific loggerhead sea turtle at 17, effective on January 1, 2019. The revised limit is consistent with the incidental take statement from the previous 2004 BiOp. This rule implements the Court Order by revising the annual limit for North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles from 34 to 17. In addition, as accounted for in the Court Order, NMFS is consulting on the potential effects of the fishery on sea turtles, and may issue a revised regulation in the future that adopts different interaction limits or takes a different approach to interactions after that consultation is concluded.

    If the fishery reaches the interaction limit for either leatherback sea turtles or North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles, NMFS will close the fishery for the remainder of the calendar year. All other provisions applicable to the fishery remain unchanged.

    Classification

    The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, has determined that this final rule is consistent with the Court order, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Endangered Species Act, and other applicable laws.

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

    NMFS has good cause to waive the prior notice and comment requirement under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)). The Court Order, in relevant parts, vacates the portion of the 2012 Biological Opinion that relates to North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles, and requires NMFS to revise the interaction limit for those turtles to 17. Under the ESA, NMFS may not continue to authorize the shallow-set longline fishery until the consultation requirements of ESA section 7(a)(2) have been satisfied, and a new biological opinion and incidental take statement are prepared. Because NMFS has no discretion to revise and implement the loggerhead sea turtle interaction limit under the Court Order, no meaningful purpose will be served by public comment, and so providing prior notice and comment of this rule would be impracticable and contrary to public interest. The 30-day delayed effective date requirement under the APA (5 U.S.C. 553(d)) is not waived.

    Additionally, the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603-605) do not apply to this rule. Furthermore, because the changes identified in this rule are required by the Court Order and are not discretionary, the National Environmental Policy Act does not apply to this rule.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 665

    Administrative practice and procedure, Fisheries, Fishing, Hawaii, Sea turtles.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 665 is amended as follows:

    PART 665—FISHERIES IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC 1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 665 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    2. In § 665.813, revise paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
    § 665.813 Western Pacific longline fishing restrictions.

    (b) * * *

    (1) Maximum annual limits are established on the number of physical interactions that occur each calendar year between leatherback and North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles and vessels registered for use under Hawaii longline limited access permits while shallow-set fishing. The annual limit for leatherback sea turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) is 26, and the annual limit for North Pacific loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) is 17.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21349 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 170817779-8161-02] RIN 0648-XG509 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; modification of a closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is opening directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the Bering Sea subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area. This action is necessary to fully use the 2018 total allowable catch of Pacific ocean perch specified for the Bering Sea subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), October 1, 2018, through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2018. Comments must be received at the following address no later than 4:30 p.m., A.l.t., October 17, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0108, by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0108, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    NMFS closed directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch (POP) in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI under § 679.20(d)(1)(iii) (83 FR 8365, February 27, 2018).

    NMFS has determined that approximately 5,200 metric tons of POP remain in the directed fishing allowance. Therefore, in accordance with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully utilize the 2018 total allowable catch of POP in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI, NMFS is terminating the previous closure and is opening directed fishing for POP in Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI, effective 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October 1, 2018, through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2018. This will enhance the socioeconomic well-being of harvesters dependent on POP in this area.

    The Administrator, Alaska Region considered the following factors in reaching this decision: (1) The current catch of POP in the BSAI and, (2) the harvest capacity and stated intent on future harvesting patterns of vessels participating in this fishery.

    Classification

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

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

    Without this inseason adjustment, NMFS could not allow the fishery for POP in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI to be harvested in an expedient manner and in accordance with the regulatory schedule. Under § 679.25(c)(2), interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this action to the above address until October 17, 2018.

    This action is required by § 679.20 and § 679.25 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21409 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 170817779-8161-02] RIN 0648-XG510 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; “Other Rockfish” in the Aleutian Islands Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is prohibiting retention of “other rockfish” in the Aleutian Islands subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI). This action is necessary because the 2018 “other rockfish” total allowable catch (TAC) in the Aleutian Islands subarea of the BSAI has been reached.

    DATES:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    The 2018 “other rockfish” TAC in the Aleutian Islands subarea of the BSAI is 570 metric tons (mt) as established by the final 2018 and 2019 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (83 FR 8365, February 27, 2018). In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has determined that the 2018 “other rockfish” TAC in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI has been reached. Therefore, NMFS is requiring that “other rockfish” in the Aleutian Islands subarea of the BSAI be treated as prohibited species in accordance with § 679.21(b).

    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay prohibiting retention of “other rockfish” in the Aleutian Islands subarea of the BSAI. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as September 26, 2018.

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

    This action is required by §§ 679.20 and 679.21 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21400 Filed 9-27-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 191 Tuesday, October 2, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [Doc. No. AMS-FGIS-18-0053] 7 CFR Part 810 United States Standards for Canola AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Request for comments from the public; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is reopening the comment period for its request for comments from the public regarding the United States (U.S.) Standards for Canola under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA).

    DATES:

    The comment period for the document published June 29, 2018 at 83 FR 30590 is reopened. We will consider comments we receive by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Postal Mail: Please send your comment addressed to Kendra Kline, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2043-S, Washington, DC 20250-3614.

    Hand Delivery or Courier: Kendra Kline, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2043-S, Washington, DC 20250-3614.

    Internet: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick McCluskey, USDA, AMS; Telephone: (816) 659-8403; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 29, 2018, AMS published its request for comments from the public in the Federal Register (83 FR 30590) regarding the United States (U.S.) Standards for Canola under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA) (7 U.S.C. 71-87k). The comment period for the request for comments ended August 28, 2018. In response to requests from interested stakeholders, AMS is reopening the comment period an additional 60-days.

    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.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 71-87k.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Greg Ibach, Under Secretary, Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21426 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [Doc. No. AMS-FGIS-18-0054] 7 CFR Part 810 United States Standards for Soybeans AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Request for comments from the public; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is reopening the comment period for its request for comments from the public regarding the United States (U.S.) Standards for Soybeans under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA).

    DATES:

    We will consider comments we receive by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Postal Mail: Please send your comment addressed to Kendra Kline, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2043-S, Washington, DC 20250-3614.

    Hand Delivery or Courier: Kendra Kline, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2043-S, Washington, DC 20250-3614.

    Internet: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick McCluskey, USDA, AMS; Telephone: (816) 659-8403; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 29, 2018, AMS published its request for comments from the public in the Federal Register (83 FR 30592) regarding the United States (U.S.) Standards for Soybeans under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA) (7 U.S.C. 71-87k). The comment period for the request for comments ended August 28, 2018. In response to requests from interested stakeholders, AMS is reopening the comment period an additional 60-days.

    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.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 71-87k.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Greg Ibach, Under Secretary, Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21425 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [Doc. No. AMS-FGIS-18-0052] 7 CFR Part 810 United States Standards for Corn AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Request for comments from the public; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is reopening the comment period for its request for comments from the public regarding the United States (U.S.) Standards for Corn under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA).

    DATES:

    The comment period for the document published June 29, 2018 at 83 FR 30591 is reopened. We will consider comments we receive by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Postal Mail: Please send your comment addressed to Kendra Kline, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2043-S, Washington, DC 20250-3614.

    Hand Delivery or Courier: Kendra Kline, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2043-S, Washington, DC 20250-3614.

    Internet: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick McCluskey, USDA, AMS; Telephone: (816) 659-8403; Email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 29, 2018, AMS published its request for comments from the public in the Federal Register (83 FR 30591) regarding the United States (U.S.) Standards for Corn under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA) (7 U.S.C. 71-87k). The comment period for the request for comments ended August 28, 2018. In response to requests from interested stakeholders, AMS is reopening the comment period an additional 60-days.

    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.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 71-87k.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Greg Ibach, Under Secretary, Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21427 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 905 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-18-0065; SC18-905-4 PR] Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Pummelos Grown in Florida; Decreased Assessment Rate AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would implement a recommendation from the Citrus Administrative Committee (Committee) to decrease the assessment rate established for the 2018-19 and subsequent fiscal periods. The assessment rate would remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by November 1, 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:

    Abigail Campos, Marketing Specialist, or Christian D. Nissen, Regional Director, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324-3375, Fax: (863) 291-8614, 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. 905, as amended (7 CFR part 905), regulating the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and pummelos grown in Florida. Part 905 (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 growers and handlers operating within the area of production, and a public member.

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in conformance with Executive Orders 13563 and 13175. This proposed rule falls within a category of regulatory actions that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 12866 review. Additionally, because this proposed 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).

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the Order now in effect, Florida citrus handlers 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 citrus for the 2018-19 crop year, 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 are familiar with the Committee's needs and with the costs of 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 from $0.02, the rate that was established for the 2017-18 and subsequent fiscal periods, to $0.015 per 4/5-bushel cartons of citrus for the 2018-19 and subsequent fiscal periods. Shipments from last season exceeded initial projections after Hurricane Irma, allowing the Committee to maintain their financial reserve. As the industry continues to recover from Hurricane Irma, the Committee estimates that the 2018-19 Florida citrus crop will be around 8,250,000 regulated cartons, an increase of nearly one million cartons from last season. The anticipated increase in production prompted the Committee to recommend the reduction in the assessment rate.

    The Committee met on July 17, 2018, and unanimously recommended 2018-19 expenditures of $130,260 and an assessment rate of $0.015 per 4/5-bushel cartons of citrus. The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2018-19 year include $113,260 for management, $9,000 for auditing, and $4,000 for travel. Budgeted expenses for these items in 2017-18 were $75,000, $9,000, and $4,200, respectively.

    The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by considering anticipated expenses, expected shipments of 8.25 million 4/5-bushel cartons, and the amount of funds available in the authorized reserve. Income derived from handler assessments calculated at $123,750 (8.25 million × $0.015), along with interest income and funds from the Committee's authorized reserve, would be adequate to cover budgeted expenses of $130,260. Funds in the reserve are estimated to be at $147,500 and would be kept within the maximum permitted by the Order. As stated in §  905.42, the amount of the reserve is not to exceed two fiscal periods' expenses.

    The assessment rate proposed in this rule would continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA based upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other available information.

    Although the proposed assessment rate would be effective for an indefinite period, the Committee will 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 2018-19 budget and those for subsequent fiscal periods will 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 are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

    There are approximately 500 producers of Florida citrus 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 data from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), the industry, and the Committee, the weighted average f.o.b. price for Florida citrus for the 2016-17 season was approximately $15.20 per carton with total shipments of around 12.6 million cartons. Using the number of handlers, and assuming a normal distribution, the majority of handlers have average annual receipts of more than $7,500,000 ($15.20 times 12.6 million equals $191,520,000 divided by 20 handlers equals $9,576,000 per handler).

    In addition, based on the NASS data, the weighted average grower price for the 2016-17 season was around $8.30 per carton of citrus. Based on grower price, shipment data, and the total number of Florida citrus growers, and assuming a normal distribution, the average annual grower revenue is below $750,000 ($8.30 times 12.6 million cartons equals $104,580,000 divided by 500 growers equals $209,160 per grower). Thus, the majority of Florida citrus handlers may be classified as large entities, while the majority of growers may be classified as small entities.

    This proposal would decrease the assessment rate collected from handlers for the 2018-19 and subsequent fiscal periods from $0.02 to $0.015 per 4/5-bushel cartons of citrus. The Committee unanimously recommended 2018-19 expenditures of $130,260 and an assessment rate of $0.015 per 4/5-bushel cartons. The proposed assessment rate of $0.015 is $0.005 lower than the 2017-18 rate. The quantity of assessable citrus for the 2018-19 fiscal period is estimated at 8.25 million 4/5-bushel cartons. Thus, the $0.015 rate should provide $123,750 in assessment income (8.25 million × $0.015). Income derived from handler assessments, along with interest income and funds from the Committee's authorized reserve (currently $147,500), would be adequate to cover budgeted expenses.

    The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2018-19 fiscal year include $113,260 for management, $9,000 for auditing, and $4,000 for travel. Budgeted expenses for these items in 2017-18 were $75,000, $9,000, and $4,200, respectively.

    Shipments from last season exceeded initial projections after Hurricane Irma, allowing the Committee to maintain its financial reserve. The Committee estimates the 2018-19 Florida citrus crop will be around 8,250,000 regulated cartons, an increase of nearly one million cartons from last season. The Committee recommended the reduction in the assessment rate based on the anticipated increase in production.

    Prior to arriving at this budget and assessment rate, the Committee considered information from the Executive Committee. Alternative expenditure levels and assessment rates were discussed by the Executive Committee, based upon the relative value of various activities to the citrus industry. The Committee determined that all program activities were adequately funded and essential to the functionality of the Order, thus no alternate expenditure levels were deemed appropriate.

    Based on these discussions and estimated shipments, the recommended assessment rate of $0.015 would provide $123,750 in assessment income. The Committee determined that assessment revenue, along with funds from reserves and interest income, would be adequate to cover budgeted expenses for the 2018-19 fiscal period.

    A review of historical information and preliminary information pertaining to the upcoming fiscal period indicates that the average grower price for the 2018-19 season should be approximately $8.30 per 4/5-bushel cartons of citrus. Therefore, the estimated assessment revenue for the 2018-19 crop year as a percentage of total grower revenue would be about 0.2 percent.

    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 reduces the burden on handlers and may also reduce the burden on producers.

    The Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the Florida citrus industry. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the July 17, 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.

    Based on its evaluation of the Committee recommendation and other available information, USDA has determined that a modification of the assessment rate for the 2018-19 Florida citrus fiscal period would be appropriate. Therefore, USDA issues this proposed rule.

    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 the 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 Florida citrus 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 proposed rule.

    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.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905

    Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, Oranges, Pummelos, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tangerines.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 905 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES, AND PUMMELOS GROWN IN FLORIDA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 905 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    2. Section 905.235 is revised to read as follows:
    § 905.235 Assessment rate.

    On and after August 1, 2018, an assessment rate of $0.015 per 4/5-bushel carton or equivalent is established for Florida citrus covered under the Order.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Bruce Summers, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21424 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 431 [EERE-2017-BT-TP-0031] Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Three-Phase Commercial Air-Cooled Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps With a Certified Cooling Capacity of Less Than 65,000 Btu/h AGENCY:

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Request for information.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) is initiating a data collection process through this request for information (“RFI”) to consider whether to amend its test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 British thermal units per hour (“Btu/h”). To inform interested parties and to facilitate this process, DOE has gathered data, identifying several issues associated with the currently applicable test procedures on which DOE is interested in receiving comment. The issues outlined in this document mainly concern three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h and whether the test procedure and certification and compliance provisions for this equipment should align with those provisions that apply to single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h; and any additional topics that may inform DOE's decisions in a future test procedure rulemaking, including methods to reduce regulatory burden while ensuring the procedure's accuracy. DOE welcomes written comments from the public on any subject within the scope of this document (including topics not raised in this RFI).

    DATES:

    Written comments and information are requested and will be accepted on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-201X-BT-TP-0031, by any of the following methods:

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

    2. Email: [email protected] Include EERE-2017-BT-TP-0031 in the subject line of the message. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, portable document format (PDF), or American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) file format, and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption.

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

    4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.

    No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this process, see section III of this document.

    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available.

    The docket web page can be found at: https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&po=0&D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0031. The docket web page contains simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See Section III for further information on how to submit comments through http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Antonio Bouza, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4563. Email: [email protected].

    Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586-8145. Email: [email protected].

    For further information on how to submit a comment or review other public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction A. Authority and Background B. Rulemaking History II. Request for Information A. Scope & Definition B. Test Procedure 1. Industry Standard 2. Updates to the Federal Test Method 3. Harmonization C. Other Test Procedure Topics III. Submission of Comments I. Introduction

    Three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h are included in the list of “covered equipment” for which DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)) DOE's test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h is prescribed at 10 CFR 431.96. The following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish and amend the test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h, as well as relevant background information regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures for this equipment.

    A. Authority and Background

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (“EPCA” or “the Act”),1 Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified), among other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and industrial equipment. Title III, Part C 2 of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, § 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This equipment includes small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment—which includes three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h, the subject of this RFI. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B); 42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B))

    1 All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 (EEIA 2015), Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015).

    2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated Part A-1.

    Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant provisions of the Act include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy efficiency standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).

    Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant a Federal preemption waiver to a State for a standard prescribed or established under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)—which details DOE's authority for setting standards applying to commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment—in accordance with specific criteria. See 42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D).

    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296), and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that equipment (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.

    Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE follows when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section must (1) be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect the energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating cost of a covered equipment during a representative average use cycle or period of use and (2) not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)).

    As a category of commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA requires that the test procedures for this equipment—including three-phase systems with capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h—be those generally accepted industry testing procedures or rating procedures developed or recognized by the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (“AHRI”) or by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (“ASHRAE”), as referenced in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, “Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings” (“ASHRAE Standard 90.1”). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) Further, if such an industry test procedure is amended, DOE must amend its test procedure to be consistent with the amended industry test procedure, unless DOE determines, by rule published in the Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that such amended test procedure would not meet the requirements in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3) related to representative use and test burden. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B))

    In addition, if DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is appropriate, it must publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))

    EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including those at issue here, to determine whether an amended test procedure would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements that the procedure not be unduly burdensome to conduct and be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) In addition, if DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it must publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)) If DOE determines that test procedure revisions are not appropriate, DOE must publish its determination not to amend the test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))

    DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information to inform its decision consistent with its obligations under EPCA.

    B. Rulemaking History

    DOE's test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h is codified at 10 CFR 431.96. The test procedure was last amended on May 16, 2012, to incorporate by reference ANSI/AHRI Standard 210/240-2008, “2008 Standard for Performance Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning & Air-Source Heat Pump Equipment,” approved by ANSI on October 27, 2011, and updated by addendum 1 in June 2011 and addendum 2 in March 2012 (“AHRI 210/240-2008”). 77 FR 28928 (May 16, 2012). The May 2012 final rule also established additional testing requirements at 10 CFR 431.96(c) and (e), applicable to measuring seasonal energy efficiency ratio (“SEER”) and heating seasonal performance factor (“HSPF”) for this equipment. Id. ASHRAE Standard 90.1 was updated on October 26, 2016,3 but did not revise the test procedures for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h. In late 2017, AHRI published an updated version of its standard, AHRI 210/240-2017. As outlined further in this document, that updated standard made a number of changes that are of relevance to DOE's current procedure.

    3 There is no publication date printed on ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016, but ASHRAE issued a press release on October 26, 2016, which can be found at https://www.ashrae.org/news/2016/ashraeies-publish-2016-energy-efficiency-standard.

    II. Request for Information

    In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety of issues on which it seeks input to aid in the development of the technical and economic analyses regarding whether to amend the test procedures for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h. Specifically, DOE is requesting comment on opportunities to streamline and simplify the testing requirements for this equipment.

    Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the conduct of this process that may not specifically be identified in this document. In particular, DOE notes that under Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” Executive Branch agencies such as DOE are directed to manage the costs associated with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Consistent with that Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on measures DOE could take to lower the cost of its regulations applicable to the equipment at issue in a manner consistent with the requirements of EPCA.

    A. Scope and Definition

    Three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h are a category of small commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment. Commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment may be air-cooled, water-cooled, evaporatively-cooled, or water sourced (not including ground water source), and are electrically-operated, unitary central air conditioners or central air-conditioning heat pumps that are used for commercial applications. 10 CFR 431.92.

    Three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h are further disaggregated into four equipment classes: Three-phase air-cooled single-package air conditioners, three-phase air-cooled single-package heat pumps, three-phase air-cooled split-system air conditioners, and three-phase air-cooled split-system heat pumps. This RFI seeks comment on the test procedure applicable to all four equipment classes.

    B. Test Procedure 1. Industry Standard

    As noted, the current DOE test procedure at 10 CFR 431.96 for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h incorporates by reference AHRI 210/240-2008 (except section 6.5), which is also referenced in the current version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e., “ASHRAE 90.1-2016”). AHRI 210/240-2008 includes as normative appendix C the entirety of 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix M (“Appendix M”) as amended by a final rule published on October 22, 2007. (72 FR 59906) Appendix M provides the test procedure for determining the efficiency of single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h, a consumer product covered under 10 CFR part 430.

    In late 2017, AHRI updated the incorporated industry standard, releasing AHRI 210/240-2017. Many of the revisions in the update attempted to harmonize AHRI 210/240-2017 with the updated federal test method for single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h. AHRI 210/240-2017 no longer includes any version of Appendix M as a normative appendix, but has integrated requirements consistent with Appendix M throughout the standard.4 AHRI 210/240-2017 also includes additional updates beyond integrating the revised Appendix M. DOE understands that these changes, if adopted, would not conflict with Appendix M and would be highly unlikely to impact the measured efficiency of the subject equipment during a representative average use cycle as compared to conducting a test relying on the provisions already contained in Appendix M.5

    4 The inclusion of Appendix M as a normative appendix indicated that Appendix M was required to be followed when testing in accordance with AHRI 210/240-2008. As a result, AHRI's direct integration of Appendix M's provisions into AHRI 210/240-2017 achieves the same objective without the need for the previous normative appendix.

    5 For example, AHRI 210/240-2017 has stricter requirements for heat balance than does Appendix M, which also would be acceptable under Appendix M (i.e., they are not less strict requirements).

    2. Updates to the Federal Test Method

    On June 8, 2016, subsequent to the incorporation of Appendix M into AHRI 210/240-2008, DOE published a test procedure final rule that amended Appendix M. 81 FR 36992 (“June 2016 final rule”).6 DOE further amended Appendix M in a final rule published on January 5, 2017, to improve test repeatability, reduce testing burden, and improve the accuracy of field representativeness of the testing values without impacting the measured energy consumption. 82 FR 1426 (“January 2017 final rule”). The January 2017 final rule also established Appendix M1, which specifies new efficiency metrics SEER2, EER2, and HSPF2 that, while based on the efficiency metrics in Appendix M for cooling and heating performance, generally have different numerical values than the metrics used in Appendix M. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix M1 (“Appendix M1”). These new metrics were developed to avoid confusion with the metrics that are currently in use under Appendix M. See 82 FR 1437 (explaining DOE's decision to adopt new metrics SEER2, EER2, and HSPF2). Beginning on January 1, 2023, efficiency representations for single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h must be based on the test procedure in Appendix M1. Both Appendix M and Appendix M1 reference AHRI 210/240-2008, sections 6.1.3.2, 6.1.3.4, 6.1.3.5 and figures D1, D2, D4, along with sections of AHRI 1230-2010, ASHRAE 23.1-2010, ASHRAE 37-2009, ASHRAE 41.1-2013, ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA 1992), ASHRAE 41.6-2014, ASHRAE 41.9-2011, ASHRAE 116-2010, and AMCA 210-2007.

    6 A correction was issued on August 18, 2016, correcting a number of editorial errors. 81 FR 55111.

    Additionally, both the June 2016 and the January 2017 final rules adopted amendments related to the certification, compliance, and enforcement of single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h, codified in 10 CFR part 429. The amendments included revisions to the basic model definition, clarifying definitions, revisions to the testing and other requirements for determining represented values, additional certification reporting requirements, and additional product-specific enforcement provisions.

    3. Harmonization

    DOE understands that the equipment at issue are often nearly identical to single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with rated cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h. Specifically, DOE understands that three-phase equipment models generally are manufactured on the same production lines and are physically identical to their corresponding single-phase central air conditioner and heat pump models—with the exception generally being that the former have three-phase electrical systems—and use components—primarily compressors—that are designed for three-phase power input. Other key operational components, such as heat exchangers and fans, are typically identical for three-phase and single-phase designs of a given model family. In addition, DOE found that most manufacturers' model numbers for single-phase products and three-phase equipment are interchangeable and that there is consistency in energy efficiency ratings between them, i.e., three-phase and single-phase models of the same unit have the same efficiency. See, e.g., 80 FR 42614, 42622 (July 17, 2015).

    In light of these facts, DOE is considering whether to harmonize the test procedures for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h with those used to test single-phase central air conditioners and heat pumps with capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h.7 Having the same test procedure for essentially identical equipment may reduce manufacturer burden as compared to having to follow two separate test procedures. Furthermore, reliance on the current version of Appendix M (or Appendix M1 8 ), as opposed to the prior version referenced in AHRI 210/240-2008, would capture the amendments DOE has made to improve test repeatability and reduce burden, which may lead to improved manufacturer and consumer confidence in ratings. Additionally, harmonization of the test procedures would provide for more comparable information between the three-phase equipment and the single-phase products. Commercial customers considering either single-phase or three-phase equipment would have ratings for both that are based on identical testing requirements when evaluating product options. For these reasons, DOE is weighing whether to modify its procedure for the equipment at issue by referencing the most recently updated version of the test procedure applicable to single-phase central air conditioners (i.e., Appendix M or Appendix M1), as opposed to AHRI 210/240. DOE is also considering referencing the updated AHRI 210/240-2017, which reflects the latest amendments made in the updated version of Appendix M. DOE seeks comment on the merits of adopting AHRI 210/240-2017 as compared to adopting the updated version of Appendix M.

    7 The current standards in effect for the three-phase systems and the single-phase systems are presently harmonized. (See Tables 3 and 4 to 10 CFR 431.97 and 10 CFR 430.32(c)(1).)

    8 Beginning January 1, 2023, manufacturers will be required to test and certify single-phase central air conditioner and heat pumps to the test procedure in Appendix M1. The changes in Appendix M1 likely will impact the measured energy efficiency of tested units, and such impacts are reflected in the amended energy conservation standards that apply to these products beginning January 1, 2023. 82 FR 1786 (January 6, 2017).

    DOE seeks comment on a number of key issues related to whether, and if so how, it should amend its test procedures for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps.

    (1) DOE requests comment on whether it should align its test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h with the test procedure for single-phase air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with cooling capacities of less than 65,000 Btu/h. DOE requests comments and information on the merits of referencing the current version of Appendix M of 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, or some portion thereof, for the three-phase systems at issue versus the merits of referencing the updated AHRI 210/240-2017, which reflects the updated Appendix M. DOE requests information on the extent that either such amendment would impact a manufacturer's test burden as well as the relative merits of each approach.

    As noted, beginning January 1, 2023, single-phase air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps must be tested according to Appendix M1. DOE recognizes that testing of three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h under Appendix M1 may impact the measured energy efficiency of the tested units. AHRI 210/240-2017 does not contain updates to account for the more recent changes contained in Appendix M1; DOE understands that AHRI intends to address Appendix M1 in a separate revision at a later date. DOE requests comment on the appropriateness of testing three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps according to Appendix M1, or some part thereof. DOE requests any information and data on testing manufacturers may have performed with three-phase systems using the procedure in Appendix M1. DOE requests comment and information on the impact to a manufacturer's test burden that would be expected if the equipment at issue were subject to testing under Appendix M1.

    (2) DOE also requests comment on whether the general structure and language related to its certification, compliance, and enforcement requirements for three-phase systems in 10 CFR part 429 should mirror the structure, language, and certification, compliance, and enforcement requirements for single-phase systems already found in 10 CFR part 429. DOE notes that AHRI 210/240-2017 includes many updates to mirror these requirements, regardless of the phase of the equipment. If DOE were to adopt such an approach, what would be the advantages and disadvantages in doing so? DOE is also particularly interested in information on the extent that such an amendment would impact a manufacturer's certification and reporting test burden.

    C. Other Test Procedure Topics

    In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE welcomes comment on any other aspect of the existing test procedures for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h not already addressed by the specific areas identified in this document. DOE particularly seeks information that would improve the repeatability, reproducibility, and consumer representativeness of the test procedures. DOE also requests information that would help DOE create a procedure that would limit manufacturer test burden through streamlining or simplifying testing requirements. Comments regarding the repeatability and reproducibility are also welcome.

    DOE also requests feedback on any potential amendments to the existing test procedure that could be considered to address impacts on manufacturers, including small businesses. Regarding the Federal test method, DOE seeks comment on the degree to which the DOE test procedure should consider and be harmonized with the most recent relevant industry standards for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000Btu/h and whether there are any changes to the DOE test method that would provide additional benefits to the public. DOE also requests comment on the benefits and burdens of adopting any industry/voluntary consensus-based or other appropriate test procedure, without modification. As discussed, the current test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h references AHRI 210/240-2008, and also establishes additional specifications necessary to address an optional break-in period and set-up of the units to be tested. 10 CFR 431.96(c) and (e). AHRI 210/240-2008 incorporates a version of the DOE test procedure for single-phase air-cooled air conditioners and heat-pumps that has since become outdated. The updated version of the industry standard, AHRI 210/240-2017, has been revised to reflect subsequent amendments to that DOE test procedure that were made to improve the repeatability and reproducibility of the test procedure, as well as to provide clarifying revisions.

    Additionally, DOE requests comment on whether the existing test procedures limit a manufacturer's ability to provide additional features to commercial consumers on three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h. DOE particularly seeks information on how the test procedures could be amended to reduce the cost of new or additional features and make it more likely that such features are included on three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h.

    Finally, DOE requests comment on whether there are models currently on the market that have unique characteristics preventing them from being tested by the current DOE test procedure or for which the test procedure is unrepresentative. If so, DOE requests information on modifications that could be made to the test procedure to accommodate such models.

    III. Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by December 3, 2018, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of whether and how to amend the test procedure for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h. These comments and information will aid in the development of a test procedure notice of proposed rulemaking for three-phase commercial air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps with cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h if DOE determines that amended test procedures may be appropriate for this equipment.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of the process for developing test procedures and energy conservation standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the comment period in each stage of this process. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and information about this process should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at [email protected]

    Signed in Washington, DC, on September 26, 2018. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21401 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0485; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-10] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Leitchfield, KY AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

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

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify the Docket No. FAA-2018-0485; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-10, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

    FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11C 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:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority, as it would establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Leitchfield-Grayson County Airport, Leitchfield, KY, to support standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at this airport.

    Comments Invited

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

    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-2018-0485 and Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-10) and be submitted in triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number.) You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0485; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-10.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

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

    Availability of NPRMs

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

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

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11C, 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 Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile radius of Leitchfield-Grayson County Airport, Leitchfield, KY, providing the controlled airspace required to support the new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at this airport.

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

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.11C, 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. ASO KY E5 Leitchfield, KY [New] Leitchfield-Grayson County Airport, KY (Lat. 37°23′59 ″ N, long. 86°15′41″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile radius of Leitchfield-Grayson County Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on September 24, 2018. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21318 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 573 [Docket No. FDA-2018-F-3347] Kemin Industries, Inc.; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal Use) AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification; petition for rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that Kemin Industries, Inc., has filed a petition proposing that the food additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of chromium propionate as a source of supplemental chromium in horse feed.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the petitioner's environmental assessment by November 1, 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 1, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of November 1, 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 comment, 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-F-3347 for “Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals; chromium propionate.” 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 comment 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:

    Chelsea Trull, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-6729, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), notice is given that a food additive petition (FAP 2306) has been filed by Kemin Industries, Inc., 1900 Scott Ave., Des Moines, IA 50317. The petition proposes to amend Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 573 Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals (21 CFR part 573) to provide for the safe use of chromium propionate (21 CFR 573.304) as a source of supplemental chromium in horse feed.

    The potential environmental impact of this action is being reviewed. To encourage public participation consistent with regulations issued under the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1501.4(b)), the Agency is placing the environmental assessment (EA) submitted with the petition that is the subject of this notice on public display at the Dockets Management Staff for public review and comment (see DATES and ADDRESSES). FDA will also place on public display any amendments to, or comments on, the petitioner's EA without further announcement in the Federal Register.

    If, based on its review, the Agency finds that an environmental impact statement is not required and this petition results in a regulation, the notice of availability of the Agency's finding of no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding will be published with the regulation in the Federal Register in accordance with 21 CFR 25.51(b).

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21395 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 70 [EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0642; FRL-9983-78—Region 7] Air Plan Approval; Iowa; State Implementation Plan and Operating Permits Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the Iowa State Implementation Plan (SIP) and the Operating Permits Program. The revisions include updating definitions, clarifying permit rule exemptions and permit-by-rule regulations, revising methods and procedures for performance test/stack test and continuous monitoring systems, and updating the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations and Operating Permits Program. In addition, the State has removed its rules that implement the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and revised their acid rain rules. These revisions will not impact air quality and will ensure consistency between the state and Federally approved rules.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0642 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    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. What SIP revisions are being proposed by EPA? III. What Operating Permit Plan revisions are being proposed by EPA? IV. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP and the Operating Permits Program revisions been met? V. What actions are proposed? VI. Incorporation by Reference VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is proposing to approve a submission from the State of Iowa to revise the Iowa SIP and the Operating Permits Program. The revisions to the Iowa SIP revise the definition for EPA reference method and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), clarifies permit rule exemptions and the State's permit-by-rule regulation, and revises methods and procedures for performance test/stack test and continuous monitoring systems. In addition, the State has removed its rules that implement the CAIR. The State has also revised their Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations to incorporate the most recent Federal requirements. Iowa has also revised their Operating Permits Program by revising the definition for EPA Reference Method, clarifying insignificant activities as applied to internal combustion engines, revising forms used to submit emission inventories and due dates as well as revising the public participation rules. In addition, the State revised their acid rain rules to include the most recent EPA Reference Method.

    EPA is not acting on Chapter 25.2—Continuous emission monitoring under the acid rain program, as these provisions are not approved in the operating permits program. EPA is also not acting on the New Source Performance Standards, emission standards for hazardous air pollutants, emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for source categories, and emission guidelines that were submitted in this SIP revision. These will be addressed separately.

    II. What SIP revisions are being proposed by EPA?

    EPA is proposing the following revisions to the Iowa SIP:

    Chapter 20—Scope of Title-Definitions: The State revised the definition of “EPA reference method,” to adopt the most current EPA methods for measuring air pollutant emissions (stack testing and continuous monitoring). EPA revised the reference methods in 40 CFR parts 51, 60, 61 and 63 on August 30, 2016. These updates will ensure that state reference methods are equivalent to Federal reference methods and are no more stringent than Federal methods.

    The State revised the definition of “volatile organic compounds” (VOC) to reflect changes made to the Federal definition of VOC on August 1, 2016. EPA finalized a regulation on August 1, 2016, to exclude the compound 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) Ethane (HFE-347pcf2) from the Federal definition because this compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. This revision to the VOC definition ensures consistency with the Federal definition.

    Chapter 22—Controlling Pollution: The State made three revisions under Chapter 22, “Permits required for new or existing stationary sources,” subrule 22.1(2), “Permitting exemptions.” The revisions to permitting exemptions do not relieve the owner or operator of any source from any obligation to comply with any other applicable requirements.

    The introductory paragraph to 22.1(2) “i”, “Initiation of construction, installation, reconstruction, or alteration (modification) to equipment,” now cross-refers to subrule 31.3(1) in the Iowa SIP as the previous reference no longer exists. Subrule 31.3(1) refers to definitions for nonattainment new source review requirements for areas designated nonattainment on or after May 18, 1998.

    Subparagraph 22.1(2) “r”, applies to the exemption for an internal combustion engine with a brake horsepower rating of less than 400 measured at the shaft. The added language (underlined below) clarifies that the owner or operator of an engine that was manufactured, ordered, modified or reconstructed after March 18, 2009, may use this exemption only if the owner or operator, prior to installing, modifying or reconstructing the engine, submits to the department a completed registration on forms provided by the department (unless the engine is exempted from registration, as specified in this paragraph or on the registration form). This revision clarifies that an engine that meets the definition of nonroad engine as specified in 40 CFR 1068.30,1 is exempt from registration requirements. The engine must be in compliance with New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for stationary compression ignition internal combustion engines (40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII); NSPS for stationary spark ignition internal combustion engines (40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJJ), and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ). The State also corrected punctuation errors in this subparagraph.

    1https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=db4b0eb8f69070dfa866091c274c941c&mc=true&node=se40.37.1068_130&rgn=div8.

    Subparagraph 22.1(2)“w”(1) applies to “small unit” exemptions from construction permitting. The SIP-approved list of criteria has the word “or” between the last two items in the list, which could lead affected owners and operators to conclude that an emission unit does not need to meet all the criteria in the list. This proposed revision changes the word “or” to “and” between the provision for “PM2.5” and the one for “hazardous air pollutants” in the list of air pollutants. A spelling error will also be corrected with this proposed revision.

    The revisions to subrule 22.8(1) “a”, “Permit by Rule,” allow powder coat material to be used in paint booths without being considered “sprayed material,” provided the powder coating is applied in an indoor-vented spray booth equipped with filters or an overspray powder recovery system. Included in this docket are justification materials from the state that evaluates that particulate emissions from powder coatings specified under the conditions in permit by rule, would not contribute to the exceedances of the ambient air quality standards for particulate matter. The justification was previously provided in support of the exemption for powder coatings for construction permits (22.1(2)“bb”). Owners and/or operators using the permit by rule must send a notification letter to the Department and complete applicability questions for the facility. Facilities not eligible for permit by rule are required to apply for a construction permit as specified under 567 IAC subrules 22.1(1) and 22.1(3).

    Chapter 25—Measurement of Emissions: The State revised subrule 25.1(9), “Methods and Procedures,” to adopt the most current EPA reference methods for measuring air pollutant emissions (performance test/stack test, 25.1(9)a, and continuous monitoring systems, 25.1(9)b). EPA revised the reference methods in 40 CFR parts 51, 60, 61 and 63 on August 30, 2016. These proposed updates will ensure that state reference methods are equivalent to Federal reference methods and are no more stringent than Federal methods.

    Chapter 33—Special Regulations and Construction Permit Requirements for Major Stationary Sources—Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) of Air Quality:

    33.1—Purpose. The State revised the applicable date to incorporate the recent changes EPA made to the Federal requirements of the PSD program from August 19, 2015, to October 18, 2016.

    33.1(3)—Definitions. The State revised the definition of “volatile organic compounds” (VOC) to reflect changes made to the Federal definition of VOC on August 1, 2016. The compound 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) Ethane (HFE-347pcf2) was excluded from the Federal definition at 40 CFR 51.100(s) because this compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. This proposed revision to the state's VOC definition ensures consistency with the Federal definition.

    33.3(17)—Public participation. The State made revisions that addresses public participation requirements for the PSD program to reflect updates to the Federal regulations, at 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, published October 18, 2016. The revision removes the requirements for advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in each region in which the proposed source will be constructed, and provides for posting of the public comment period on a website identified by the department.2 The electronic notice shall be available for the duration of the public comment period and include the notice of public comment, the draft permit(s), information on how to access the administrative record for the draft permit(s), and how to request or attend a public hearing on the draft permits(s). The revision also requires the department to be consistent in the method of providing public notice while using other means necessary to ensure adequate notice to the affected public.

    2 The “department” is the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and the permitting authority.

    33.3(22)—Permit rescission. This revision allows for rescission of PSD permits to be consistent with the Federal changes made to 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, published October 18, 2016, with regard to public participation. A notice of permit rescission may be posted on a publicly available website identified by the department.

    Chapter 34—Provisions for Air Quality Emissions Trading Programs. Due to the regulations being phased out and replaced with the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule published in the Federal Register on August 8, 2011 at 76 FR 48208, Iowa is implementing the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule through a Federal Implementation Plan, and removing its regulations that implement CAIR. Because the State CAIR trading programs created by these rules are no longer being implemented, and because the rules serve no other purpose, removal of the rules from the SIP does not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or any other requirement of the CAA.

    EPA is proposing to approve the rescission of the following chapters in the Iowa SIP:

    34.201, CAIR NOX Annual Trading Program Provisions;

    34.202, CAIR Designated Representative for CAIR NOX sources;

    34.203, Permits;

    34.204, Reserved;

    34.205, CAIR NOX Allowance Allocations;

    34.206, CAIR NOX Allowance Tracking System;

    34.207, CAIR NOX Allowance Transfers;

    34.208, Monitoring and Reporting;

    34.209, CAIR NOX Opt-in Units;

    34.210, CAIR SO2 Trading Program;

    34.211-34.219, Reserved;

    34.220, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Trading Program;

    34.221, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Trading Program General Provisions;

    34.222, CAIR Designated Representative for CAIR NOX Ozone Season Sources;

    34.223, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Permits;

    34.224, Reserved;

    34.225, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Allowance Allocations;

    34.226, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Allowance Tracking System;

    34.227, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Allowance Transfers;

    34.228, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Monitoring and Reporting, and 34.229, CAIR NOX Ozone Season Opt-in Units.

    III. What operating permits plan revisions are being proposed by EPA?

    EPA is proposing to approve the following revisions to Iowa's Operating Permits Program (Title V) as follows:

    Chapter 22.100—Definitions for Title V Operating Permits: The State revised the definition of “EPA reference method,” to adopt the most current EPA methods for measuring air pollutant emissions (stack testing and continuous monitoring). EPA revised the reference methods in 40 CFR parts 51, 60, 61 and 63 on August 30, 2016. These updates will ensure that state reference methods are equivalent to Federal reference methods and are no more stringent than Federal methods.

    Chapter 22.103—Insignificant activities:

    Subparagraph 22.103(2)“b”(6) applies to the exemption for internal combustion engines that are used for emergency response purpose with a brake horsepower rating of less than 400 measured at the shaft. The revision adds that emergency engines that are subject to the following rules are not to be considered insignificant: New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), 40 CFR part 60 subpart IIII (stationary compression ignition internal combustion engines); NSPS 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJJ (stationary spark ignition internal combustion engines), and National Emission Standards for hazardous air pollutants, 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ (reciprocating internal combustion engines).

    Chapter 22.106, Title V permit fees:

    The revision to 22.106(2) applies to emission inventories and documentation due dates. The revision specifies that emissions inventories will be submitted with forms specified by the department. For emissions in Polk and Linn Counties, three copies of forms should be submitted that document actual emissions for the previous calendar year annually by March 31. Emissions in other counties are required to submit two copies of forms documenting actual emissions for the previous calendar year annually by March 31. With this revision, the following forms have been removed: Form 1.0, “Facility Identification”; Form 4.0, “Emission Unit—Actual Operations and Emissions” for each emission unit; Form 5.0, “Title V Annual Emissions Summary/Fee”, and Part 3, “Application Certification.”

    Chapter 22.107, Title V permit processing procedures:

    The revision to subrule 22.107(6), “Public notice and public participation,” updates the Title V program to reflect the changes made to Federal regulations at 40 CFR 70.7(h), published October 18, 2016. The revision removes the requirements for advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation and adds that posting of the notice, including the draft permit, for the duration of the public comment period on a public website identified by the permitting authority.3

    3 Iowa Department of Natural Resources.

    Chapter 22.120: This chapter applies to the acid rain program. In Iowa, all provisions of the acid rain program are approved under the Title V Operating Permits Program. Therefore, the test methods as applied in Chapter 22.100 apply to Chapter 22.120 to include the most recent EPA reference method revision to 40 CFR part 75 (August 30, 2016).

    Chapter 30—Fees: The revision to “Fees Associated with Title V Operating Permits” at 30.4(2) “b” removes the following forms: Form 1.0, “Facility Identification”; Form 5.0, “Title V Annual Emissions Summary/Fee”, and Part 3, “Application Certification.” The revision also adds the language “with forms specified by the department.”

    IV. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP and the Operating Permits Program revisions been met?

    The submission met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The State held a public comment period from December 20, 2017 to January 22, 2018, with a public hearing on January 22, 2018. No comments were received. The submissions 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.

    V. What actions are proposed?

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Iowa SIP and the Operating Permits Program. The proposed revisions clarify rules, makes revisions and corrections, and rescinds rules no longer relevant to the air program. EPA has determined that approval of these revisions will not impact air quality and will ensure consistency between the state and federally-approved rules, and ensure Federal enforceability of the state's revised air program rules.

    VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is proposing to include regulatory text in an EPA final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the Iowa Regulations described in the proposed 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).

    VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act (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 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 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 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    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 proposes to amend 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, paragraph (c), by: a. Revising the table entries “567-20.2”, “567-22.1”, “567-22.8”, “567-25.1”, “567-33.1”, and “567-33.3”, and b. Removing the table entries and the heading for “Chapter 34—Provisions for Air Quality Emissions Trading Programs” in its entirety.

    The revisions 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 20—Scope of Title-Definitions *         *         *         *         *         *         * 567-20.2 Definitions 4/18/2018 [Date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register], [Federal Register citation of the final rule] The definitions for “anaerobic lagoon,” “odor,” “odorous substance,” “odorous substance source” are not SIP approved. *         *         *         *         *         *         * Chapter 22—Controlling Pollution 567-22.1 Permits Required for New or Stationary Sources 4/18/2018 [Date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register], [Federal Register citation of the final rule] In 22.1(3) the following sentence regarding electronic submission is not SIP approved. The sentence is: “Alternatively, the owner or operator may apply for a construction permit for a new or modified stationary source through the electronic submittal format specified by the department.” *         *         *         *         *         *         * 567-22.8 Permit by Rule 4/18/2018 [Date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register], [Federal Register citation of the final rule] *         *         *         *         *         *         * Chapter 25—Measurement of Emissions 567-25.1 Testing and Sampling of New and Existing Equipment 4/18/2018 [Date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register], [Federal Register citation of the final rule] *         *         *         *         *         *         * Chapter 33—Special Regulations and Construction Permit Requirements for Major Stationary Sources—Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) of Air Quality 567-33.1 Purpose 4/18/2018 [Date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register], [Federal Register citation of the final rule] 567-33.3 Special Construction Permit Requirements for Major Stationary Sources in Areas Designated Attainment or Unclassified (PSD) 4/18/2018 [Date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register], [Federal Register citation of the final rule] Provisions of the 2010 PM2.5 PSD—Increments, SILs and SMCs rule (75 FR 64865, October 20, 2010) relating to SILs and SMCs that were affected by the January 22, 2013, U.S. Court of Appeals decision are not SIP approved. Iowa's rule incorporating EPA's 2007 revision of the definition of “chemical processing plants” (the “Ethanol Rule,” published May 1, 2007) or EPA's 2008 “fugitive emissions rule,” (published December 19, 2008) are 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 new paragraph (t) under Iowa to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 70—Approval Status of State and Local Operating Permits Programs Iowa

    (t) The Iowa Department of Natural Resources submitted for program approval revisions to rules 567-22.103, 567-22.106, 567-22.107, and 567-30.4. The state effective date is April 18, 2018. This revision is effective [date 60 days after date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register].

    [FR Doc. 2018-21287 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Parts 405 and 423 [CMS-4174-P] RIN 0938-AT27 Medicare Program: Changes to the Medicare Claims and Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Determination Appeals Procedures AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would revise the regulations setting forth the appeals process that Medicare beneficiaries, providers, and suppliers must follow in order to appeal adverse determinations regarding claims for benefits under Medicare Part A and Part B or determinations for prescription drug coverage under Part D. These changes would help streamline the appeals process and reduce administrative burden on providers, suppliers, beneficiaries, and appeal adjudicators. These revisions, which include technical corrections, would also help to ensure the regulations are clearly arranged and written to give stakeholders a better understanding of the appeals process.

    DATES:

    To be assured consideration, comments must be received at one of the addresses provided below, no later than 5 p.m. on December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    In commenting, please refer to file code CMS-4174-P. Because of staff and resource limitations, we cannot accept comments by facsimile (FAX) transmission.

    Comments, including mass comment submissions, must be submitted in one of the following three ways (please choose only one of the ways listed):

    1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this regulation to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the “Submit a comment” instructions.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address only: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-4174-P, P.O. Box 8013, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.

    Please allow sufficient time for mailed comments to be received before the close of the comment period.

    3. By express or overnight mail. You may send written comments to the following address only: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-4174-P, Mail Stop C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.

    For information on viewing public comments, see the beginning of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joella Roland, (410) 786-7638 or Nishamarie Sherry, (410) 786-1189.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Inspection of Public Comments: All comments received before the close of the comment period are available for viewing by the public, including any personally identifiable or confidential business information that is included in a comment. We post all comments received before the close of the comment period on the following website as soon as possible after they have been received: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the search instructions on that website to view public comments.

    I. Background

    As specified under sections 1869 and 1860D-4 of the Social Security Act (the Act) and their implementing regulations, once Medicare makes a coverage or payment determination under Medicare Parts A, B, or D, affected parties have the right to appeal the decision through four levels of administrative review. If a minimum amount in controversy (AIC) is met, parties can then appeal the decision to federal district court.

    Section 1869 of the Act sets forth the process for appealing Parts A and B claim determinations. For most Part A and B claims, the initial determination is made by a Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC). If a party is dissatisfied with the initial determination, the party may request a redetermination by the MAC, which is a review by MAC staff not involved in the initial determination. If a party is dissatisfied with the MAC's redetermination, the party may request a Qualified Independent Contractor (QIC) reconsideration consisting of an independent review of the administrative record, including the redetermination. Provided a minimum AIC is met, parties then have the option to appeal to the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA) where they may receive either a hearing or review of the administrative record by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), or a review of the administrative record by an attorney adjudicator. Parties then have the option to appeal to the Medicare Appeals Council (the Council) within the Departmental Appeals Board, where an Administrative Appeals Judge examines their claim. A party can then appeal the decision to federal district court if certain requirements are met, including a minimum AIC.

    The appeals process described above for Parts A and B claim determinations was initially proposed in the November 15, 2002 Federal Register (67 FR 69312), which was promulgated to implement section 521 of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-554). This process was implemented in an interim final rule with comment period published on March 8, 2005 (the 2005 interim final rule with comment period) (70 FR 11420), which also set forth new provisions to implement the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-173). Correcting amendments to the 2005 interim final rule were published on June 30, 2005 (70 FR 37700) and August 26, 2005 (70 FR 50214), and the final rule was published on December 9, 2009 (74 FR 65296). Subsequent revisions to implement section 201 of the Strengthening Medicare and Repaying Taxpayers Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-242) were published on February 27, 2015 (80 FR 10611). These appeals procedures for Part A and B claims are set forth in regulations at part 405, subpart I.

    Section 1860D-4 of the Act sets forth the appeals process for Part D coverage determinations. Under Medicare Part D, the Part D plan sponsor issues a coverage determination. If this coverage determination is appealed, the Part D plan sponsor reviews the determination, which is known as a redetermination. If a party is dissatisfied with the redetermination, the party may request a reconsideration by an independent review entity. Similar to the appeals process for Parts A and B claim determinations, provided a minimum AIC is met, parties then have the option to appeal to OMHA where they may receive either a hearing or review of the administrative record by an ALJ, or a review of the administrative record by an attorney adjudicator. If not satisfied with OMHA's decision, a party then may appeal to the Council. The Council decision then may be appealed to federal district court if certain requirements are met, including a minimum AIC. These procedures are set forth in regulations at part 423, subparts M and U.

    On January 17, 2017, we issued a final rule entitled “Medicare Program: Changes to the Medicare Claims and Entitlement, Medicare Advantage Organization Determination, and Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Determination Appeals Procedures” (82 FR 4974) (the January 17, 2017 final rule), which revised the Parts A, B, C, and D appeals procedures. The goals of this rulemaking were to streamline the appeals process, increase consistency in decision-making, improve efficiency for both appellants and adjudicators, and provide particular benefit to beneficiaries by clarifying processes and adding provisions for increased assistance when they are unrepresented. On April 16, 2018, we issued a final rule (83 FR 16440) that made additional changes to subparts M and U in order to implement section 704 of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016 (Pub. L. 114-198), along with other changes.

    Through our experience implementing the current appeals process, and through additional research, we have identified several opportunities to streamline the claims appeals process and reduce associated burden on providers, beneficiaries, and appeals adjudicators. We have also identified several technical corrections that should be made to correct cross-references, inconsistent definitions, and confusing terminology.

    II. Provisions of the Proposed Regulations A. Removal of Requirement That Appellants Sign Appeal Requests (§§ 405.944, 405.964, 405.1112, and 423.2112)

    Existing regulations at part 405, subpart I; and part 423, subparts M and U, specify the required elements of requests for Medicare Parts A and B claims appeals and for Medicare Part D coverage determination appeals, respectively. Generally, when a contractor or plan issues a Part A or B initial determination or a Part D coverage determination, it notifies the provider, supplier, and/or beneficiary and offers the opportunity to appeal. If this determination is appealed, the contractor or plan reviews the determination, which, in Medicare Parts A, B and D appeals, is known as a redetermination (see §§ 405.940 and 423.580). This can be followed by a review by an independent contractor consisting of an independent review of the administrative record, including the redetermination, which is known as a reconsideration (§§ 405.960 and 423.600). If a minimum amount-in-controversy is met, parties then have the option to appeal to the OMHA where the administrative record may be reviewed by an attorney adjudicator or an ALJ or a hearing may be held by an ALJ (§§ 405.1000 et seq. and 423.2000 et seq.). Parties then have the option to appeal to the Council within the Departmental Appeals Board where an Administrative Appeals Judge reviews their claim (§§ 405.1100 et seq. and 423.2100 et seq.).

    Appeal requests can be made using different standard forms. These standard forms include the following: Medicare Redetermination Request Form (CMS-20027); Medicare Reconsideration Request Form (CMS-20033); Request for Administrative Law Judge Hearing or Review of Dismissal (OMHA-100); and Request for Review of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Medicare Decision/Dismissal (DAB-101). A written request that is not made on a standard form is also accepted if it contains certain required elements. For example, see, §§ 405.944(b), 405.964(b), 405.1014(a), 405.1112, 423.2014(a), 423.2112.

    As discussed previously, all Medicare Parts A, B, and D appeal requests must contain the information specified in our regulations. In addition, for Parts A and B claims appeal requests at the redetermination, reconsideration, and Council review levels (§§ 405.944(b)(4), 405.964(b)(4), and 405.1112(a)), and for Part D coverage determination appeal requests at the Council level (§ 423.2112(a)(4)), the appellants must sign their appeal requests. However, there is no signature requirement when the appellant requests OMHA review of Parts A and B claim determinations, or when the appellant requests a redetermination, reconsideration, or OMHA review of Part D coverage determinations. In addition, there is no requirement that appellants sign appeals requests for appeals of Part C organization determinations.

    In order to promote consistency between appeal levels, ensure transparency in developing our appeal request requirements, help ensure that we do not impose nonessential requirements on appellants, reduce the burden on appellants, and improve the appeals process based on our experience, we are proposing that appellants in Medicare Parts A and B claim and Part D coverage determination appeals be allowed to submit appeal requests without a signature. Specifically, we are proposing to revise §§ 405.944(b)(4), 405.964(b)(4), 405.1112(a), and 423.2112(a)(4) to remove the requirement of the appellant's signature for appeal requests.

    As discussed previously, there is no requirement that appellants sign appeal requests when appealing their cases to OMHA, for the Part C organization determination appeals process, or at the redetermination and reconsideration levels of Part D appeals. However, the other requirements for appeal requests are substantially similar between levels of appeal and appeals processes, or there is a clear reason for the differing requirements. For example, the requirements for Part A and B appeal requests at the redetermination and reconsideration levels are identical with the exception of the reconsideration requirement that the name of the contractor be listed on the reconsideration appeal request (§§ 405.944 and 405.964). The rationale for the requirement that the name of the contractor be included on reconsideration appeal requests is that without this information, the independent contractor does not have a method of determining which contractor made the initial determination and redetermination, and is unable to get the case file. Since the contractor doing the redetermination is the same contractor who performed the initial determination, it is not necessary that this information be included in the redetermination appeal request.

    By contrast, we do not believe there is a compelling reason to require that a signature be included on redetermination, reconsideration, and Council-level appeal requests, but not on OMHA appeal requests. Removing the requirement that appellants sign their appeal requests, would help promote consistency between appeal request requirements, thus making the appeals process easier for parties to understand.

    Eliminating the requirement that appellants sign their appeal requests would reduce the burden of developing the appeal request and appealing dismissals of appeal requests for lack of a signature to the next level of review (for example, §§ 405.952(b), 405.972(b)). Allowing adjudicators to review appeal requests without signatures would allow them to focus their attention on the merits of the appeal, rather than having to dismiss potentially meritorious appeals for a lack of a signature.

    When we promulgated the requirement for appellants to sign the appeal requests in regulations, we included a signature on the appeal request to ensure that the person requesting the appeal was a proper party to the appeal. Through experience, we have found that, in practice, little verification of the signature is possible. To determine if the appeal requestor is a proper party to the appeal, the adjudicator uses the name of the beneficiary and name of the party listed on the appeal request, in addition to the information listed in the case file.

    The other appeal request requirements consist of fields that are necessary for the adjudicators to properly process the appeal request. As discussed previously, the name of the contractor who made the redetermination is required for the independent contractor to review the case file. The Part A and B redetermination appeal request requirement to include the disputed service and/or item enables the contractor to determine the merit of the appellant's claim.

    Thus, we believe there is no need for a signature on an appeal request at this time and propose to eliminate that requirement. However, if, we find in the future that there are other reasons that would warrant an appellant's signature on an appeal request (for example, for a good-faith attestation), we would re-examine the possibility of adding the requirement back in. However, given that our existing statutory authority limits our ability to enforce certain attestations, we find the signature requirement unnecessary.

    We are inviting public comments on our proposal to revise §§ 405.944(b)(4), 405.964(b)(4), 405.1112(a), and 423.2112(a)(4) of the regulations to remove the requirement that the appellant sign the appeal request.

    B. Change to Timeframe for Vacating Dismissals (§§ 405.952, 405.972, 405.1052, and 423.2052)

    The regulations at §§ 405.952(d), 405.972(d), 405.1012(e), and 423.2052(e) allow adjudicators to vacate a dismissal of an appeal request for a Medicare Part A or B claim or Medicare Part D coverage determination within 6 months of the date of the notice of dismissal. This allows sufficient time for adjudicators to carefully evaluate their dismissals while taking into account the principle of administrative finality.

    Through experience, we have concluded that the timeframe for vacating a dismissal would be better expressed in calendar days, rather than months, for two reasons. First, all timeframes in the regulations under part 405, subpart I and part 423 subpart U, associated with the filing of appeal requests, adjudication periods, reopening of prior determinations, and other time-limited procedural actions are expressed in calendar days, not months. For example, see §§ 405.942 and 423.2056. Second, applying a timeframe based on days, rather than months, leads to more consistency in interpretation and actual timeframes. A timeframe based on months could be subject to varying interpretations, as the number of days in a consecutive 6-month period varies from 181 to 184 days. For example, if an ALJ or attorney adjudicator's dismissal is dated August 31 of one calendar year, advancing the timeframe 6 months to February could be confusing for parties and adjudicators because February does not contain 30 or 31 days. Also, given that February has only 28 or 29 days (in a leap year), any 6-month period that includes February would be shorter than other 6 month periods, leading to some inconsistency in the actual timeframe for vacating a dismissal.

    To provide more consistency and predictability for appellants and adjudicators, and better conformity with other timeframes in the part 405, subpart I and part 423 subpart U, we are proposing to revise the timeframe for vacating a dismissal from 6 months to 180 days in §§ 405.952(d), 405.972(d), 405.1052(e), and 423.2052(e).

    C. Technical Correction to Regulations To Change Health Insurance Claim Number (HICN) References to Medicare Numbers (§§ 405.910, 405.944, 405.964, 405.1014, 405.1112, 423.2014, and 423.2112)

    Section 501 of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) (Pub. L. 114-10), added section 205(c)(2)(C)(xiii) of the Act to prohibit Social Security Numbers (or derivatives) from being displayed on Medicare cards. As a result, CMS is undertaking efforts to issue new Medicare cards, which contain a randomly generated Medicare Beneficiary Identifier (MBI), rather than the Social Security Number-based Health Insurance Claim Number (HICN) that is on the current Medicare cards. In order to ensure that appellants can easily submit appointment of representative documentation and appeal requests, we would accept this documentation with HICNs or MBIs. Consistent with these efforts, we are proposing to remove references to the Social Security Number-based HICN on Medicare cards that are included in the Medicare appeals regulations, and to replace them with references to Medicare number to clarify that either a HICN or MBI can be included on appointment of representative documentation and appeal requests. Accordingly, we are proposing to revise the following provisions of Medicare regulations to remove the words “health insurance claim” from the phrase “Medicare health insurance claim number” so that there is only a reference to “Medicare number”: §§ 405.910(c)(5), 405.944(b)(2), 405.964(b)(2), 405.1014(a)(1)(i), 405.1112(a), 423.2014(a)(1)(i), and 423.2112(a)(4).

    D. Removal of Redundant Regulatory Provisions Relating to Medicare Appeals of Payment and Coverage Determinations and Conforming Changes (§§ 423.562, 423.576, 423.602, 423.604, 423.1970, 423.1972, 423.1974, 423.1976, 423.1984, 423.1990, 423.2002, 423.2004, 423.2006, 423.2014, 423.2020, 423.2044, 423.2100, and 423.2136)

    The January 17, 2017 final rule revised certain Medicare procedures for appeals of payment and coverage determinations for items and services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries and enrollees. Since the publication of this final rule, we have identified four regulatory provisions in part 423, subpart U that are redundant. In order to reduce potential confusion, we are proposing to remove redundant provisions at §§ 423.1970, 423.1972, 423.1974, and 423.1976 and, where necessary, incorporate appropriate provisions in other sections of the regulations.

    Section 423.1970 of the regulations relating to the rights of enrollees to an ALJ hearing provides—

    • In paragraph (a), that, if the amount remaining in controversy after the independent review entity (IRE) reconsideration meets the threshold requirement established annually by the Secretary, an enrollee who is dissatisfied with the IRE reconsideration determination has a right to a hearing before an ALJ;

    • In paragraph (b)(1), the methodology for computing the AIC when the basis for appeal is the refusal by the Part D plan sponsor to provide drug benefits;

    • In paragraph (b)(2), the methodology for computing the AIC when the basis for appeal is an at-risk determination made under a drug management program in accordance with § 423.153(f); and

    • In paragraph (c), the requirements for aggregating appeals to meet the AIC.

    Section 423.2002 also contains provisions on the right to an ALJ hearing. This section contains cross-references to the provisions in § 423.1970, and also—

    • Establishes a 60-calendar day timeframe for filing a written request for an ALJ hearing following receipt of the written notice of the IRE's reconsideration; and indicates the AIC requirement must be met to be entitled to an ALJ hearing;

    • Provides the circumstances under which an enrollee may request that an ALJ hearing be expedited;

    • Establishes a 5-calendar day presumption for receipt of the reconsideration following the date of the written reconsideration, unless there is evidence to the contrary; and

    • Provides that, for purposes of the section, requests for hearing are considered as filed on the date they are received by the office specified in the IRE's reconsideration.

    Because §§ 423.1970 and 423.2002 both address the right to an ALJ hearing, and because there is a possibility that confusion may arise from having two sections with the same title in the same CFR subpart, we are proposing to remove § 423.1970. Because § 423.1970(a) is redundant of §§ 423.2000(a) and 423.2002(a)(2) in describing that an enrollee has a right to an ALJ hearing when the enrollee is dissatisfied with an IRE reconsideration and meets the AIC requirement, we believe § 423.1970(a) should be eliminated. We are proposing to relocate § 423.1970(b) and (c) to new proposed § 423.2006 (“Amount in controversy required for an ALJ hearing and judicial review”) as paragraphs (c) and (d), respectively.

    In addition, we are proposing to remove the reference to “CMS” in § 423.1970(b) (relocated to proposed § 423.2006(c)) to clarify that adjudicators, not CMS, ultimately compute the amount remaining in controversy in determining whether the AIC threshold is met for an ALJ hearing or review of an IRE dismissal, and judicial review.

    We believe having one section titled “Right to an ALJ hearing” at § 423.2002 and another section titled “Amount in controversy required for an ALJ hearing and judicial review” at § 423.2006 is more consistent with the corresponding rules in 42 CFR part 405, subpart I for appeals of Medicare Part A and Part B initial determinations (§§ 405.1002 and 405.1006). For consistency with § 423.2000(a) and language that was removed from § 423.1970(a), we are also proposing to add language to § 423.2002(a) providing that the right to an ALJ hearing is available to enrollees who are dissatisfied with the IRE's reconsideration determination.

    In order to further increase consistency with § 405.1006 and consolidate the Medicare Part D appeals rules regarding the AIC, we are proposing to incorporate provisions in proposed new § 423.2006(a) and (b) that are similar to those provisions contained at § 405.1006(b) and (c), describing the amounts in controversy required for an ALJ hearing and judicial review, respectively, including the annual adjustment of these amounts. In order to more clearly state the AIC requirements for appeals of Part D prescription drug plan coverage determinations, without the need for multiple statutory and regulatory cross-references, we are proposing that new § 423.2006 would include the following:

    • At proposed paragraph (a)(1), a provision similar to § 405.1006(b)(1) that the required amount remaining in controversy must be $100 increased by the percentage increase in the medical care component of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (U.S. city average) as measured from July 2003 to the July preceding the current year involved.

    • At proposed paragraph (a)(2), a provision similar to § 405.1006(b)(2) that, if the figure in § 423.2006(a)(1) is not a multiple of $10, it is rounded to the nearest multiple of $10, and that the Secretary will publish changes to the AIC requirement in the Federal Register when necessary.

    • At proposed paragraph (b), a provision similar to § 405.1006(c) that, to be entitled to judicial review, the enrollee must meet the AIC requirements of this subpart and have an amount remaining in controversy of $1000 or more, adjusted as specified in proposed § 423.2006(a)(1) and (2).

    • At proposed paragraph (c), a provision similar to current § 423.1970(b) explaining how the amount remaining in controversy is calculated.

    • At proposed paragraph (d), the text currently found in § 423.1970(c) concerning aggregation of appeals to meet the amount in controversy.

    Finally, we are proposing to update or remove the cross-references to § 423.1970 in §§ 423.562(b)(4)(iv), 423.576, 423.602(b)(2), 423.1984(c); 423.2002(a) introductory text and (a)(2), and (b)(3), 423.2004(a)(2), and 423.2044(c) and to add a cross-reference to § 423.2006 in § 423.1990(b)(3) in place of the language “established annually by the Secretary.”

    Section 423.1972, titled “Request for an ALJ hearing,” provides the procedures an enrollee must follow when filing a request for hearing as follows:

    • Paragraph (a) provides that a written request must be filed with the OMHA office specified in the IRE's reconsideration notice.

    • Paragraph (b) provides the timeframe for filing a request.

    • Paragraph (c)(1) states that if a request for hearing clearly shows that the AIC is less than that required under § 423.1970, the ALJ or attorney adjudicator dismisses the request.

    • Paragraph (c)(2) provides that if, after a hearing is initiated, the ALJ finds that the AIC is less than the amount required under § 423.1970, the ALJ discontinues the hearing and does not rule on the substantive issues raised in the appeal.

    With the exception of paragraph (c)(2), all of the provisions in § 423.1972 are duplicative of or incorporate by reference other provisions found in § 423.2002(a) and (d) (Right to an ALJ hearing), § 423.2014(d)(2) and (e) (Request for an ALJ hearing or a review of an IRE dismissal), § 423.2020 (Time and place for a hearing before an ALJ), and § 423.2052(a)(2) (Dismissal of a request for a hearing before an ALJ or request for review of an IRE dismissal). In order to eliminate the redundancy and potential confusion, we are proposing to remove § 423.1972 in its entirety. As a part of this proposed change, we also are proposing to update or remove the cross-references to § 423.1972 in §§ 423.604, 423.1984(c), 423.2014(d) introductory text and (e)(1), and 423.2020(a). We do not believe it is necessary to retain § 423.1972(c)(2) in another location because ALJs have broad authority to regulate the course of the hearing. In the rare circumstances described in § 423.1972(c)(2) where an ALJ does not make a finding regarding the AIC until after a hearing is initiated, the ALJ may discontinue the hearing and issue a dismissal under §§ 423.2002(a)(2) and 423.2052(a)(2).

    Section 423.1974, titled “Council review,” provides that an enrollee who is dissatisfied with an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal may request that the Council review the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal as provided in § 423.2102. This provision is similar to § 423.2100, titled “Medicare Appeals Council review: general.” To eliminate the redundancy, we are proposing to remove the language of § 423.1974 and incorporate it in § 423.2100(a). This language would replace the language in § 423.2100(a). We also are proposing to update or remove the cross-references to § 423.1974 in §§ 423.562(b)(4)(v) and 423.1984(d).

    Section 423.1976, titled “Judicial review,” provides the following:

    • In paragraph (a), that an enrollee may request judicial review of an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision if the Council denied the enrollee's request for review and the AIC meets the threshold requirement established annually by the Secretary.

    • In paragraph (b), that the enrollee may request judicial review of a Council decision if it is the final decision of CMS and the AIC meets the threshold established in paragraph (a)(2).

    • In paragraph (c), that, in order to request judicial review, an enrollee must file a civil action in a district court of the United States in accordance with section 205(g) of the Act.

    With the exception of paragraph (a), these provisions are largely duplicative of other provisions contained in § 423.2136, also titled “Judicial review.” To eliminate this redundancy, we are proposing to remove the provisions of § 423.1976 and revise § 423.2136 as follows:

    • Section 423.2136(a) would be redesignated as § 423.2136(a)(1). The cross-reference to § 423.1976 would be removed, and language from § 423.1976(b) would be incorporated in § 423.2136(a)(1)(i) and (ii) and revised by replacing “CMS” with “the Secretary” for consistency with the language in section 1876(c)(5)(B) of the Act and § 423.2140, and replacing “paragraph (a)(2) of this section” with “§ 423.2006” which we are proposing to add to the regulations to address the AIC requirements.

    • Language at § 423.1976(a) would be revised to incorporate a reference to § 423.2006 and the authorizing language from § 423.2136(a) (proposed § 423.2136(a)(1)) and moved to new § 423.2136(a)(2).

    • We also are proposing to update or remove the cross-references to § 423.1976 in §§ 423.562(b)(4)(vi), 423.576, and 423.2136(b)(1). We seek comment on these proposed changes.

    In summary, we are proposing to remove or relocate language as shown in the following table:

    Current section Proposed new
  • section
  • Proposed action Rationale
    § 423.1970(a) N/A Remove Similar language exists in §§ 423.2000(a) and 423.2002(a)(2). § 423.1970(b) § 423.2006 Remove and incorporate revised language at proposed new § 423.2006(c) Increases consistency with § 405.1006. § 423.1970(c) Remove and incorporate at proposed new § 423.2006(d) N/A
  • N/A
  • § 423.2006(a)
  • § 423.2006(b)
  • Add language concerning AIC computation not previously outlined in 42 CFR part 423
    § 423.1972(a), § 423.1972(b), § 423.1972(c)(1) N/A Remove Similar language exists in §§ 423.2002(a) and (d), 423.2014(d)(2) and (e), 423.2020, and 423.2052(a)(2) and reduces redundancy. § 423.1972(c)(2) N/A Remove Unnecessary. § 423.1974 N/A Remove and incorporate into § 423.2100(a) Reduces redundancy. § 423.1976(a) N/A Remove and incorporate revised language at new § 423.2136(a)(2) § 423.1976(b) Remove and incorporate revised language at proposed new § 423.2136(a)(1) § 423.1976(c) N/A Remove Similar language exists in § 423.2136(b)(1).
    E. Change to Timeframe for Council Referral (§ 405.1110 and § 423.2110)

    The regulations at §§ 405.1110(a) and (b)(2) and 423.2110(a) and (b)(2) give CMS or its contractors 60 calendar days after the date or issue date, respectively, of OMHA's decision or dismissal to refer the case to the Council. In the case of Part A and Part B appeals, CMS or its contractors are sent the decision notice when they are a party to the hearing or soon after the hearing occurred. For Part D appeals, as specified in § 423.2046(a)(1), the decision notice is sent to the enrollee, plan sponsor, and IRE.

    Our regulations generally include regulatory timeframes that start when CMS or its contractors receive the decision notice, rather than the date the decision notice was issued. For example, § 405.1010(b)(3), which addresses the timing of when CMS or its contractor may elect to participate in an ALJ hearing, provides that CMS or its contractor must send notice of its intent to participate, if no hearing is scheduled, no later than 30 calendar days after notification that a request for hearing was filed or, if a hearing is scheduled, no later than 10 calendar days after receiving the notice of hearing. The rationale for starting the timeframe in § 405.1010(b)(3) after receipt of the notice was to ensure that CMS or its contractors have sufficient time to conduct a thorough evaluation of the facts and the case.

    For the same reason, we are proposing to revise the timeframe in §§ 405.1110(a) and (b)(2) and 423.2110(a) and (b)(2) for CMS or it contractors to refer a case to the Council such that the timeframe would begin after the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal is received. Starting the timeframe after CMS or its contractor receives OMHA's written decision or dismissal would help ensure that CMS and its contractors have sufficient time to decide whether the case is the type of case that should be referred to the Council for review. This proposed change would help ensure that even if CMS and its contractors receive a delayed notice, they would have sufficient time to decide whether the case should be referred to the Council.

    In order to ensure consistent implementation of this proposal, we also are proposing to add new §§ 405.1110(e) and 423.2110(e) to provide that the date of receipt of the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal is presumed to be 5 calendar days after the date of the notice of the decision or dismissal, unless there is evidence to the contrary. This would help facilitate the Council's determination on the timeliness of the referral by establishing a date by which the Council may presume that CMS or its contractor received the decision from OMHA. This 5 day mailing presumption is consistent with the presumption included in §§ 405.1102(a)(2) and 423.2102(a)(3) with respect to the timeframe for requesting Council review following an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal.

    For these reasons, we are proposing to revise the Council referral timeframes in §§ 405.1110(a) and (b)(2) and 423.2110(a) and (b)(2), and proposing to add §§ 405.1110(e) and 423.2110(e) as discussed previously.

    F. Technical Correction to Regulation Regarding Duration of Appointed Representative in a Medicare Secondary Payer Recovery Claim (§ 405.910)

    Section 405.910 sets forth provisions addressing the appointment of representatives in a Medicare Parts A and B claims appeals, including for secondary payer recovery claims. Specific requirements regarding the duration of time that an appointment of representative instrument is valid are provided under § 405.910(e).

    On February 27, 2015, we published a final rule entitled “Medicare Program; Right of Appeal for Medicare Secondary Payer Determinations Relating to Liability Insurance (Including Self-Insurance), No-Fault Insurance, and Workers' Compensation Laws and Plans (80 FR 10611). In that final rule, we added paragraph (e)(4) to § 405.910 in order to provide applicable plans with the benefit of the existing rule for Medicare secondary payers regarding the duration of appointment for an appointed representative. Within this added provision, we included a citation to § 405.906(a)(1)(iv), as the regulation establishing party status for applicable plans. This citation is an incorrect cross-reference; and the correct cross-reference is § 405.906(a)(4). We are proposing to revise § 405.910(e)(4) to correct the cross-reference. This proposed correction would not alter any existing processes or procedures within the Medicare claims appeals process.

    G. Technical Correction to Actions That Are Not Initial Determinations (§ 405.926)

    Section 405.926 sets forth actions that are not considered initial determinations subject to the administrative appeals process under part 405, subpart I. On October 4, 2016, we issued a final rule entitled “Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Reform of Requirements for Long-Term Care Facilities” (81 FR 68688 through 68872) that moved the definition of “transfer and discharge” in § 483.12 to the definitions under § 483.5. Accordingly, we updated the cross-reference to “§ 483.5” within § 405.926(f) to the cross-reference to “§ 483.5(n)”. However, the citation of § 483.5(n) is an incorrect cross-reference.

    To correct this error, we are proposing to revise § 405.926(f) to remove the incorrect reference to “§ 483.5(n)” and replace it with the cross-reference “§ 483.5 definition of `transfer and discharge' ”. This proposed technical correction would serve to correct an incorrect citation. It would not alter any existing processes or procedures within the Medicare claims appeals process.

    H. Changes To Enhance Implementation of Rule Streamlining the Medicare Appeals Procedures (§§ 405.970, 405.1006, 405.1010, 405.1014, 405.1020, 405.1034, 405.1046, 405.1052, 405.1056, 423.1014, 423.1990, 423.2002, 423.2010, 423.2016, 423.2032, 423.2034, 423.2036, 423.2052, and 423.2056)

    Since we published the January 17, 2017 final rule, we have identified several provisions that, upon further review, pose unanticipated challenges with implementation, which are explained in this section. In addition, there are other regulatory provisions that we believe require additional clarification and the correction of technical errors and omissions. In the proposals listed in this section, we seek to help ensure the provisions are implemented as intended, provide clarification, and correct technical errors and omissions. Our proposed changes are as follows.

    1. Amount in Controversy (AIC) (§ 405.1006)

    Section 405.1006 addresses the AIC required for an ALJ hearing and judicial review, and § 405.1006(d) provides the methodology for computing the AIC. In general, the AIC is computed as the amount that the provider or supplier bills for the items and services in the disputed claim, reduced by any Medicare payments already made or awarded for the items or services, and further reduced by any deductible and/or coinsurance amounts that may be collected for the items or services. In the January 17, 2017 final rule, we created several exceptions to this general computation methodology for situations where we believed an alternative methodology would more accurately describe the amount actually in dispute. Among these alternatives was the calculation methodology specified in § 405.1006(d)(4), which states that when an appeal involves an identified overpayment, the AIC is the amount of the overpayment specified in the demand letter for the items or services in the disputed claim. For appeals involving an estimated overpayment amount determined through the use of statistical sampling and extrapolation, § 405.1006(d)(4) further provides that the AIC is the total amount of the estimated overpayment determined through extrapolation, as specified in the demand letter.

    When we created this exception, we did not account for the possibility that the amount of the overpayment or estimated overpayment specified in the demand letter might change throughout the administrative appeals process if, for example, an adjudicator finds that some of the items or services for which an overpayment was demanded are covered and payable, or alternatively, if an adjudicator raises a new issue that results in the denial of additional items or services. Even outside the administrative appeals process, the amount of an overpayment may be revised by a CMS contractor (for example, following a discussion period with the contractor that initially determined the overpayment). Although some of these situations may result in the issuance of a revised demand letter, such a letter may not always be issued during the pendency of the appeals process.

    To account for situations where the amount of an overpayment specified in the demand letter does not reflect subsequent adjustments to the amount remaining in controversy, we are proposing to revise § 405.1006(d)(4) to state that when an appeal involves an identified overpayment, the AIC is the amount of the overpayment specified in the demand letter, or the amount of the revised overpayment if the amount originally demanded changes as a result of a subsequent determination or appeal, for the items or services in the disputed claim. For appeals involving an estimated overpayment amount determined through the use of statistical sampling and extrapolation, we are further proposing to revise § 405.1006(d)(4) to state that the AIC is the total amount of the estimated overpayment determined through extrapolation, as specified in the demand letter, or as subsequently revised.

    2. Submissions by CMS and CMS Contractors (§§ 405.1010 and 405.1012)

    In § 405.1010(b)(1), we stated that if CMS or a CMS contractor elects to participate in the proceedings on a request for hearing before receipt of a notice of hearing, or when notice of hearing is not required, it must send written notice of its intent to participate to the parties who were sent a copy of the notice of reconsideration, and to the assigned ALJ or attorney adjudicator, or if the appeal is not assigned, to a designee of the Chief ALJ. We discussed in the January 17, 2017 final rule that the requirement to notify the parties who were sent a copy of the notice of reconsideration helps ensure that the potential parties to a hearing, if a hearing is conducted, would receive notice of the intent to participate (82 FR 5016). However, the final regulation at § 405.1010(b)(1) does not account for requests for reconsideration that are escalated from the QIC level to the OMHA level of appeal without a notice of reconsideration having been issued.

    In order to help ensure that the potential parties to a hearing would receive notice of CMS' or the contractor's intent to participate and address reconsideration escalations from the QIC to OMHA, we are proposing to revise § 405.1010(b)(1) to require that, for escalated requests for reconsideration, notice of the intent to participate would also be sent to any party that filed a request for reconsideration or was found liable for the services at issue subsequent to the initial determination, which we believe is consistent with circumstances under which a party would receive notice of a hearing under § 405.1020. (Section 405.1020(c)(1) also provides that a notice of hearing is sent to all parties that participated in the reconsideration. However, we do not believe this provision is necessary in circumstances where the QIC has not issued a reconsideration because, in practice, there is generally no opportunity for participation in these circumstances by parties other than the party that filed the request for reconsideration.) For the same reason, we also are proposing to revise § 405.1010(c)(3)(ii)(A), which currently requires that copies of CMS or contractor position papers or written testimony that are submitted before receipt of a notice of hearing must be sent to the parties who were sent a copy of the notice of reconsideration. We are proposing to revise § 405.1010(c)(3)(ii)(A) to instead provide that copies are sent to the parties that are required to be sent a copy of the notice of intent to participate in accordance with § 405.1010(b)(1). No corresponding revisions to § 423.2010 are needed because escalation is not available in Medicare Part D appeals.

    In § 405.1010(b)(3)(ii), we stated that if CMS or a CMS contractor elects to participate after a hearing is scheduled, it must send written notice of its intent to participate no later than 10 calendar days “after receiving the notice of hearing.” Upon reviewing the revised rules, we noticed an inconsistency between this language and the language in § 405.1012(a)(1), which requires CMS or a CMS contractor electing to be a party to a hearing to send written notice of its intent to be a party no later than 10 calendar days “after the QIC receives the notice of hearing.” We explained in the January 17, 2017 final rule (82 FR 5020) that the timeframe in § 405.1012(a)(1) was based on receipt of the notice of hearing by the QIC because notices of hearing are currently sent to the QIC in accordance with § 405.1020(c). We believe these requirements should be consistent and the timeframes should begin on the same date, regardless of whether CMS or a CMS contractor is electing to be a party or participant. We also believe that the regulations should provide flexibility for CMS to designate another contractor, other than the QIC, to receive notices of hearing under § 405.1020(c) if that contractor is then tasked with disseminating the notice of hearing to other CMS contractors. Therefore, and as discussed in this section with regard to notices of hearing, we are proposing to revise § 405.1020(c)(1) to provide for this flexibility.

    For conformity with proposed revised § 405.1020(c)(1) and to resolve the existing inconsistency in §§ 405.1010(b)(3)(ii) and 405.1012(a)(1), we are proposing to revise both sections to provide that written notice of the intent to participate or intent to be a party must be submitted no later than 10 calendar days after receipt of the notice of hearing by the QIC or another contractor designated by CMS to receive the notice of hearing. No corresponding revision is needed to the part 423, subpart U rules because notices of hearing are sent to both the Medicare Part D plan sponsor and the IRE.

    In § 405.1010(c)(3)(i), we state that CMS or a CMS contractor that filed an election to participate must submit any position papers or written testimony within 14 calendar days of its election to participate if no hearing has been scheduled, or no later than 5 calendar days prior to the hearing if a hearing is scheduled, unless the ALJ grants additional time to submit the position paper or written testimony. In the January 17, 2017 final rule (82 FR 5017), we discussed that the requirement to submit any written testimony within 14 calendar days of the election to participate if no hearing has been scheduled helps to ensure that the position paper and/or written testimony are available when determinations are made to schedule a hearing or issue a decision based on the record in accordance with § 405.1038.

    Although § 405.1010(c)(3)(i) allows an ALJ to extend the 5-calendar day submission timeframe for cases in which a hearing is scheduled, the regulation text may be unclear as to whether the same discretion is afforded to ALJs or attorney adjudicators with respect to the 14-calendar day submission timeframe for cases in which no hearing has been scheduled. Our intent was to apply this discretionary extension in both circumstances, as evidenced by the corresponding regulation at § 423.2010(d)(3)(i), which allows an ALJ or attorney adjudicator to grant additional time to submit a position paper or written testimony both in cases where a hearing has been scheduled and in cases where no hearing has been scheduled (82 FR 5019). Accordingly, to clarify our intent and help ensure consistency between the part 405 and part 423, we are proposing to revise § 405.1010(c)(3)(i) to clarify that an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may also extend the 14-calendar day timeframe for submission of position papers and written testimony in cases in which no hearing has been scheduled.

    In § 405.1012(b), we stated that if CMS or a CMS contractor elects to be a party to the hearing, it must send written notice of its intent to the ALJ and to “the parties identified in the notice of hearing.” Upon reviewing the revised rules, we noticed an inconsistency between this language and the language in § 405.1010(b)(2), which states that if CMS or a CMS contractor elects to participate after receipt of a notice of hearing, it must to send written notice of its intent to participate to the ALJ and “the parties who were sent a copy of the notice of hearing.” Although the standard for who must receive notice is the same, the way in which it is articulated is different, which we believe may lead to confusion. To prevent potential confusion and help ensure consistency in the regulations, we are proposing to revise § 405.1012(b)(2) by replacing the language “identified in the notice of hearing” with “who were sent a copy of the notice of hearing”. No corresponding revision is needed to the part 423, subpart U rules because only the enrollee is a party to a Medicare Part D appeal and CMS, the IRE, and the Part D plan sponsor may only request to be nonparty participants.

    Finally, § 405.1012(e)(1) states the circumstances under which an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may determine that a CMS or contractor election to be a party to a hearing made under § 405.1012 is invalid. Because § 405.1012(a) only permits CMS or a contractor to elect to be a party after the QIC receives a notice of hearing, and only an ALJ may schedule and conduct a hearing, we believe the determination as to whether an election made under § 405.1012 is valid should be left to the assigned ALJ. Therefore, we are proposing in § 405.1012(e)(1) to replace the phrase “ALJ or attorney adjudicator” with “ALJ.” No corresponding revision is needed to the part 423, subpart U rules because only the enrollee is a party to a Medicare Part D appeal and CMS, the IRE, and the Part D plan sponsor may only request to be nonparty participants.

    3. Extension Requests (§§ 405.1014 and 423.2014)

    Prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule, § 405.1014(c)(2) provided that any request for an extension of the time to request a hearing must be in writing, give the reasons why the request for a hearing was not filed within the stated time period, and must be filed with the entity specified in the notice of reconsideration. In the January 17, 2017 final rule, this provision was relocated to § 405.1014(e)(2) and revised, in part, to state that any request for an extension of the time to request a hearing or review of a QIC dismissal must be filed with the request for hearing or request for review. This change was motivated by questions from appellants concerning whether a request for an extension should be filed without a request for hearing so that a determination could be made on the extension request before the request for hearing was filed (82 FR 5038). However, in our attempt to provide clarity to appellants, we created a requirement that, in its strictest interpretation, would foreclose an appellant from requesting an extension of the time to request a hearing or review after a request for hearing is filed. The need for such a request to be made may arise when an appellant—particularly an unrepresented beneficiary—is not aware that a request for hearing is untimely at the time of filing. In these situations, OMHA frequently requests that the appellant provide an explanation for the untimely filing and, if the OMHA adjudicator finds good cause for the untimely filing, the time period for filing is extended in accordance with § 405.1014(e)(3).

    In order to remedy this situation, we are proposing to revise § 405.1014(e)(2) to provide that requests for extension must be filed with the request for hearing or request for review, or upon notice that the request may be dismissed because it was not timely filed. We also are proposing a corresponding revision to § 423.2014(e)(3) for extension requests filed by Medicare Part D enrollees.

    4. Notice of Hearing (§ 405.1020)

    In § 405.1020(c)(1), we require that a notice of hearing be sent to all parties that filed an appeal or participated in the reconsideration, any party who was found liable for the services at issue subsequent to the initial determination or may be found liable based on a review of the record, the QIC that issued the reconsideration, and CMS or a contractor that elected to participate in the proceedings in accordance with § 405.1010(b) or that the ALJ believes would be beneficial to the hearing, advising them of the proposed time and place of the hearing. However, this rule does not account for requests for reconsideration that are escalated from the QIC level to the OMHA level of appeal without a reconsideration having been issued.

    To help ensure that the QIC, and other CMS contractors who receive notice of scheduled hearings through the QIC, receive notice of all scheduled hearings, we are proposing to revise § 405.1020(c)(1) to require that notice be sent to the QIC that issued the reconsideration or from which the request for reconsideration was escalated. As discussed in section II.H.3. of this proposed rule with regard to CMS and CMS contractor submissions, we also are proposing to provide future flexibility for CMS to designate another contractor to receive notices of hearing by revising § 405.1020(c)(1) to state, in part, that the notice of hearing may instead be sent to another contractor designated by CMS to receive it. No corresponding revisions are needed in § 423.2020(c)(1) because escalation is not available in Medicare Part D appeals, and notices of hearing are sent to both the Medicare Part D plan sponsor and the IRE.

    5. Request for an In-Person or Video Teleconference (VTC) Hearing (§§ 405.1020 and 423.2020)

    Section 405.1020(i)(1) and (i)(5) provides that if an unrepresented beneficiary who filed the request for hearing objects to a video-teleconference (VTC) hearing or to the ALJ's offer to conduct a hearing by telephone, or if a party other than an unrepresented beneficiary who filed the request for hearing objects to a telephone or VTC hearing, an ALJ may grant the unrepresented beneficiary's or other party's request for an in-person or VTC hearing if it satisfies the requirements in § 405.1020(i)(1) through (3), with the concurrence of the Chief ALJ or a designee and upon a finding of good cause. Prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule, § 405.1020(i) dealt exclusively with a party's request for an in-person hearing and § 405.1020(i)(5) required concurrence of the Managing Field Office ALJ and a finding of good cause for an ALJ to grant the request. (As we discussed in the January 17, 2017 final rule, the position of Managing Field Office ALJ was replaced by the position of Associate Chief ALJ, and we replaced the reference to “Managing Field Office ALJ” in § 405.1020(i)(5) with “Chief ALJ or a designee” to provide greater flexibility in the future as position titles change.) Managing Field Office ALJ concurrence and a finding of good cause were not required prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule for requests for a VTC hearing because VTC was the default method of hearing.

    When we revised § 405.1020(i) in the January 17, 2017 final rule to reflect the change from VTC to telephone hearing as the default method for appearances by parties other than unrepresented beneficiaries, we neglected to restrict the requirement for the concurrence of the Chief ALJ or designee to requests for in-person hearing, in accordance with § 405.1020(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(ii). In addition, we neglected to clarify that, because VTC is the default hearing method for unrepresented beneficiaries, a finding of good cause is not required when an unrepresented beneficiary who filed the request for hearing objects to an ALJ's offer to conduct a hearing by telephone and requests a VTC hearing. Accordingly, we are proposing to revise § 405.1020(i)(5) to clarify that concurrence of the Chief ALJ or designee is only required if the request is for an in-person hearing, and that a finding of good cause is not required for a request for VTC hearing made by an unrepresented beneficiary who filed the request for hearing and objects to an ALJ's offer to conduct a hearing by telephone. We also are proposing corresponding revisions to § 423.2020(i)(5) for objections filed by Medicare Part D enrollees.

    In reviewing the January 17, 2017 final rule, we also noted potential confusion about whether § 405.1020(e) or (i) applies to objections to the place of a hearing when the objection is accompanied by a request for a VTC or an in-person hearing. While an objection to a hearing being conducted by telephone or VTC may broadly qualify as an objection to the place of the hearing under § 405.1020(e), our intent was for § 405.1020(i) to apply to such an objection when the objection is accompanied by a request for a different hearing format, because § 405.1020(i) is specific to an objection to the scheduled hearing format and request for an alternate hearing format. To mitigate the potential confusion as to which provisions applies, we are proposing to revise § 405.1020(e) by adding paragraph (e)(5) to make clear that it applies only when the party's or enrollee's objection does not include a request for an in-person or VTC hearing. We also are proposing a corresponding revision to § 423.2020(e) concerning a Medicare Part D enrollee's objection to the time and place of hearing.36. Dismissal of a Request for a Hearing (§§ 405.1052 and 423.2052)

    Section 405.1052(a) describes the situations under which an ALJ may dismiss a request for hearing (other than withdrawals of requests for hearing, which are described in § 405.1052(c)). Although paragraph (a) pertains only to ALJ dismissals, paragraphs (a)(3), (4)(i), (5), and (6) contain inadvertent references to attorney adjudicators.

    • Paragraph (a)(3) states that an ALJ may dismiss a request for hearing when the party did not request a hearing within the stated time period and the ALJ or attorney adjudicator has not found good cause for extending the deadline, as provided in § 405.1014(e).

    • Paragraph (a)(4)(i) provides that when determining whether the beneficiary's surviving spouse or estate has a remaining financial interest, the ALJ or attorney adjudicator considers whether the surviving spouse or estate remains liable for the services that were denied or a Medicare contractor held the beneficiary liable for subsequent similar services under the limitation of liability provisions based on the denial of the services at issue. (As discussed in section II.H.10. of this proposed rule, we are proposing to change the reference to “limitation of liability” to “limitation on liability.”)

    • Paragraph (a)(5) states that an ALJ or attorney adjudicator dismisses a hearing request entirely or refuses to consider any one or more of the issues because a QIC, an ALJ or attorney adjudicator, or the Council has made a previous determination or decision under part 405, Subpart I about the appellant's rights on the same facts and on the same issue(s) or claim(s), and this previous determination or decision has become binding by either administrative or judicial action.

    • Paragraph (a)(6) states that an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may conclude that an appellant has abandoned a request for hearing when OMHA attempts to schedule a hearing and is unable to contact the appellant after making reasonable efforts to do so.

    As discussed of in the January 17, 2017 final rule (82 FR 4982), our intent in finalizing the attorney adjudicator proposals was to provide authority for attorney adjudicators to dismiss a request for hearing only when an appellant withdraws his or her request for an ALJ hearing, and not under any other circumstances. We further explained that attorney adjudicators could not dismiss a request for hearing due to procedural issues or make a determination that would result in a dismissal of a request for an ALJ hearing (other than a determination that the appellant had withdrawn the request for hearing) (82 FR 5008 and 5009). Therefore, we are proposing to revise § 405.1052(a)(3), (a)(4)(i), and (a)(6) to remove the reference to attorney adjudicators and paragraph (a)(5) to remove the first reference to an attorney adjudicator. We also are proposing corresponding corrections to § 423.2052(a)(3), (5), and (6) for dismissals of Part D requests for hearing.

    Prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule, § 405.1052(b) required that notice of a dismissal of a request for hearing be sent to all parties at their last known address. We explained in the final rule that the requirement to send notice of the dismissal to all parties was overly inclusive and caused confusion by requiring notice of a dismissal to be sent to parties who have not received a copy of the request for hearing or request for review that is being dismissed (82 FR 5086). Therefore, we revised this provision (and moved it to § 405.1052(d)) to state that OMHA mails or otherwise transmits a written notice of a dismissal of a request for hearing or review to all parties who were sent a copy of the request for hearing or review at their last known address.

    However, in our effort to better tailor the list of recipients, we neglected to specify that notice is also sent to the appellant—who must receive notice of the dismissal, but would not have received a copy of its own request for hearing or review—and to account for CMS or a CMS contractor who elected to be a party to the appeal. We believe that CMS or a CMS contractor that is a party to an appeal has an interest in the outcome of the appeal and should be notified if the request for hearing or review is dismissed. Section 405.1046 helps ensure that CMS or CMS contractors who are a party to a hearing receive notice of the decision by requiring that the decision be sent to all parties at their last known address. In order to help ensure CMS and CMS contractors are afforded similar notice of dismissals, and that the appellant is notified of a dismissal of its request for hearing or review, we are proposing to revise § 405.1052(d) to require that notice be sent to the appellant, all parties who were sent a copy of the request for hearing or review at their last known address, and to CMS or a CMS contractor that is a party to the proceedings on a request for hearing. No corresponding revision to § 423.2052 is needed because only the enrollee is a party to a Medicare Part D appeal and receives notice of the dismissal.

    7. Remanding a Dismissal of a Request for Reconsideration (§§ 405.1056, 405.1034, 423.2034, and 423.2056)

    Section 405.1056(a)(1) provides that if an ALJ or attorney adjudicator requests an official copy of a missing redetermination or reconsideration for an appealed claim in accordance with § 405.1034, and the QIC or another contractor does not furnish the copy within the timeframe specified in § 405.1034, the ALJ or attorney adjudicator may issue a remand directing the QIC or other contractor to reconstruct the record or, if it is not able to do so, initiate a new appeal adjudication. Section 405.1056(a)(2) provides that if the QIC does not furnish the case file for an appealed reconsideration, an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may issue a remand directing the QIC to reconstruct the record or, if it is not able to do so, initiate a new appeal adjudication. In § 405.1056(d), an ALJ or attorney adjudicator will remand a case to the appropriate QIC if the ALJ or attorney adjudicator determines that a QIC's dismissal of a request for reconsideration was in error.

    Occasionally, an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may need to remand a request for review of a dismissal of a reconsideration request for reasons similar to those specified in § 405.1056(a)(1) and (2) because the ALJ or attorney adjudicator is unable to obtain an official copy of the dismissal determination, or because the QIC does not furnish the case file for an appealed dismissal. By restricting the bases for remand under § 405.1056(a)(1) and (2) to appeals of reconsiderations, we inadvertently made these reasons unavailable for remands of requests for review of a dismissal under § 405.1056(d). Therefore, we are proposing to revise § 405.1056(d) by redesignating existing paragraph (d) as paragraph (d)(1), and adding paragraph (d)(2) to state that an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may also remand a request for review of a dismissal in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (a) of the section if an official copy of the notice of dismissal or case file cannot be obtained from the QIC. We also are proposing corresponding revisions to § 423.2056(d) for Medicare Part D remands of a request for review of an IRE's dismissal of a request for reconsideration. This proposed change would necessitate two additional revisions.

    First, §§ 405.1056(g) and 423.2056(g), which discuss reviews of remands by the Chief ALJ or designee, state that the review of remand procedures are not available for and do not apply to remands that are issued under §§ 405.1056(d) or 423.2056(d), respectively. In the January 17, 2017 final rule, we explained that this limitation was due to the fact that remands issued on review of a QIC's or IRE's dismissal of a request for reconsideration (that is, based on a determination that the QIC's or IRE's dismissal was in error) are more akin to a determination than a purely procedural mechanism (82 FR 5069 through 5070). Because remands issued under new proposed §§ 405.1056(d)(2) and 423.2056(d)(2) would be procedural remands, we are proposing to revise §§ 405.1056(g) and 423.2056(g) by replacing the references to paragraph (d) with a reference to paragraph (d)(1), so that remands issued under paragraph (d)(2) would be subject to the review of remand procedures in paragraph (g).

    Second, we are proposing to revise §§ 405.1034(a)(1) and 423.2034(a)(1) to provide that the request for information procedures in these paragraphs apply not only to requests for official copies of redeterminations and reconsiderations, but also to requests for official copies of dismissals of requests for redetermination or reconsideration.

    8. Notice of a Remand (§ 405.1056)

    Section 405.1056(f) provides that OMHA mails or otherwise transmits written notice of a remand of a request for hearing or request for review to all of the parties who were sent a copy of the request for hearing or review, at their last known address, and to CMS or a contractor that elected to be a participant in the proceedings or party to the hearing. However, § 405.1056(f) does not require that notice be sent to the appellant, who would not have received a copy of its own request for hearing or review. For the same reasons described in section II.H.6 above with regard to notices of dismissal, we are proposing to revise § 405.1056(f) to require that notice be sent to the appellant, all parties who were sent a copy of the request for hearing or review at their last known address, and to CMS or a contractor that elected to be a participant in the proceedings or party to the hearing. No corresponding revision to part 423, subpart U is needed because § 423.2056(f) already provides that notice is sent to the enrollee, who is the only party to a Part D appeal.

    In addition, § 405.1056(f) provides that the notice of remand states that there is a right to request that the Chief ALJ or a designee review the remand. However, § 405.1056(g) states that the review of remand procedures are not available for and do not apply to remands that are issued under § 405.1056(d) (which, as noted in section II.H.D.7. of this proposed rule, we are proposing to redesignate as § 405.1056(d)(1)). To resolve this discrepancy and help ensure that parties receive accurate information regarding the availability of the review of remand procedures, we are proposing to revise § 405.1056(f) to clarify that the notice of remand states that there is a right to request that the Chief ALJ or a designee review the remand, unless the remand was issued under § 405.1056(d)(1). We are also proposing corresponding changes to § 423.2056(d)(1).

    9. Requested Remands (§ 423.2056)

    Section 423.2056(b) provides that if an ALJ or attorney adjudicator finds that the IRE issued a reconsideration and no redetermination was made with respect to the issue under appeal or the request for redetermination was dismissed, the reconsideration will be remanded to the IRE, or its successor, to readjudicate the request for reconsideration. However, when we finalized this provision in the January 17, 2017 final rule, we did not account for situations in which no redetermination was issued because the Medicare Part D plan sponsor failed to meet the timeframe for a standard or expedited redetermination, as provided in § 423.590. In these situations, § 423.2056(b) does not provide a basis for remand because the failure of the Part D plan sponsor to provide a redetermination within the specified timeframe constitutes an adverse redetermination decision, and the Part D plan sponsor is required to forward the enrollee's request to the IRE within 24 hours of the expiration of the adjudication timeframe in accordance with § 423.590(c) (for requests for standard redeterminations) and (e) (for requests for expedited redeterminations). Accordingly, we are proposing to revise § 423.2056(b) to clarify that this reason for remand does not apply when the request for redetermination was forwarded to the IRE in accordance with § 423.590(c) or (e) without a redetermination having been conducted.

    10. Other Technical Changes

    In the January 17, 2017 final rule, we amended regulations throughout 42 CFR part 405, subparts I and J; part 422, subpart M; Part 423, subparts M and U; and part 478, subpart B by replacing certain references to ALJs, ALJ hearing offices, and unspecified entities with a reference to OMHA or an OMHA office. We explained that these changes were being made to provide clarity to the public on the role of OMHA in administering the ALJ hearing program, and to clearly identify where requests and other filings should be directed (82 FR 4992). However, we neglected to revise two existing references to ALJs in § 405.970(c)(2) and one existing reference to an ALJ in § 405.970(d). To correct our oversight, we are proposing to revise § 405.970(c)(2) and (d) by replacing each instance of the phrase “to an ALJ” with “to OMHA” to clarify that appeals are escalated to OMHA, rather than an individual ALJ.

    In the January 17, 2017 final rule, in order to reduce confusion with MACs, we revised references to the Medicare Appeals Council throughout part 405, subpart I; part 422, subpart M; and part 423, subparts M and U by replacing “MAC” with “Council” (82 FR 4993). However, we neglected to change one reference to “MAC” in § 423.1990(d)(2)(ii). Accordingly, we are proposing to revise § 423.1990(d)(2)(ii) by replacing “MAC” with “Council.”

    In § 423.2010(d)(1), we stated that CMS, IRE, and/or Part D plan sponsor participation in an appeal may include filing position papers and/or providing testimony to clarify factual or policy issues in a case, but it does not include calling witnesses or cross-examining the witnesses of an enrollee to the hearing. This provision is similar to § 405.1010(c)(1), which describes the scope of CMS and CMS contractor participation in Medicare Part A and Part B appeals and provides, in part, that such participation does not include calling witnesses or cross-examining the witnesses of a party to the hearing. When finalizing § 423.2010(d)(1) in the January 17, 2017 final rule, which we based on § 405.1010(c)(1), we inadvertently retained the phrase “to the hearing” after “enrollee”. We believe this phrase is unnecessary in this context and reads awkwardly, and are proposing to revise § 423.2010(d)(1) to remove it.

    Prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule, § 423.2016(b)(1) provided that an ALJ may consider the standard for granting an expedited hearing met if a lower-level adjudicator has granted a request for an expedited hearing. We revised this paragraph in the January 17, 2017 final rule to account for the possibility that a request for an expedited appeal could be granted by an attorney adjudicator. However, we neglected to correct the existing reference to a lower-level adjudicator having granted a request for an expedited hearing. Because lower-level adjudicators do not conduct hearings, we are proposing to revise § 423.2016(b)(1) by replacing “hearing” with “decision”.

    Section 423.2032(c) describes the circumstances in which a coverage determination on a drug that was not specified in a request for hearing may be added “to pending appeal.” We inadvertently omitted the word “a” and are proposing to revise § 423.2032(c) by removing the phrase “to pending appeal” and adding “to a pending appeal” in its place.

    Prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule, § 423.2036(g) stated, in part, that an ALJ may ask the witnesses at a hearing any questions relevant to the issues “and allow the enrollee or his or her appointed representative, as defined at § 423.560.” In the final rule, we redesignated this paragraph as paragraph (d), but neglected to correct the missing language at the end of the sentence. For consistency with § 405.1036(d), we are proposing to revise § 423.2036(d) by adding “, to do so” at the end of the paragraph, before the period.

    Section 423.2036(e) discusses what evidence is admissible at the hearing, and states that an ALJ may not consider evidence on any change in condition of a Part D enrollee after a coverage determination, and further provides that if an enrollee wishes for such evidence to be considered, the ALJ must remand the case to the Part D IRE as set forth in § 423.2034(b)(2). Prior to the January 17, 2017 final rule, § 423.2034(b)(2) stated that an ALJ will remand a case to the appropriate Part D IRE if the ALJ determines that the enrollee wishes evidence on his or her change in condition after the coverage determination to be considered in the appeal. In the final rule, we moved this provision to § 423.2056(e), but neglected to update the cross-reference to it in § 423.2036(e). Accordingly, we are proposing to revise § 423.2036(e) to replace the reference to “§ 423.2034(b)(2)” with the reference “§ 423.2056(e)”.

    In §§ 405.952(b)(4)(i), 405.972(b)(4)(i), 405.1052(a)(4)(i) and (b)(3)(i), and 405.1114(c)(1), when discussing determinations as to whether a beneficiary's surviving spouse or estate has a remaining financial interest in an appeal, we refer to limitation on liability under section 1879 of the Act as “limitation of liability.” To increase consistency with the language used in the statute and help reduce confusion as to which standard is being applied, we are proposing to replace the phrase “limitation of liability” with “limitation on liability” in each of these sections.

    We have identified one provision in part 405, subpart I, and two provisions in part 423, subpart U, where we used incorrect terminal punctuation at the end of a paragraph that is part of a list. To correct our errors, we are proposing to revise §§ 405.1046(a)(2)(ii), 423.2002(b)(1), and 423.2010(b)(3)(ii) by replacing the period at the end of each paragraph with a semicolon.

    Lastly, we are proposing to revise the authority citations for parts 405 and 423 to meet current Office of the Federal Register regulatory drafting guidance. The guidance requires that we use only the United States Code (U.S.C.) citations for statutory citation unless the citation does not exist.

    III. Collection of Information Requirements

    This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. In addition, appeals are considered to be an information collection requirement that is associated with an administrative action pertaining to specific individuals or entities (5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2) and (c)). As a result, the burden for preparing and filing an appeal is exempt from the requirements and collection burden estimates of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Consequently, there is no need for review by the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the PRA.

    IV. Regulatory Impact Statement

    We have examined the impact of this rule as required by Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30, 1993), Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (January 18, 2011), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96-354), section 1102(b) of the Act, section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104-4), Executive Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4, 1999), the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)), and Executive Order 13771 on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs (January 30, 2017).

    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). A RIA must be prepared for major rules with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1 year). This rule does not reach the economic threshold and thus is not considered a major rule.

    The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief of small entities. For purposes of the RFA, small entities include small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. Most hospitals and most other providers and suppliers are small entities, either by nonprofit status or by having revenues of less than $7.5 million to $38.5 million in any 1 year. Individuals and states are not included in the definition of a small entity. We are not preparing an analysis for the RFA because we have determined, and the Secretary certifies, that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act requires us to prepare an RIA if a rule may have a significant impact on the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals. This analysis must conform to the provisions of section 603 of the RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a small rural hospital as a hospital that is located outside of a Metropolitan Statistical Area for Medicare payment regulations and has fewer than 100 beds. We are not preparing an analysis for section 1102(b) of the Act because we have determined, and the Secretary certifies, that this proposed rule would not have a significant impact on the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals.

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. In 2018, that threshold is approximately $150 million. This rule would have no consequential effect on state, local, or tribal governments or on the private sector.

    Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on state and local governments, preempts state law, or otherwise has Federalism implications. Since this regulation does not impose any costs on state or local governments, the requirements of Executive Order 13132 are not applicable.

    Executive Order 13771, titled Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, was issued on January 30, 2017 and requires that the costs associated with significant new regulations “shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations.” OMB's interim guidance, issued on April 5, 2017, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2017/M-17-21-OMB.pdf, explains that “E.O. 13771 deregulatory actions are not limited to those defined as significant under E.O. 12866 or OMB's Final Bulletin on Good Guidance Practices.” This proposed rule, if finalized, is considered a E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. Consistent with Executive Order 13771 requirements, when discounted from 2016 to infinity at 7 percent, this proposed rule would annually save $9,497,685.00 a year.

    Our proposal to remove the requirement that appellants sign appeal requests would result in a slight reduction of burden to appellants by allowing them to spend less time developing their appeal request and appealing dismissals of appeal requests for lack of a signature to the next level of review. Using the data from the number of appeal requests received, we estimate that approximately 4,465,000 appeal requests per year require a signature. We estimate that it takes 1 minute to sign the appeal request. Therefore, the reduction in administrative time spent would be 4,465,000 × .016 hour = 71,440.00 hours.

    We used an adjusted hourly wage of $34.66 based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2016 website for occupation code 43-9199, “All other office and administrative support workers,” which gives a mean hourly salary of $17.33, which when multiplied by a factor of two to include overhead, and fringe benefits, results in $34.66 an hour. The consequent cost savings would be 71,440.00 × $34.66 = $2,476,110.40 for time spent signing the appeal requests.

    Based on a sampling of the number of appeal requests that are dismissed for not containing a signature, we estimated that 284,486 appeal requests are dismissed per year for not containing a signature on them, and 5 minutes to request that the adjudicator vacate the dismissal or appeal the dismissal. For appellants, the reduction in administrative time spent would be 284,486 × .0083 hours = 23,612 hours with a consequent savings of 23,612 hours × $34.66 per hour = $818,404.00. The total amount saved for appellants would be $3,294,514.40, which consists of $2,476,110.40 for time spent signing the appeal requests added to $818,404.00 for time saved appealing the dismissed appeal requests.

    When the cost of contractors dismissing appeal requests for the lack of signature is factored in, the cost savings becomes $11,757,600. This cost is calculated by multiplying the number of appeal requests dismissed at the MAC and QIC levels multiplied by the cost that we pay the contractors to adjudicate a dismissal. The average cost for a MAC to dismiss an appeal request would be $25 × 200,000 appeals dismissed for a lack of signature per year, which equates to $5,000,000. The average cost for a QIC to dismiss an appeal request would be $80 × 84,470 appeal requests dismissed for a lack of signature per year, which equates to a savings of $6,757,600. When these two costs are added together the cost savings becomes $11,757,600.

    In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this proposed rule was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    V. Response to Comments

    Because of the large number of public comments we normally receive on Federal Register documents, we are not able to acknowledge or respond to them individually. We will consider all comments we receive by the date and time specified in the DATES section of this preamble, and, when we proceed with a subsequent document, we will respond to the comments in the preamble to that document.

    List of Subjects 42 CFR Part 405

    Administrative practice and procedure, Diseases, Health facilities, Health professions, Medical devices, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping, Rural areas, X-rays.

    42 CFR Part 423

    Administrative practice and procedures, Emergency medical services, Health facilities, Health maintenance organizations (HMO), Medicare, Penalties, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For reasons stated in the preamble, CMS proposes to amend 42 CFR parts 405 and 423 as follows:

    PART 405—FEDERAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE AGED AND DISABLED 1. The authority citation for part 405 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 263a, 405(a), 1302, 1320b-12, 1395x, 1395y(a), 1395ff, 1395hh, 1395kk, 1395rr, and 1395ww(k).

    § 405.910 [Amended]
    2. Section 405.910 is amended— a. In paragraph (c)(5), by removing the phrase “health insurance claim”; and b. In paragraph (e)(4), by removing the reference “§ 405.906(a)(1)(iv)” and adding the reference “§ 405.906(a)(4)” in its place.
    § 405.926 [Amended]
    3. Section 405.926 is amended in paragraph (f) by removing the reference “§§ 483.5(n) and 483.15” and adding the reference “§ 483.5 definition of `transfer and discharge' and § 483.15” in its place.
    § 405.944 [Amended]
    4. Section 405.944 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(2) by removing the phrase “health insurance claim”; and b. In paragraph (b)(4) by removing the phrase “and signature”.
    § 405.952 [Amended]
    5. Section 405.952 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(4)(i) by removing the phrase “limitation of liability” and adding the phrase “limitation on liability” in its place; and b. In paragraph (d) by removing the phrase “6 months” and adding the phrase “180 calendar days” in its place.
    § 405.964 [Amended]
    6. Section 405.964 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(2) by removing the phrase “health insurance claim”; and b. In paragraph (b)(4) by removing the phrase “and signature”.
    § 405.970 [Amended]
    7. Section 405.970 is amended in paragraphs (c)(2) and (d) by removing the phrase “to an ALJ” each time it appears and adding the phrase “to OMHA” in its place.
    § 405.972 [Amended]
    8. Section 405.972 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(4)(i) by removing the phrase “limitation of liability” and adding the phrase “limitation on liability” in its place; and b. In paragraph (d) by removing the phrase “6 months” and adding the phrase “180 calendar days” in its place. 9. Section 405.1006 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows:
    § 405.1006 Amount in controversy required for an ALJ hearing and judicial review.

    (d) * * *

    (4) Overpayments. Notwithstanding paragraph (d)(1) of this section, when an appeal involves an identified overpayment, the amount in controversy is the amount of the overpayment specified in the demand letter, or the amount of the revised overpayment if the amount originally demanded changes as a result of a subsequent determination or appeal, for the items or services in the disputed claim. When an appeal involves an estimated overpayment amount determined through the use of statistical sampling and extrapolation, the amount in controversy is the total amount of the estimated overpayment determined through extrapolation, as specified in the demand letter, or as subsequently revised.

    10. Section 405.1010 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(3)(ii), (c)(3)(i), and (c)(3)(ii)(A) to read as follows:
    § 405.1010 When CMS or its contractors may participate in the proceedings on a request for an ALJ hearing.

    (b) * * *

    (1) No notice of hearing. If CMS or a contractor elects to participate before receipt of a notice of hearing, or when a notice of hearing is not required, it must send written notice of its intent to participate to—

    (i) The assigned ALJ or attorney adjudicator, or a designee of the Chief ALJ if the request for hearing is not yet assigned to an ALJ or attorney adjudicator; and

    (ii) The parties who were sent a copy of the notice of reconsideration or, for escalated requests for reconsideration, any party that filed a request for reconsideration or was found liable for the services at issue subsequent to the initial determination.

    (3) * * *

    (ii) If a hearing is scheduled, no later than 10 calendar days after receipt of the notice of hearing by the QIC or another contractor designated by CMS to receive the notice of hearing.

    (c) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (i) Unless the ALJ or attorney adjudicator grants additional time to submit the position paper or written testimony, a position paper or written testimony must be submitted within 14 calendar days of an election to participate if no hearing has been scheduled, or no later than 5 calendar days prior to the hearing if a hearing is scheduled.

    (ii) * * *

    (A) The parties that are required to be sent a copy of the notice of intent to participate in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section, if the position paper or written testimony is being submitted before receipt of a notice of hearing for the appeal; or

    § 405.1012 [Amended]
    11. Section 405.1012 is amended— a. In paragraph (a)(1) by removing the phrase “after the QIC receives the notice of hearing” and adding the phrase “after receipt of the notice of hearing by the QIC or another contractor designated by CMS to receive the notice of hearing” in its place; b. In paragraph (b) by removing the phrase “identified in the notice of hearing” and adding the phrase “who were sent a copy of the notice of hearing” in its place; and c. In paragraph (e)(1) by removing the phrase “ALJ or attorney adjudicator” and adding the term “ALJ” in its place.
    § 405.1014 [Amended]
    12. Section 405.1014 is amended— a. In paragraph (a)(1)(i) by removing the phrase “health insurance claim”; and b. In paragraph (e)(2) by removing the phrase “with the request for hearing or request for review of a QIC dismissal” and adding the phrase “with the request for hearing or request for review of a QIC dismissal, or upon notice that the request may be dismissed because it was not timely filed,” in its place. 13. Section 405.1020 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1), adding paragraph (e)(5), and revising paragraph (i)(5) to read as follows:
    § 405.1020 Time and place for a hearing before an ALJ.

    (c) * * *

    (1) A notice of hearing is sent to all parties that filed an appeal or participated in the reconsideration; any party who was found liable for the services at issue subsequent to the initial determination or may be found liable based on a review of the record; the QIC that issued the reconsideration or from which the request for reconsideration was escalated, or another contractor designated to receive the notice of hearing by CMS; and CMS or a contractor that elected to participate in the proceedings in accordance with § 405.1010(b) or that the ALJ believes would be beneficial to the hearing, advising them of the proposed time and place of the hearing.

    (e) * * *

    (5) If the party's objection to the place of the hearing includes a request for an in-person or VTC hearing, the objection and request are considered in paragraph (i) of this section.

    (i) * * *

    (5) The ALJ may grant the request, with the concurrence of the Chief ALJ or designee if the request was for an in-person hearing, upon a finding of good cause and will reschedule the hearing for a time and place when the party may appear in person or by VTC before the ALJ. Good cause is not required for a request for VTC hearing made by an unrepresented beneficiary who filed the request for hearing and objects to an ALJ's offer to conduct a hearing by telephone.

    14. Section 405.1034 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
    § 405.1034 Requesting information from the QIC.

    (a) * * *

    (1) Official copies of redeterminations and reconsiderations that were conducted on the appealed claims, and official copies of dismissals of a request for redetermination or reconsideration, can be provided only by CMS or its contractors. Prior to issuing a request for information to the QIC, OMHA will confirm whether an electronic copy of the redetermination, reconsideration, or dismissal is available in the official system of record, and if so will accept the electronic copy as an official copy.

    § 405.1046 [Amended]
    15. Section 405.1046 is amended in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) by removing the period at the end of the paragraph and adding a semicolon in its place. 16. Section 405.1052 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4)(i), (a)(5) and (6), (b)(3)(i), (d), and (e) to read as follows:
    § 405.1052 Dismissal of a request for a hearing before an ALJ or request for review of a QIC dismissal.

    (a) * * *

    (3) The party did not request a hearing within the stated time period and the ALJ has not found good cause for extending the deadline, as provided in § 405.1014(e).

    (4) * * *

    (i) The request for hearing was filed by the beneficiary or the beneficiary's representative, and the beneficiary's surviving spouse or estate has no remaining financial interest in the case. In deciding this issue, the ALJ considers if the surviving spouse or estate remains liable for the services that were denied or a Medicare contractor held the beneficiary liable for subsequent similar services under the limitation on liability provisions based on the denial of the services at issue.

    (5) The ALJ dismisses a hearing request entirely or refuses to consider any one or more of the issues because a QIC, an ALJ or attorney adjudicator, or the Council has made a previous determination or decision under this subpart about the appellant's rights on the same facts and on the same issue(s) or claim(s), and this previous determination or decision has become binding by either administrative or judicial action.

    (6) The appellant abandons the request for hearing. An ALJ may conclude that an appellant has abandoned a request for hearing when OMHA attempts to schedule a hearing and is unable to contact the appellant after making reasonable efforts to do so.

    (b) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (i) The request for review was filed by the beneficiary or the beneficiary's representative, and the beneficiary's surviving spouse or estate has no remaining financial interest in the case. In deciding this issue, the ALJ or attorney adjudicator considers if the surviving spouse or estate remains liable for the services that were denied or a Medicare contractor held the beneficiary liable for subsequent similar services under the limitation on liability provisions based on the denial of the services at issue.

    (d) Notice of dismissal. OMHA mails or otherwise transmits a written notice of the dismissal of the hearing or review request to the appellant, all parties who were sent a copy of the request for hearing or review at their last known address, and to CMS or a CMS contractor that is a party to the proceedings on a request for hearing. The notice states that there is a right to request that the ALJ or attorney adjudicator vacate the dismissal action. The appeal will proceed with respect to any other parties who filed a valid request for hearing or review regarding the same claim or disputed matter.

    (e) Vacating a dismissal. If good and sufficient cause is established, the ALJ or attorney adjudicator may vacate his or her dismissal of a request for hearing or review within 180 calendar days of the date of the notice of dismissal.

    17. Section 405.1056 is amended by revising paragraphs (d), (f), and (g) to read as follows:
    § 405.1056 Remands of requests for hearing and requests for review.

    (d) Remanding a QIC's dismissal of a request for reconsideration. (1) Consistent with § 405.1004(b), an ALJ or attorney adjudicator will remand a case to the appropriate QIC if the ALJ or attorney adjudicator determines that a QIC's dismissal of a request for reconsideration was in error.

    (2) If an official copy of the notice of dismissal or case file cannot be obtained from the QIC, an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may also remand a request for review of a dismissal in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (a) of this section.

    (f) Notice of remand. OMHA mails or otherwise transmits a written notice of the remand of the request for hearing or request for review to the appellant, all of the parties who were sent a copy of the request at their last known address, and CMS or a contractor that elected to be a participant in the proceedings or party to the hearing. The notice states that there is a right to request that the Chief ALJ or a designee review the remand, unless the remand was issued under paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

    (g) Review of remand. Upon a request by a party or CMS or one of its contractors filed within 30 calendar days of receiving a notice of remand, the Chief ALJ or designee will review the remand, and if the remand is not authorized by this section, vacate the remand order. The determination on a request to review a remand order is binding and not subject to further review. The review of remand procedures provided for in this paragraph are not available for and do not apply to remands that are issued under paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

    18. Section 405.1110 is amended— a. In paragraph (a) by removing the phrase “after the date” and adding the phrase “of receipt” in its place; and b. In paragraph (b)(2) by removing the term “issued” and adding the term “received” in its place. c. Adding paragraph (e).

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 405.1110 Council review on its own motion.

    (e) Referral timeframe. For purposes of this section, the date of receipt of the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal is presumed to be 5 calendar days after the date of the notice of the decision or dismissal, unless there is evidence to the contrary.

    § 405.1112 [Amended]
    19. Section 405.1112 is amended in paragraph (a)— a. By removing the phrase “health insurance claim”; and b. By removing the phrase “and signature”.
    § 405.1114 [Amended]
    20. Section 405.1114 is amended in paragraph (c)(1) by removing the phrase “limitation of liability” and adding the phrase “limitation on liability” in its place. PART 423—VOLUNTARY MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT 21. The authority citation for part 423 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 1302, 1306, 1395w-101 through 1395w-152, and 1395hh.

    § 423.562 [Amended]
    22. Section 423.562 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(4)(iv) by removing the reference “§ 423.1970” and adding the reference “§ 423.2006” in its place; b. In paragraph (b)(4)(v) by removing the reference “§ 423.1974” and adding the reference “§ 423.2100” in its place; and c. In paragraph (b)(4)(vi) by removing the reference “§ 423.1976” and adding the cross-reference “§ 423.2006” in its place.
    § 423.576 [Amended]
    23. Section 423.576 is amended by removing the reference “§ 423.1970 through § 423.1976” and adding the reference “§ 423.2000 through § 423.2140” in its place.
    § 423.602 [Amended]
    24. Section 423.602 is amended in paragraph (b)(2)by removing the reference “§ 423.1970” and adding the cross “§ 423.2006” in its place.
    § 423.604 [Amended]
    25. Section 423.604 is amended by removing the reference “§ 423.1972” and adding the reference “§ 423.2014” in its place.
    § 423.1970 [Removed and reserved]
    26. Section 423.1970 is removed and reserved.
    § 423.1972 [Removed and reserved]
    27. Section 423.1972 is removed and reserved.
    § 423.1974 [Removed and reserved]
    28. Section 423.1974 is removed and reserved.
    § 423.1976 [Removed and reserved]
    29. Section 423.1976 is removed and reserved.
    § 423.1984 [Amended]
    30. Section 423.1984 is amended— a. In paragraph (c) by removing the reference “§ 423.1970 through § 423.1972 and”; and b. In paragraph (d) by removing the phrase “§ 423.1974 and”.
    § 423.1990 [Amended]
    31. Section 423.1990 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(3) by removing the phrase “established annually by the Secretary” and adding the phrase “specified in § 423.2006” in its place; and b. In paragraph (d)(2)(ii) by removing the term “MAC” and adding the term “Council” in its place. 32. Section 423.2002 is amended— a. By revising paragraphs (a) introductory text and (a)(2); b. In paragraph (b)(1) by removing the period at the end of the paragraph and adding a semicolon in its place; and c. By revising paragraph (b)(3).

    The revisions read as follows.

    § 423.2002 Right to an ALJ hearing.

    (a) An enrollee who is dissatisfied with the IRE reconsideration determination has a right to a hearing before an ALJ if—

    (2) An enrollee meets the amount in controversy requirements of § 423.2006.

    (b) * * *

    (3) An enrollee meets the amount in controversy requirements of § 423.2006.

    § 423.2004 [Amended]
    33. Section 423.2004 is amended in paragraph (a)(2) by removing the reference “§ 423.1970” and adding the reference “§ 423.2006” in its place. 34. Section 423.2006 is added to read as follows:
    § 423.2006 Amount in controversy required for an ALJ hearing and judicial review.

    (a) ALJ review. To be entitled to a hearing before an ALJ, an enrollee must meet the amount in controversy requirements of this section.

    (1) For ALJ hearing requests, the required amount remaining in controversy must be $100, increased by the percentage increase in the medical care component of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (U.S. city average) as measured from July 2003 to the July preceding the current year involved.

    (2) If the figure in paragraph (a)(1) of this section is not a multiple of $10, it is rounded to the nearest multiple of $10. The Secretary will publish changes to the amount in controversy requirement in the Federal Register when necessary.

    (b) Judicial review. To be entitled to judicial review, the enrollee must meet the amount in controversy requirements of this subpart at the time it requests judicial review. For review requests, the required amount remaining in controversy must be $1,000 or more, adjusted as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.

    (c) Calculating the amount remaining in controversy. (1) If the basis for the appeal is the refusal by the Part D plan sponsor to provide drug benefits, the projected value of those benefits is used to compute the amount remaining in controversy. The projected value of a Part D drug or drugs must include any costs the enrollee could incur based on the number of refills prescribed for the drug(s) in dispute during the plan year.

    (2) If the basis for the appeal is an at-risk determination made under a drug management program in accordance with § 423.153(f), the projected value of the drugs subject to the drug management program is used to compute the amount remaining in controversy. The projected value of the drugs subject to the drug management program shall include the value of any refills prescribed for the drug(s) in dispute during the plan year.

    (d) Aggregating appeals to meet the amount in controversy. (1) Enrollee. Two or more appeals may be aggregated by an enrollee to meet the amount in controversy for an ALJ hearing if—

    (i) The appeals have previously been reconsidered by an IRE;

    (ii) The enrollee requests aggregation at the same time the requests for hearing are filed, and the request for aggregation and requests for hearing are filed within 60 calendar days after receipt of the notice of reconsideration for each of the reconsiderations being appealed, unless the deadline to file one or more of the requests for hearing has been extended in accordance with § 423.2014(d); and

    (iii) The appeals the enrollee seeks to aggregate involve the delivery of prescription drugs to a single enrollee, as determined by an ALJ or attorney adjudicator. Only an ALJ may determine the appeals the enrollee seeks to aggregate do not involve the delivery of prescription drugs to a single enrollee.

    (2) Multiple enrollees. Two or more appeals may be aggregated by multiple enrollees to meet the amount in controversy for an ALJ hearing if—

    (i) The appeals have previously been reconsidered by an IRE;

    (ii) The enrollees request aggregation at the same time the requests for hearing are filed, and the request for aggregation and requests for hearing are filed within 60 calendar days after receipt of the notice of reconsideration for each of the reconsiderations being appealed, unless the deadline to file one or more of the requests for hearing has been extended in accordance with § 423.2014(d); and

    (iii) The appeals the enrollees seek to aggregate involve the same prescription drugs, as determined by an ALJ or attorney adjudicator. Only an ALJ may determine the appeals the enrollees seek to aggregate do not involve the same prescription drugs.

    § 423.2010 [Amended]
    35. Section 423.2010 is amended— a. In paragraph (b)(3)(ii) by removing the period at the end of the paragraph and adding a semicolon in its place; and b. In paragraph (d)(1) by removing the phrase “to the hearing”. 36. Section 423.2014 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (d) introductory text, and (e)(1) and (3) to read as follows:
    § 423.2014 Request for an ALJ hearing or a review of an IRE dismissal.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (i) The name, address, telephone number, and Medicare number of the enrollee.

    (d) When and where to file. The request for an ALJ hearing after an IRE reconsideration or request for review of an IRE dismissal must be filed:

    (e) * * *

    (1) If the request for hearing or review is not filed within 60 calendar days of receipt of the written IRE's reconsideration or dismissal, an enrollee may request an extension for good cause.

    (3) The request must be filed with the office specified in the notice of reconsideration or dismissal, must give the reasons why the request for a hearing or review was not filed within the stated time period, and must be filed with the request for hearing or request for review of an IRE dismissal, or upon notice that the request may be dismissed because it was not timely filed.

    § 423.2016 [Amended]
    37. Section 423.2016 is amended in paragraph (b)(1) by removing the term “hearing” and adding the term “decision” in its place. 38. Section 423.2020 is amended by revising paragraph (a), adding paragraph (e)(5), and revising paragraph (i)(5) to read as follows:
    § 423.2020 Time and place for a hearing before an ALJ.

    (a) General. The ALJ sets the time and place for the hearing, and may change the time and place, if necessary.

    (e) * * *

    (5) If the enrollee's objection to the place of the hearing includes a request for an in-person or video-teleconferencing hearing, the objection and request are considered in paragraph (i) of this section.

    (i) * * *

    (5) The ALJ may grant the request, with the concurrence of the Chief ALJ or designee if the request was for an in-person hearing, upon a finding of good cause and will reschedule the hearing for a time and place when the enrollee may appear in person or by video-teleconference before the ALJ. Good cause is not required for a request for video-teleconferencing hearing made by an unrepresented enrollee who filed the request for hearing and objects to an ALJ's offer to conduct a hearing by telephone.

    § 423.2032 [Amended]
    39. Section 423.2032 is amended in paragraph (c) by removing the phrase “to pending appeal” and adding the phrase “to a pending appeal” in its place. 40. Section 423.2034 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
    § 423.2034 Requesting information from the IRE.

    (a) * * *

    (1) Official copies of redeterminations and reconsiderations that were conducted on the appealed issues, and official copies of dismissals of a request for redetermination or reconsideration, can be provided only by CMS, the IRE, and/or the Part D plan sponsor. Prior to issuing a request for information to the IRE, OMHA will confirm whether an electronic copy of the missing redetermination, reconsideration, or dismissal is available in the official system of record, and if so will accept the electronic copy as an official copy.

    § 423.2036 [Amended]
    41. Section 423.2036 is amended— a. In paragraph (d) by removing the reference “§ 423.560.” and adding the phrase “§ 423.560, to do so.” in its place; and b. In paragraph (e) by removing the reference “§ 423.2034(b)(2)” and adding the reference “§ 423.2056(e)” in its place.
    § 423.2044 [Amended]
    42. Section 423.2044 is amended in paragraph (c) by removing the reference “§ 423.1970” and adding the reference “§ 423.2006” in its place.
    § 423.2052 [Amended]
    43. Section 423.2052 is amended— a. In paragraph (a)(3) by removing the phrase “or attorney adjudicator”; b. In paragraph (a)(5) by removing the phrase “or attorney adjudicator” the first time it appears; c. In paragraph (a)(6) by removing the phrase “or attorney adjudicator”; and d. In paragraph (e) by removing the phrase “6 months” and adding the phrase “180 calendar days” in its place. 44. Section 423.2056 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (d), (f), and (g) to read as follows:
    § 423.2056 Remands of requests for hearing and requests for review.

    (b) No redetermination. If an ALJ or attorney adjudicator finds that the IRE issued a reconsideration and no redetermination was made with respect to the issue under appeal or the request for redetermination was dismissed, the reconsideration will be remanded to the IRE, or its successor, to readjudicate the request for reconsideration, unless the request for redetermination was forwarded to the IRE in accordance with § 423.590(c) or (e) without a redetermination having been conducted.

    (d) Remanding an IRE's dismissal of a request for reconsideration. (1) Consistent with § 423.2004(b), an ALJ or attorney adjudicator will remand a case to the appropriate IRE if the ALJ or attorney adjudicator determines that an IRE's dismissal of a request for reconsideration was in error.

    (2) If an official copy of the notice of dismissal or case file cannot be obtained from the IRE, an ALJ or attorney adjudicator may also remand a request for review of a dismissal in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (a) of this section.

    (f) Notice of a remand. OMHA mails or otherwise transmits a written notice of the remand of the request for hearing or request for review to the enrollee at his or her last known address, and CMS, the IRE, and/or the Part D plan sponsor if a request to be a participant was granted by the ALJ or attorney adjudicator. The notice states that there is a right to request that the Chief ALJ or a designee review the remand, unless the remand was issued under paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

    (g) Review of remand. Upon a request by the enrollee or CMS, the IRE, or the Part D plan sponsor filed within 30 calendar days of receiving a notice of remand, the Chief ALJ or designee will review the remand, and if the remand is not authorized by this section, vacate the remand order. The determination on a request to review a remand order is binding and not subject to further review. The review of remand procedures provided for in this paragraph are not available for and do not apply to remands that are issued in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

    45. Section 423.2100 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 423.2100 Medicare Appeals Council review: general.

    (a) An enrollee who is dissatisfied with an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal may request that the Council review the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal.

    46. Section 423.2110 is amended— a. In paragraph (a) introductory text by removing the phrase “after the date” and adding the phrase “of receipt” in its place; and b. In paragraph (b)(2) by removing the term “issued” and adding the term “received” in its place. c. Adding paragraph (e).

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 423.2110 Council review on its own motion.

    (e) Referral timeframe. For purposes of this section, the date of receipt of the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal is presumed to be 5 calendar days after the date of the notice of the decision or dismissal, unless there is evidence to the contrary.

    § 423.2112 [Amended]
    47. Section 423.2112 is amended in paragraph (a)(4)— a. By removing the phrase “health insurance claim”; and b. By removing the phrase “and signature”. 48. Section 423.2136 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) to read as follows.
    § 423.2136 Judicial review.

    (a) General rule. (1) Review of Council decision. To the extent authorized by sections 1876(c)(5)(B) and 1860D-4(h) of the Act, an enrollee may obtain a court review of a Council decision if—

    (i) It is a final decision of the Secretary; and

    (ii) The amount in controversy meets the threshold requirements of § 423.2006.

    (2) Review of ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision. To the extent authorized by sections 1876(c)(5)(B) and 1860D-4(h) of the Act, the enrollee may request judicial review of an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision if—

    (i) The Council denied the enrollee's request for review; and

    (ii) The amount in controversy meets the threshold requirements of § 423.2006.

    (b) * * *

    (1) Any civil action described in paragraph (a) of this section must be filed in the District Court of the United States for the judicial district in which the enrollee resides.

    Dated: July 16, 2018. Seema Verma, Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Dated: September 5, 2018. Alex M. Azar II, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21223 Filed 9-28-18; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    83 191 Tuesday, October 2, 2018 Notices ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES Notice of Availability of Revised Model Adjudication Rules AGENCY:

    Administrative Conference of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of the Chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States, through its Model Adjudication Rules Working Group, has completed a revision of the Conference's 1993 Model Adjudication Rules. The rules are intended for use by all Federal agencies when designing new, and revising existing, procedural rules governing agency adjudications that involve a trial-type hearing—whether conducted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act), other statutes, agency regulations, or practice—that offers an opportunity for fact-finding before an adjudicator, whether or not the adjudicator is an administrative law judge.

    The final revised Model Adjudication Rules are available at https://www.acus.gov/model-rules/model-adjudication-rules.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Francis Massaro, Attorney Advisor, Administrative Conference of the United States, 1120 20th Street NW, Suite 706 South, Washington, DC 20036; Telephone (202) 480-2080.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Administrative Conference Act, 5 U.S.C. 591-596, established the Administrative Conference of the United States. The Conference studies the efficiency, adequacy, and fairness of the administrative procedures used by Federal agencies and makes recommendations for improvements to agencies, the President, Congress, and the Judicial Conference of the United States.

    Originally released in 1993 by a working group of the Conference, the Model Adjudication Rules were designed for use by Federal agencies to amend or develop their procedural rules for hearings conducted under the Administrative Procedure Act. In 2016, the Office of the Chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States established a similar working group—the Model Adjudication Rules Working Group—to review and revise the Conference's 1993 Model Adjudication Rules.

    Numerous agencies have relied on the Conference's 1993 Model Adjudication Rules to improve existing adjudicative schemes; and newer agencies, like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, have relied on them to design new procedures. Significant changes in adjudicative practices and procedures since 1993—including use of electronic case management and video hearings—necessitated a careful review and revision of the Model Adjudication Rules. In the course of its work, the new Working Group relied on the Conference's extensive empirical research of adjudicative practices reflected in the Federal Administrative Adjudication Database, available at https://acus.law.stanford.edu/; amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since 1993; and input from agency officials, academics, practitioners, and other stakeholders. Public comment on the draft revised Model Adjudication Rules was solicited in the Federal Register on January 22, 2018 (83 FR 2958), and multiple public meetings of the Working Group and the Conference's Adjudication Committee were held to help inform the final document.

    Additional information about the Administrative Conference's Model Adjudication Rules project, including drafts, meeting agendas, a listing of the Working Group members, and other related information, can be found on the Conference's website at https://www.acus.gov/research-projects/office-chairman-model-adjudication-rules-working-group.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Shawne McGibbon, General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21438 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6110-01-P
    AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION Public Quarterly Meeting of the Board of Directors AGENCY:

    United States African Development Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF) will hold its quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors to discuss the agency's programs and administration. This meeting will occur at the USADF office.

    DATES:

    The meeting date is Thursday, October 11, 2018, 9:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting location is USADF, 1400 I St. NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20005.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jenny Morgan, (202)233-8819.

    Authority:

    Public Law 96-533 (22 U.S.C.§ 290h).

    Dated: September 26, 2018. June B. Brown, General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21373 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6117-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request September 27, 2018.

    The Department of Agriculture will submit the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 on or after the date of publication of this notice. Comments are requested regarding: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden 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 through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC; New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602.

    Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received by November 1, 2018. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8681.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    National Agricultural Statistics Service

    Title: Floriculture Survey.

    OMB Control Number: 0535-0093.

    Summary of Collection: The primary function of the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) is to prepare current official state and national estimates of crop and livestock production. Since 1985 Congress has provided funds to conduct an annual Commercial Floriculture Survey which obtains data on this important and growing industry. Several program changes have occurred since the previous approval in November of 2015. Results from the surveys that were conducted in January 2016 referencing 2015 production data, were published in April 2016. In January 2017 and 2018 the national surveys were postponed due to budget cuts. NASS did collect data for the State of Hawaii only for those two years under a cooperative agreement with the Hawaii State Dept. of Agriculture.

    Following an extensive review of the floriculture industry and trends in production, NASS is proposing the following changes to the program. Based on the 2014 Horticultural Specialties Census, the top 16 states which represent 79.6% of the combined total of floriculture production and sales in the United States, will be surveyed. In addition, Congress has provided line item funding for the inclusion of Alaska into the Floriculture Survey program. The 17 States that will be included in the program in this renewal request are: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. New to this program are the States of Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Dropped from the federally funded program are Hawaii, Maryland, and South Carolina. However, NASS has been contacted by the States of Arizona, Hawaii and Maryland about doing a reimbursable survey through a cooperative agreement with each State. These three State surveys will be included in this OMB approval request.

    General authority for these data collection activities is granted under U.S. Code Title 7, Section 2204. This statute specifies that “The Secretary of Agriculture shall procure and preserve all information concerning agriculture which can be obtained by the collection of statistics . . . and shall distribute them among agriculturists”. The floriculture industry accounted for approximately $5.9 billion in wholesale sales at the U.S. level in 2014 (Census of Horticultural Specialties). In 2015 the 15 States that were surveyed by the Commercial Floriculture Survey accounted for $4.37 billion in wholesale sales or a little over 74% of the U.S. total.

    Need and Use of the Information: NASS obtains basic agricultural statistics on production and value of floriculture products. The target population for this survey is all operations with production and sales of at least $10,000 of floriculture products. Data collected from the survey will assess alternative agriculture opportunities, and provide statistics for Federal and State agencies to monitor the use of agricultural chemicals. If the information is not collected data users could not keep abreast of changes.

    Description of Respondents: Farms; Business or other-for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 12,000.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: Annually.

    Total Burden Hours: 5,793.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21381 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-20-P
    APPALACHIAN STATES LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE COMMISSION Annual Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. October 26, 2018.

    PLACE:

    Harrisburg Hilton and Towers, One North Second Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101.

    STATUS:

    The meeting will be open to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC:

    The primary purpose of this meeting is to (1) Review the independent auditors' report of the Commission's financial statements for fiscal year 2017-2018; (2) Review the Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) generation information for 2017; (3) Consider a proposed budget for fiscal year 2019-2020; (4) Review recent regional and national developments regarding LLRW management and disposal; and (5) Elect the Commission's Officers.

    PORTIONS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC:

    Executive Session, if deemed necessary, will be announced at the meeting.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Rich Janati, Administrator of the Commission at 717-787-2163.

    Rich Janati, Administrator, Appalachian Compact Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21447 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Idaho Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Idaho Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 12:00 p.m. (Mountain Time) Tuesday, October 16, 2018, for the purpose of reviewing the project proposal on Native American voting rights.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 16, 2018, at 12:00 p.m. MT.

    Public Call Information:

    Dial: 888-602-6363.

    Conference ID: 2385391.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alejandro Ventura at [email protected] or (213) 894-3437.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the number listed above. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012. They may be faxed to the Commission at (213) 894-0508, or emailed Alejandro Ventura at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (213) 894-3437.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=245. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Adoption of Agenda III. Review of Project Proposal on Native American Voting Rights IV. Public Comment V. Vote on Project Proposal VI. Discussion of Next Steps VII. Adjournment Dated: September 26, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21357 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the North Dakota Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of the North Dakota Advisory Committee to the Commission will by teleconference at 11:00 a.m. (MDT) on Thursday, October 25, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is for project and briefing planning.

    DATES:

    Thursday, October 25, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. MDT.

    Public Call-In Information: Conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call 8958570.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Evelyn Bohor, at [email protected] or by phone at 303-866-1040.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call 8958570. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call 8958570.

    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meeting or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1961 Stout Street, Suite 13-201, Denver, CO 80294, faxed to (303) 866-1040, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at (303) 866-1040.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://gsageo.force.com/FACA/apex/FACAPublicCommittee?id=a10t0000001gzl9AAA; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Rocky Mountain Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at the above phone numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda Thursday, October 25, 2018, 11:00 a.m. (MDT) • Rollcall • Project/Briefing Planning • Open Comment • Adjourn Dated: September 27, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21444 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a meeting of the Oregon Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held at 1:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) Monday, October 15, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is to review and vote on their final draft of the human trafficking report.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Monday, October 15, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. PT.

    Public Call Information:

    Dial: 877-260-1479

    Conference ID: 2624390

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ana Victoria Fortes (DFO) at [email protected] or (213) 894-3437.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is available to the public through the above toll-free call-in number. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Western Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, Los Angeles, CA 90012. They may be faxed to the Commission at (213) 894-0508, or emailed Ana Victoria Fortes at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (213) 894-3437.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meeting at https://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=270. Please click on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, https://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome II. Review Report Draft a. Findings and Recommendations Section i. Vote b. Introduction Section i. Vote c. Summary of Testimony Section i. Vote III. Public Comment IV. Next Steps V. Adjournment Dated: September 26, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21358 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Sunshine Act Meetings AGENCY:

    United States Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Commission Telephonic Business Meeting.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, October 3, 2018, 12:00 p.m. ET.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting to take place by telephone.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Walch, phone: (202) 376-8371; TTY: (202) 376-8116; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This business meeting is open to the public by telephone only.

    Participant Access Instructions: Listen-Only, Toll Free: 1 (888) 811-5448; Conference ID: 305-5056. Please dial in 5-10 minutes prior to the start time.

    Meeting Agenda I. Approval of Agenda II. Program Planning • Discussion and Vote on Commission Report, Crisis of Conscience: The Broken Promises to Native Americans • Discussion and Vote on Commission Findings and Recommendations, Crisis of Conscience: The Broken Promises to Native Americans III. Adjourn Meeting Dated: September 28, 2018. Brian Walch, Director, Communications and Public Engagement.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21529 Filed 9-28-18; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on Wednesday, October 10, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is project planning and decision-making on next steps.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, October 10, 2018 at 12:00 p.m. (EDT).

    Public Call-In Information: Conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call 5634706.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] or by phone at 202-376-7533.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call 5634706. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call 5634706.

    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meeting or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://gsageo.force.com/FACA/apex/FACAPublicCommittee?id=a10t0000001gzlqAAA; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda Wednesday, October 10, 2018 at 12 p.m. (EDT) • Roll Call • Project Planning/Vote on Project Proposal • Open Comment • Adjourn Dated: September 26, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21356 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meetings of the New York Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the New York Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on: Friday, October 12, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss topics of study.

    DATES:

    Friday, October 12, 2018 at 12:00 p.m. EDT.

    Public Call-In Information: Conference call-in number: 1-334-323-0522 and conference ID# 9150864.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Barreras, at [email protected] or by phone at 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-334-323-0522 and conference ID# 9150864. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-334-323-0522 and conference ID# 9150864.

    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meetings or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwest Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn Street, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604, faxed to (312) 353-8324, or emailed to David Barreras at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwest Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=265; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Midwest Regional Office at the above phone numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda Friday, October 12, 2018 • Open—Roll Call • Discussion of Study Topics • Open Comment • Adjourn Dated: September 26, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21363 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Hawaii Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via teleconference on Wednesday, October 17, 2018, from 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (Hawaiian Time) for the purpose of hearing testimony regarding equal opportunity barriers facing Micronesian immigrant groups in the state.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 17, 2018, from 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. (HDT).

    Location: Impact Hub Honolulu, 1050 Queen Street, #100, Honolulu, HI 96814. The location is accessible via public transportation. Street parking is available.

    Teleconference: The public may also participate via conference call by calling (855) 719-5012 and use ConferenceID# 5908102.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Barreras, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is an open comment period, members of the public will be asked to sign in and will be allowed to make a statement, beginning at 1:00 p.m. To request individual accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend, please contact the Regional Programs Unit at 312-353-8311 at least 10 days prior to the meeting. Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S. Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324 or emailed to David Barreras at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (312) 353-8311.

    The Committee intends to receive testimony from Hawaii's Micronesian population on the topic of barriers to equal opportunity based on color, race, sex, religion, national origin, and/or disability status. The Committee will hear testimony from any community member wishing to be heard on the topic.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Hawaii Advisory Committee link (https://gsageo.force.com/FACA/apex/FACAPublicCommittee?id=a10t0000001gzl0AAA). Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Opening Remarks and Introductions (1:00 p.m.) Open Forum (1:10 p.m.-4:00 p.m.) Closing Remarks (4:00 p.m.) Dated: September 26, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21361 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Rhode Island Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a planning meeting of the Rhode Island State Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call, on Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. (EDT). The purpose of the meeting is to vote on the voting rights report, review and possibly vote on the predatory lending report, and continue planning.

    DATES:

    Tuesday, October 16, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. (EDT).

    Public Call-In Information: Conference call number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call ID: 9226912.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Evelyn Bohor, at [email protected] or by phone at 202-376-7533

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call ID: 9226912. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator may ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number herein.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference call ID: 9226912.

    Members of the public are invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://gsageo.force.com/FACA/apex/FACAPublicCommittee?id=a10t0000001gzm4AAA; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

    Agenda Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. (EDT) I. Rollcall II. Review of Reports III. Vote on Reports IV. Next Steps/Other Discussion V. Open Comment VI. Adjournment Dated: September 27, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21442 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

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

    Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Title: 2020 Census.

    The clearance requested from OMB is for all data collection operations in the 2020 Census. The initial Federal Register Notice described the 2020 Census in full. Approval for the 2020 Census is being sought from OMB in phases. This Federal Register Notice will provide details about the 2020 Census Address Canvassing operation only. This is the operation that creates the address list for the census, which precedes census enumeration data collection. The remaining operations scoped for the 2020 Census, as listed below, will be described in detail in a future Federal Register Notice for an additional 30-day comment period, and the full census description will be considered as a substantive change to the approved OMB materials.

    OMB Control Number: 0607-XXXX.

    Form Number(s): D-CN(E/S) (Confidentiality Notice for Address Canvassing)

    Type of Request: New Collection.

    Number of Respondents: 17,365,407 for Address Canvassing; 180,955,761 for all operations in 2020 Census.

    Average Hours per Response: 5 minutes for Address Canvassing; 10 minutes for census enumeration.

    Burden Hours: 1,447,117 for Address Canvassing; 26,533,537 for Census.

    2020 Census Operation or category Estimated number of
  • respondents
  • Estimated time
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    Address Canvassing 15,786,734 5 minutes 1,315,561 Address Canvassing Listing Quality Control 1,578,673 5 minutes 131,556 Total for Address Canvassing * 17,365,407 1,447,117 Geographic Areas Focused on Self-Response (this includes Mailout and Update Leave): Internet/Telephone/Paper 80,700,000 10 minutes 13,450,000 Update Leave 11,900,000 5 minutes 991,667 Update Leave Quality Control 1,190,000 5 minutes 99,167 Nonresponse Followup 52,700,000 10 minutes 8,783,333 Reinterview, Coverage, and Quality 7,400,000 various 725,304 Self-Response Areas Subtotal 153,890,000 24,049,471 Geographic Area Focused on Update Enumerate: Update Enumerate Production 506,000 12 minutes 101,200 Reinterview and Quality 75,900 various 8,434 Update Enumerate Subtotal 581,900 109,634 Group Quarters: Group Quarters Advance Contact and Enumeration 8,311,300 various 720,934 Group Quarters Quality 8,500 5 minutes 708 Group Quarters Subtotal 8,319,800 721,642 Enumeration at Transitory Locations 650,000 10 minutes 108,333 Federally Affiliated Count Overseas 82 5 minutes 7 Island Areas Censuses—Housing Units 138,281 40 minutes 92,187 Island Areas Censuses—Group Quarters 10,291 30 minutes 5,146 Totals 180,955,761 26,533,537 * Address Canvassing projected counts are more detailed than the projections that inform later 2020 Census operations.
    Overview of 2020 Census Operations

    Below is a summary of the needs of uses of the 2020 Census, followed by a more detailed overview of data collection operations. As noted earlier, this notice is focused solely on Address Canvassing operations and solicits comments on these operations alone. The geographic areas discussed in this notice refer only to the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, unless otherwise noted.

    Needs and Uses

    Article 1, Section 2 of the United States Constitution mandates that the U.S. House of Representatives be reapportioned every ten years by conducting a national census of all residents. In addition to the reapportionment of the U.S. Congress, Census data are used to draw legislative district boundaries within states. Census data also are used by numerous agencies to determine funding allocations for the distribution of an estimated $675 billion of federal funds each year.

    The Census Bureau plans to conduct the most automated, modern, and dynamic decennial census in history. The 2020 Census includes design changes in four key areas, discussed below:

    (1) New methodologies to conduct the Address Canvassing operation.

    (2) Innovative ways of optimizing self-response.

    (3) The use of administrative records and third-party data to reduce the Nonresponse Followup (NRFU) operation workload.

    (4) The use of technology to reduce the manual effort and improve the productivity of field operations, while decreasing the amount of physical space required to perform the field operations.

    (1) Reengineering Address Canvassing

    An accurate address list is the cornerstone of a successful census. In order to manage the work for decennial census, the Census Bureau uses the address and physical location of each place where someone is, or could be, living. The Census Bureau maintains this address list and spatial data for the United States and Puerto Rico in its Master Address File (MAF)/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) System database.

    This database was created using the address files from the 1990 Census and has been subsequently and regularly updated using:

    • Information collected from decennial census operation updates, including address and spatial updates.

    • The Delivery Sequence File of addresses from the United States Postal Service (USPS).

    • Input from tribal, state, and local governments and third parties, including address and boundary updates from various programs conducted over the decade, such as the Local Update of Census Addresses operation.

    • Information collected in other Census Bureau programs, such as the American Community Survey.

    The purpose of Address Canvassing is (1) to deliver a complete and accurate address list and spatial database for enumeration and tabulation, and (2) to determine the type and address characteristics for each living quarter. Prior to a field Address Canvassing data collection, the Census Bureau will delineate the entire land area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and Island Areas into Type of Enumeration Areas (TEAs). Most stateside United States living quarters will be delineated into the self-response area, where the census address list will be created before the census, census materials will be provided in the mail, and self-response modes will be supported and promoted. Other areas will be designated for Update Leave, Update Enumerate (including Remote Alaska), Military Enumeration, or Island Areas Enumeration.

    For the 2020 Census there will be a full Address Canvassing of the country that will consist of In-Office Address Canvassing complemented with In-Field Address Canvassing. In-Office Address Canvassing is the process of using empirical geographic evidence (e.g., imagery, comparison of the Census Bureau's address list to address lists provided by the United States Postal Service and governmental units that partner with the Census Bureau) to assess the current address list and make changes where necessary. This component also detects and captures areas of change from high quality administrative records and third-party data. Advancements in technology have enabled continual address and spatial updates to occur throughout the decade as part of the In-Office Address Canvassing effort. Since 2015, satellite imagery has been used for the identification of areas where there are changes in living quarters. Where the necessary updates can be captured from electronic sources and are deemed to be sufficiently accurate, In-Office Address Canvassing will complete the update process prior to the census. The remaining blocks will become eligible to be sent to In-Field Address Canvassing for updating on the ground by field staff.

    (2) Optimizing Self-Response

    The goal of this innovation area is to make it as easy and efficient as possible for people to respond to the 2020 Census by offering new response options through the internet and telephone, in addition to the traditional mailback paper questionnaire option. Self-response reduces the need to conduct in-person follow-up operations to complete the enumeration, by far the most expensive method of data collection. To that end, the Census Bureau will motivate people to respond, as well as make it easy for people to respond, from any location at any time, even if they don't have the unique identifier for their address provided to them by the Census Bureau.

    The importance of responding to the 2020 Census will be communicated in a variety of ways, including through mailings, questionnaire delivery, advertising, and partnership efforts. In particular, the Integrated Partnership and Communications operation is responsible for communicating the importance of participating in the 2020 Census.

    Internet response represents a substantial innovation for the Census Bureau. The internet was not a response option in the 2010 Census. The internet response option has been included in multiple tests leading up to the 2020 Census: the 2014 Census Test; all three census tests performed in 2015; the 2016 Census Test; the 2017 Census Test; and the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. It has also been used in the American Community Survey since 2013.

    (3) Utilizing Administrative Records and Third-Party Data

    For the 2020 Census, “administrative records” and “third-party data” are terms used to describe microdata records contained in files collected and maintained by Federal, state, and local government agencies (“administrative records”) and commercial entities (“third-party data”) for administering programs and providing services. For many decades, the Census Bureau has successfully and securely used administrative records and third-party data for statistical purposes. For the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau intends to use administrative records from both internal sources, such as data from prior decennial censuses and the American Community Survey, and from a range of other Federal agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Social Security Administration, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Indian Health Service, the Selective Service, and the U.S. Postal Service. The Census Bureau is also working to acquire state government administrative records from enrollment in Federal block grant programs, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. Finally, the Census Bureau is also utilizing commercial third-party data from organizations such as CoreLogic and the Veterans Service Group of Illinois.

    Throughout the decade, the Census Bureau continuously conducted analyses and assessments to verify that the proposed uses of administrative records and third-party data sources in the 2020 Census were appropriate in each instance. Based on this research, testing, and analyses, the Census Bureau announced its plans in November 2015 to utilize administrative records and third-party data in the 2020 Census. The 2020 Census Operational Plan calls for employing this information for the following purposes:

    I. Consistent with previous decennial censuses, the Census Bureau will utilize administrative records from federal and state government agencies and third-party data to refine contact strategies and build and update the residential address list. II. Also consistent with previous decennial censuses, the Census Bureau will utilize federal and state administrative records to edit or impute invalid, inconsistent, or missing responses. III. The new use of administrative records for the 2020 Census is to use data exclusively from federal administrative records to improve the accuracy and efficiency of the NRFU operation by: a. removing vacant housing units and nonresidential addresses from the NRFU workload. b. enumerating households that do not self-respond and whom we were unable to contact after six mailings and one in-person field visit.

    For each of the purposes listed in items II, IIIa, and IIIb, the Census Bureau will use or plans to use administrative data only when it can confirm empirically across multiple sources that the data are consistent, of high quality, and can be accurately applied to the addresses and households in question. The Census Bureau plans to enumerate households utilizing administrative records only from Federal government agencies, such as the IRS. Use of administrative records for nonresponding addresses will be evaluated under a strict set of Census Bureau rules throughout the process to ensure completeness and accuracy.

    Based on the research and tests conducted, the Census Bureau estimates that under the current operational plan, Federal administrative records will be used to enumerate up to 6.5 million households of the projected total of approximately 60 million addresses that are expected to be in the NRFU workload for the 2020 Census. These 6.5 million households represent less than five percent of the approximately 145 million addresses in the Census master address file. Where the Census Bureau does not have confidence in the data, such as when the data are inconsistent or missing in the Federal administrative records, the household will remain in the NRFU workload to be enumerated in person.

    (4) Reengineering Field Operations

    The final innovation area, “Reengineering Field Operations,” has a goal of using technology to manage the 2020 Census fieldwork efficiently and effectively, and as a result, reduce the staffing, infrastructure, and brick and mortar footprint for the 2020 Census. The Census Bureau plans to provide most listers and enumerators with the capability to work completely remotely and perform all administrative and data collection tasks directly from a mobile device.

    Supporting Documents About the 2020 Census Design and the 2020 Census Objectives

    Multiple Census Bureau publications provide background on the plans for the 2020 Census. The 2020 Census Operational Plan v3.0, which was published in September 2017, describes each of the 35 operations scoped and defined for the census. Every task performed for the 2020 Census must be assigned to one of the 35 operations. The Operational Plan also summarizes the major findings of the census tests performed this decade. Moreover, this document shows the planned design of the 2020 Census as of September 2017 and identifies design decisions made, as well as remaining decisions to be made using census test results. Key design components for the 2020 Census for every operation are discussed in Chapter 5 of the 2020 Census Operational Plan.

    Type of Enumeration Areas

    Prior to the census, it is necessary to delineate all geographic areas into Type of Enumeration Areas (TEAs). These TEAs describe what methodology will be used for census material delivery and household enumeration in order to use the most cost-effective enumeration approach for achieving maximum accuracy and completeness. TEAs also describe what methodology will be used for updating the address frame. For the United States and Puerto Rico, TEAs are delineated at the block level based on the address and spatial data in the MAF/TIGER database.

    The MAF/TIGER does not contain data for the Island Areas, so a separate TEA is designated for these areas. The TEAs designated for the 2020 Census are:

    * TEA 1 = Self-Response. * TEA 2 = Update Enumerate. * TEA 3 = Island Areas. * TEA 4 = Remote Alaska. * TEA 5 = Military. * TEA 6 = Update Leave.

    The most common enumeration method by percentage of households is self-response (TEA 1), where materials will be delivered to each address through the mail, and self-response will be supported and promoted. After the initial self-response phase, nonresponding households will be enumerated in the NRFU operation. Update Enumerate uses the methodology of updating the address list and attempting household enumeration at the same time. This will be used for a very small portion of the addresses in country, such as those with access problems or minimal mail service. The Island Areas are not included in MAF/TIGER. For these areas, the address list will be created and enumeration will be attempted at the same time. Remote Alaska uses the Update Enumerate methodology but in remote areas of Alaska that require a different schedule for enumeration. Military areas require special procedures due to security restrictions. Update Leave is an update of the address list at the same time that a questionnaire is left at each individual housing unit and the enumeration data is expected to be returned or submitted by a respondent. Puerto Rico is designated as entirely Update Leave (except for military locations). Operations that will contribute to the respondent experience of the 2020 Census will be described in detail, as shown below, but only the Address Canvassing operation will be described within this clearance request. The 2020 Census Operational Plan and Detailed Operational Plans, available at www.census.gov, provide design details about the remaining operations, and the remaining operations will be described in future documents related to this OMB clearance.

    A. Content and Forms Design

    The Content and Forms Design operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    B. Language Services

    The Language Services operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    C. Address Canvassing

    Address Canvassing, as described above, consists of two major components: In-Office Address Canvassing and In-Field Address Canvassing. In-Office Address Canvassing is the process of using empirical geographic evidence (e.g., imagery, comparison of the Census Bureau's address list to partner-provided lists) to assess the current address list and make changes where necessary. This component detects and captures areas of change from high quality administrative records and third-party data. Advancements in technology have enabled continual address and spatial updates to occur throughout the decade as part of the In-Office Address Canvassing effort.

    Areas not resolved by In-Office Address Canvassing become the universe of geographic areas worked during In-Field Address Canvassing. Only the In-Field component of Address Canvassing involves in person collection of information from residents at their living quarters.

    For In-Field Address Canvassing, an extract of addresses from the MAF is created, and this address list is verified and updated in the field, as needed. Updates can include adding units missing from the address list and removing nonexistent or nonresidential units from the list. In addition, living quarters are classified as housing units or group quarters. Group quarters are living quarters where people who are typically unrelated have group living arrangements and frequently are receiving some type of service. College/university student housing and nursing/skilled-nursing facilities are examples of group quarters. Transitory locations include recreational vehicle parks, campgrounds, racetracks, circuses, carnivals, marinas, hotels, and motels. People residing at transitory locations during the census are recorded as living in housing units located at transitory locations.

    During In-Field Address Canvassing, listers knock on doors at every structure in the assignment in an attempt to locate living quarters and classify each living quarter as a housing unit, group quarter, or transitory location. If someone answers, the lister will provide a Confidentiality Notice and ask about the address in order to verify or update the information, as appropriate. The listers will then ask if there are any additional living quarters in the structure or on the property. If there are additional living quarters, the listers will collect/update that information, as appropriate. In addition, there will be a check on the quality of the address listing work on approximately 10 percent of the address listing workload.

    The results of Address Canvassing are processed with MAF/TIGER and then used as input into the creation of the census address list for enumeration. This address list in turn, is used in conjunction with the TEA delineation to determine which materials should be printed for use in the operation(s) designated for each area of the country.

    D. Forms Printing and Distribution

    The Forms Printing and Distribution operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    E. Internet Self-Response

    The internet Self-Response operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    F. Census Questionnaire Assistance

    The Census Questionnaire Assistance operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    G. Update Leave

    The Update Leave operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    H. Update Enumerate

    The Update Enumerate operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    I. Non-ID Processing

    The Non-ID Processing operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    J. Nonresponse Followup

    The Nonresponse Followup Operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    K. Group Quarters

    The Group Quarters operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    L. Paper Data Capture

    The Paper Data Capture operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    M. Response Processing

    The Response Processing Operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    N. Redistricting Data Program

    The Redistricting Data Program operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document. This program has a separate OMB clearance number. There is more detail about this program in Federal Register July 26, 2018, (Vol. 83, No. 144, pp. 35458-35460. FR Doc No. 2018-15972).

    O. Data Products and Dissemination

    The Data Products and Dissemination operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    P. Archiving

    The Archiving operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    Q. Federally Affiliated Count Overseas

    The Federally Affiliated Count Overseas operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    R. Island Areas Censuses

    The Island Areas Censuses operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    S. Evaluations and Experiments

    The Evaluations and Experiments operation will be described in more detail in subsequent versions of this document.

    The Census Bureau is not currently planning a separate clearance for the Evaluations and Experiments program, as has been done in past censuses. For the 2020 Census, these evaluations and experiments will be described either as Nonsubstantive Changes to this clearance or within other related clearance documents.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Frequency: Once every 10 years.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    Legal Authority: Title 13, United States Code, Section 141.

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

    Written comments and recommendations for the Address Canvassing phase of the proposed information collection, identified by Docket number OMB-2018-0004, may be submitted to the Federale-Rulemaking portal: Fs://www.regulations.gov within 30 days of publication of this notice. You may also submit comments and recommendations to [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806. All comments received are part of the public record. No comments will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov for public viewing until after the comment period has closed. Comments will generally be posted without change. All Personally Identifiable Information (for example, name and address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21386 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Office of the Secretary Membership of the Performance Review Board for the Office of the Secretary AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Membership on the Office of the Secretary Performance Review Board.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of the Secretary, the Department of Commerce (DOC), announces the appointment of those individuals who have been selected to serve as members of the Performance Review Board. The Performance Review Board is responsible for (1) reviewing performance appraisals and ratings of Senior Executive Service (SES) members and Senior Level (SL) members and (2) making recommendations to the appointing authority on other performance management issues, such as pay adjustments, bonuses and Presidential Rank Awards. 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 the Office of the Secretary Performance Review Board begins on October 2, 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 Office of the Secretary, Department of Commerce (DOC), announces the appointment of those individuals who have been selected to serve as members of the Office of the Secretary Performance Review Board. The Performance Review Board is responsible for (1) reviewing performance appraisals and ratings of Senior Executive Service (SES) and (SL) members and (2) making recommendations to the appointing authority on other performance management issues, such as pay adjustments, bonuses and Presidential Rank Awards. The appointment of these members to the Performance Review Board will be for a period of twenty-four (24) months.

    Dates: The name, position title, and type of appointment of each member of the Performance Review Board are set forth below:

    1. Brian DiGiacomo, Assistant General Counsel for Employment, Litigation, and Information Law, Career SES.

    2. John Cobau, Chief Counsel for International Commerce, Career SES.

    3. Kurt Bersani, Chief Financial Officer and Director of Administration, Enterprise Services, Career SES.

    4. Catrina Purvis, Senior Agency Official for Privacy (SAOP)/Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) & Director of Open Government (OPOG), Career SES.

    5. Sivaraj Shyam-Sunder, Senior Science Advisor, NIST, Career SES.

    Dated: September 27, 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. 2018-21430 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-25-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges Eastline Technologies OU, Akadeemia tee 21, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia; and Peterburi tee 47-210, 11415 Tallinn, Estonia Adimir OU, Akadeemia tee 21, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia; and Peterburi tee 47-210, 11415 Tallinn, Estonia Valery Kosmachov, a/k/a Valeri Kosmachov, a/k/a Valery Kosmatsov, a/k/a Valery Kosmatshov, a/k/a Valery Kosmachev, Vabaõhukooli tee 76-A9, 12015 Tallinn, Estonia Sergey Vetrov, a/k/a Sergei Vetrov, 6-39 Karl Marx Str., Ramenskoye, Moscow, Russia 140100 Real Components Ltd., 8-1 Aviamotornaya Str., Moscow, Russia 111024 I. Introduction and Background of the Parties at Issue

    Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration Regulations (the “Regulations” or “EAR”),1 the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”), U.S. Department of Commerce, through its Office of Export Enforcement (“OEE”), has requested that I issue an order temporarily denying, for a period of 180 days, the export privileges of Eastline Technologies OU (“Eastline”), Adimir OU (“Adimir”), Valery Kosmachov a/k/a Valeri Kosmachov, a/k/a Valery Kosmatsov, a/k/a Valery Kosmatshov, a/k/a Valery Kosmachev (“Kosmachov”), and Sergey Vetrov a/k/a Sergei Vetrov (“Vetrov”) (collectively, “Respondents”). OEE also has requested, pursuant to Sections 766.23 and 766.24 of the Regulations, that this order (“the TDO”) be applied to Real Components, Ltd. (“Real Components”) as a related person.

    1 The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR Parts 730-774 (2018). The Regulations originally issued under the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, 50 U.S.C. 4601-4623 (Supp. III 2015) (“the EAA”), which lapsed on August 21, 2001. The President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), which has been extended by successive Presidential Notices, the most recent being that of August 8, 2018 (83 FR 39871 (Aug. 13, 2018)), continued the Regulations in full force and effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2012) (“IEEPA”). On August 13, 2018, the President signed into law the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, which includes the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, Title XVII, Subtitle B of Public Law 115-232 (“ECRA”). While Section 1766 of ECRA repeals the provisions of the EAA (except for three sections which are inapplicable here), Section 1768 of ECRA provides, in pertinent part, that all rules and regulations that were made or issued under the EAA, including as continued in effect pursuant to IEEPA, and were in effect as of ECRA's date of enactment (August 13, 2018), shall continue in effect according to their terms until modified, superseded, set aside, or revoked through action undertaken pursuant to the authority provided under ECRA.

    Eastline is located in Tallinn, Estonia, and describes itself as a distributor of electronic parts and components, computer-related products, industrial personal computers and embedded systems, equipment for industrial automation, and other state-of-the-art solutions. The company holds an Estonian business license and has two addresses in Tallinn identified in registration documents. Eastline is operated primarily for the purpose of procuring electronic components, including those of U.S. origin. Kosmachov and Vetrov were listed as co-owners of Eastline until late 2016. The company is currently listed as being solely owned by Valeria Mihhailova, whom OEE has reason to believe is Kosmachov's daughter. Evidence presented by OEE indicates that both Kosmachov and Vetrov remain active in the business, as well as that Kosmachov also has previously represented that Eastline partners with Real Components, which is located in Moscow, Russia, is owned by Vetrov, and is Eastline's primary customer in Russia.

    Kosmachov also has previously identified himself as being the sole owner of Adimir, an Estonian company. Adimir shares the same business addresses as Eastline. Adimir is known to have previously been involved in the transshipment and attempted transshipment of U.S.-origin items to Russia in apparent violation of the Regulations, as described in a TDO issued by BIS on March 19, 2015, as amended on March 23, 2015 (the “March 2015 TDO”). See 80 FR 15979 (March 26, 2015); 80 FR 16632 (March 30, 2015).2 During the investigation leading up to the issuance of the March 2015 TDO, Adimir admitted to transshipping U.S.-origin items to Russia, but was not named as a respondent, as Adimir was believed to have ceased operating. See id.; see also Section III., infra. However, as discussed in Section IV., infra, recently-obtained evidence indicates that Adimir appears to have resumed operating, and to again be involved in the procurement of U.S.-origin items for transshipment to Russian customers, primarily including Real Components.

    2 The limited amendment on March 23, 2015, did not relate to the discussion of Adimir. See 80 FR 16632, at note 2. The March 2015 TDO was renewed for an additional 180 days on September 14, 2015. 80 FR 56439 (Sept. 18, 2015).

    II. Legal Standard

    Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Regulations, BIS may issue, on an ex parte basis, an order temporarily denying a respondent's export privileges upon a showing that the order is necessary in the public interest to prevent an “imminent violation” of the Regulations. 15 CFR 766.24(a)-(b). “A violation may be `imminent' either in time or degree of likelihood.” 15 CFR 766.24(b)(3). BIS may show “either that a violation is about to occur, or that the general circumstances of the matter under investigation or case under criminal or administrative charges demonstrate a likelihood of future violations.” Id. As to the likelihood of future violations, BIS may show that the violation under investigation or charge “is significant, deliberate, covert and/or likely to occur again, rather than technical or negligent[.]” Id. A “[l]ack of information establishing the precise time a violation may occur does not preclude a finding that a violation is imminent, so long as there is sufficient reason to believe the likelihood of a violation.” Id.

    Pursuant to Sections 766.23 and 766.24, a TDO also may be made applicable to other persons if BIS has reason to believe that they are related to a respondent and that applying the order to them is necessary to prevent its evasion. 15 CFR 766.23(a)-(b) and 766.24(c). A “related person” is a person, either at the time of the TDO's issuance or thereafter, who is related to a respondent “by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business.” 15 CFR 766.23(a).

    III. The March 2015 TDO and Adimir OU'S Admitted Transshipment Activities

    The March 2015 TDO issued against Flider Electronics, LLC d/b/a Trident International Corporation (“Trident”), Pavel Semenovich Flider (Trident's president and owner), and Gennadiy Semenovich Flider (Trident's office manager) for engaging in conduct prohibited by the Regulations by exporting items subject to the EAR to Russia via transshipment through third countries, including Estonia and Finland. Contemporaneous to these events, in or about March 2015, in an indictment unsealed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Pavel Flider was charged with fifteen counts of smuggling goods, one count of conspiracy to commit international money laundering, and ten counts of money laundering, and Trident was charged with all the same counts, except conspiracy. On August 16, 2016, Pavel Flider pled guilty to two counts of felony smuggling, and Trident pled guilty to two counts of money laundering involving the transshipment of U.S.-origin electronic components through Estonia and Finland to Russia. During the investigation, U.S. authorities identified other companies and individuals involved in the transshipment of U.S.-origin electronic components to Russia.

    Specifically, for example, Trident's president and owner, Pavel Flider, identified Adimir in Estonia as the ultimate consignee in a shipment of Xilinix field programmable gate array circuits that were controlled under Export Control Classification Number 3A001.a.2.c for national security reasons and required a license for export to Russia. OEE presented evidence that indicated that Adimir was not the end user of the items. In addition, Kosmachov, an Adimir corporate officer and its owner, admitted that Adimir had transshipped U.S.-origin items to Russia for Trident and Pavel Flider. In an interview with OEE, Trident office manager Gennadiy Flider stated that Trident had been doing business with Adimir for many years and that it was the only customer Trident had. Similarly, Pavel Flider stated in an interview that Adimir was Trident's one and only customer, and that at times Adimir requested that items be shipped to a freight forwarder in Finland, rather than to Adimir in Estonia.

    In sum, the March 2015 TDO described a procurement scheme that featured exports of U.S.-origin items structured as transshipments to camouflage the actual destination, end users and/or end uses of the items. As noted above, while Adimir had been involved in transshipping the items to Russia, Adimir was not made a party to the March 2015 TDO, as it was believed to have already ceased operating. The March 2015 TDO and related investigation appears to have for a time deterred Adimir and those affiliated or associated with it from engaging in similar activities. However, OEE has presented evidence as part of its current TDO request indicating that by at least May 2017, Kosmachov and Vetrov were using a revised scheme with Eastline identified falsely as the ultimate consignee and have expanded their activities to include the procurement of U.S.-origin items by both Eastline and Adimir, including as recently as August and September 2018.

    IV. Subsequent Interviews With Kosmachov About Eastline, the Detention of an Attempted Transshipment in May 2017, and More Recent Procurement and Transshipment Activities Involving Eastline and Adimir

    OEE's current request for a TDO includes evidence that an ongoing procurement scheme involves Eastline and Adimir in Estonia and Eastline's customer and partner Real Components Ltd. in Russia, all of whom share or have shared a common web of ownership or control involving Kosmachov and Vetrov. For example, Adimir and Eastline not only share a common address but also have shared a common owner in Kosmachov, who, as discussed supra, previously admitted to using Adimir to transship U.S.-origin items to Russia. Kosmachov remains active in Eastline's procurement operations, though company registration documents do not currently list him as a shareholder. Furthermore, Eastline and Real Components both have ties to Vetrov, with his continuing involvement in Eastline procurement activities and ownership of Real Components. As set forth below, OEE has presented evidence of these relationships based on interviews with Eastline in 2015-2016, a detained shipment in May 2017 and information related to recent export activities.

    In July 2015, Kosmachov, who was Eastline's acknowledged co-owner at the time (and until late November 2016), told the U.S. Government that Eastline started in 2005 as an independent distributor of electronic parts and components, among other items. Kosmachov stated that 99% of Eastline's business was in electronic components and that its primary customers are in Russia. According to Kosmachov, he chose to do business in Estonia because “it was easier to get electronics into Estonia than it was into Russia.” He also stated that U.S. companies were “easier to deal with as a European company, rather than as a Russian company.” Kosmachov indicated that “all Eastline's shipments to Russia go across the Tallinn-Helsinki Ferry to Helsinki and then across the Finnish-Russian border” because it was “cheaper” and took “less time” than shipping directly from Estonia to Russia. Also present at this meeting was another individual identified as a purchasing manager for both Eastline and Real Components. Kosmachov indicated that Eastline partners with Real Components, which is owned by Vetrov.

    In a subsequent meeting in March 2016, Kosmachov confirmed that nothing had changed in relation to Eastline since the May 2015 meeting and that he continued to own Adimir, which shares business addresses with Eastline. He noted again that Eastline primarily exports to Real Components in Russia. The purchasing manager for both Eastline and Real Components was again present at this meeting.

    OEE has presented evidence that Kosmachov and Vetrov remained the acknowledged shareholders in Eastline until November 29, 2016, at which time Valeria Mihhailova, who is believed to be Kosmachov's daughter, became listed as the sole shareholder. Information obtained from a May 2017 detention by the Department of Homeland Security indicates, moreover, that Kosmachov and Vetrov continue to be active in Eastline's business operations by having items from the United States procured under their names for Eastline and delivered on Eastline's behalf to a package forwarder's address in the United States. The package forwarder then consolidated multiple Eastline shipments into one export and, based on information provided by Eastline, created a commercial invoice and made an Electronic Export Information (“EEI”) filing in the Automated Export System (“AES”) 3 listing Estonia as the ultimate destination and Eastline as the ultimate consignee, even though Eastline has admitted that it is not an end user and that its primary customers are in Russia. The related export documents listed the “bill to” party as “Eastline Technologies OU, Attn: Valery Kosmachov” in Estonia, and the “ship to” as “Eastline Technologies OU, Attn: Sergey Vetrov” at the package forwarder's address in the United States. Furthermore, OEE has presented evidence that Kosmachov and Vetrov currently have access to Eastline bank accounts.

    3 The AES system is used by BIS (and U.S. Customs and Border Protection) for export control and clearance purposes and used by the U.S. Census Bureau to, inter alia, collect export statistics.

    Based on a review of EEI filings in AES for 2018, Eastline continued to order U.S.-origin items and have them delivered to its package forwarder in the U.S., for consolidation and export from the United States, with Eastline listed as the ultimate consignee at its address in Estonia, including as recently as June 2018. Based on the transshipment activities described in the March 2015 TDO, the May 2017 detention, and its ongoing investigation, OEE has reason to believe these items were actually intended for Real Components or another Russian customer and thus were transshipped to Russia. In addition, Eastline represents itself on its website as an independent “distributor” of electronic computers for such locations as Russia, lending additional support to OEE's contention that Eastline is not an end user of the items it procures. Moreover, OEE is concerned that Respondents' strategy of using a package forwarder in the United States to consolidate orders placed with multiple U.S. manufacturers or suppliers, rather than having the items exported directly by the manufacturers or suppliers themselves, may be part of a concerted effort to conceal their activities.

    Further, OEE has presented evidence indicating that both Eastline and Adimir have received shipments of U.S.-origin items as recently as August and September 2018, including shipments directly to Eastline and Adimir and shipments to Eastline through its package forwarder in the United States. Kosmachov's involvement in both Eastline and Adimir, Adimir's prior involvement with transshipment of controlled U.S.-origin items to Russia, and Adimir's continued receipt of U.S.-origin items, taken together, indicate that Adimir as well as Eastline presents an imminent threat of a violation of the Regulations and thus a temporary denial order is appropriate.

    V. Findings

    I find that the evidence presented by BIS demonstrates that a violation of the Regulations is imminent in both time and degree of likelihood. Eastline, Adimir, Kosmachov, and Vetrov have engaged in knowing violations of the Regulations relating to the procurement of U.S.-origin items subject to the Regulations for export to Russia, via transshipment through Estonia and Finland, while providing false or misleading information regarding the ultimate consignee and final destination of the items to U.S. suppliers and/or the U.S. Government. The ways in which their export transactions have been structured and routed appear designed to conceal or obscure the destinations, end users, and/or end uses of the U.S.-origin items they procure, including items on the Commerce Control List, thereby attempting to avoid export control scrutiny and possible detection by U.S. law enforcement.

    In sum, the facts and circumstances taken together, including the transshipment of U.S.-origin items, misrepresentations made in AES filings, and concerted actions of the Respondents, provide strong indicators that future violations are likely absent the issuance of a TDO. As such, a TDO is needed to give notice to persons and companies in the United States and abroad that they should cease dealing with Eastline, Adimir, Kosmachov, and Vetrov in export transactions involving items subject to the EAR. Accordingly, I find that an order denying the export privileges of Eastline, Adimir, Kosmachov, and Vetrov is necessary, in the public interest, to prevent an imminent violation of the EAR.

    Additionally, Section 766.23 of the Regulations provides that in order to prevent evasion, TDOs “may be made applicable not only to the respondent, but also to other persons then or thereafter related to the respondent by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business.” 15 CFR 766.23(a). Eastline and Real Components are intertwined in ownership and control and in their conduct of business. As noted above, Vetrov owns Real Components, Eastline's primary customer in Russia, and also remains active in Eastline, including apparently receiving shipments on behalf of the company and also holding a bank card in Eastline's name. The two companies also share a purchasing manager, further suggesting that Eastline serves as a procurement and transshipment agent for Real Components. Accordingly, I find that Real Components meets the criteria set out in Section 776.23 and should be added to the TDO as a related person in order to prevent evasion.

    This Order is being issued on an ex parte basis without a hearing based upon BIS's showing of an imminent violation in accordance with Section 766.24 of the Regulations.

    It is therefore ordered:

    First, that EASTLINE TECHNOLOGIES OU, with last known addresses at Akadeemia tee 21, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia, and Peterburi tee 47-210, 11415 Tallinn, Estonia, ADIMIR OU, with last known addresses at Akadeemia tee 21, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia, and Peterburi tee 47-210, 11415 Tallinn, Estonia, VALERY KOSMACHOV, a/k/a VALERI KOSMACHOV, a/k/a VALERY KOSMATSOV, a/k/a VALERY KOSMATSHOV, a/k/a VALERY KOSMACHEV, with a last known address at Vabaõhukooli tee 76-A9, 12015 Tallinn, Estonia, SERGEY VETROV, a/k/a SERGEI VETROV, with a last known address at 6-39 Karl Marx Str., Ramenskoye, Moscow, Russia, 140100, and REAL COMPONENTS LTD., with a last known address at 8-1 Aviamotornaya Str., Moscow, Russia, 111024, and when acting for or on their behalf, any successors, assigns, directors, officers, employees, or agents (each a “Denied Person” and collectively the “Denied Persons”) may not, directly or indirectly, participate in any way in any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter collectively referred to as “item”) exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”), or in any other activity subject to the EAR including, but not limited to:

    A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, license exception, or export control document;

    B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing, in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the EAR, or engaging in any other activity subject to the EAR; or

    C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the EAR, or from any other activity subject to the EAR.

    Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following:

    A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of a Denied Person any item subject to the EAR;

    B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by a Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby a Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control;

    C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from a Denied Person of any item subject to the EAR that has been exported from the United States;

    D. Obtain from a Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the EAR with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or

    E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing.

    Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in Section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization or entity related to Eastline Technologies OU, Adimir OU, Valery Kosmachov, or Sergey Vetrov by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order.

    In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, Eastline Technologies OU, Adimir OU, Valery Kosmachov, and Sergey Vetrov may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4022.

    In accordance with the provisions of Sections 766.23(c)(2) and 766.24(e)(3) of the EAR, Real Components Ltd. may, at any time, appeal its inclusion as a related person by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4022.

    In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the EAR, BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not later than 20 days before the expiration date. Eastline Technologies OU, Adimir OU, Valery Kosmachov, and Sergey Vetrov may oppose a request to renew this Order by filing a written submission with the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days before the expiration date of the Order.

    A copy of this Order shall be sent to Eastline Technologies OU, Adimir OU, Valery Kosmachov, Sergey Vetrov, and Real Components Ltd., and shall be published in the Federal Register.

    This Order is effective upon issuance and shall remain in effect for 180 days.

    Douglas Hassebrock, Director, Office of Export Enforcement, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21446 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-433-813 and A-427-830] Strontium Chromate From Austria and France: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Applicable September 25, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dennis McClure or Brian Smith at (202) 482-5973 or (202) 482-1766, respectively; AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petitions

    On September 5, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of strontium chromate from Austria and France, filed in proper form on behalf of the Lumimove Inc., d.b.a. WPC Technologies (the petitioner).1

    1See the petitioner's Letter, “Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Strontium Chromate from Austria and France,” dated September 5, 2018 (the Petitions).

    From September 7 to 19, 2018, we requested from the petitioner information pertaining to the scope and allegations contained in the petition.2 The petitioner supplemented the record in response to these requests.3

    2See Commerce's Letters, “Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Strontium Chromate from Austria and France: Supplemental Questions,” dated September 7, 2018; “Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Strontium Chromate from France: Supplemental Questions,” dated September 7, 2018; “Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Strontium Chromate from Austria: Supplemental Questions,” dated September 7, 2018; “Phone Call with Counsel to Petitioner,” dated September 14, 2018; “Phone Call with Counsel to Petitioner,” dated September 17, 2018; and Memorandum, “Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Strontium Chromate from Austria and France; Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,” dated September 19, 2018 (September 19, 2018 Memorandum).

    3See the petitioner's Letters, titled, “Petitioner's Response to the Department of Commerce's September 7, 2018 General Issues Questionnaire Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Strontium Chromate from France and Austria,” dated September 13, 2018 (General Issues Supplement); “Petitioner's Response to the Department of Commerce's September 7, 2018 Volume II Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Strontium Chromate from Austria”, dated September 13, 2018 (Austria AD Supplement); “Petitioner's Response to the Department of Commerce's September 7, 2018 Volume II Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Strontium Chromate from France,” dated September 13, 2018 (France AD Supplement); “Petitioner's Response to Questions from the Department of Commerce's September 14, 2018 Phone Call Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Strontium Chromate from France and Austria,” dated September 17, 2018 (Second Supplement); and “Petitioner's Response to Questions from the Department of Commerce's September 17, 2018 Phone Call Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Strontium Chromate from France and Austria,” dated September 18, 2018 (Third Supplement).

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of strontium chromate from Austria and France are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing strontium chromate in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegation.

    We find that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. We also find that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the petitioner is requesting.4

    4See the “Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions” section, infra.

    Period of Investigations

    Because the Petitions were filed on September 5, 2018, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for these investigations is July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018.5

    5See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).

    Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is strontium chromate from Austria and France. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the Appendix to this notice.

    Scope Comments

    During our review of the Petitions, we contacted the petitioner regarding the proposed scope language to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.6 As a result, the scope of the Petitions was modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the Petitions. The description of the merchandise covered by this initiation, as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects these clarifications.

    6See General Issues Supplement, at 1-4; see also Second Supplement, at 1-2 and Exhibit 1; see also September 19, 2018 Memorandum.

    As discussed in the preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope).7 Commerce will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information,8 all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of our questionnaires, we request that all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on October 15, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.9 Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 25, 2018, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.

    7See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).

    8See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining “factual information”).

    9See 19 CFR 351.303(b).

    We request that any factual information parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed on the records of the Austria and France less-than-fair-value investigations.

    Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).10 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines.

    10See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.

    Comments on Product Characteristics for the AD Questionnaires

    We are providing interested parties an opportunity to comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of strontium chromate to be reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of production accurately, as well as to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria.

    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics, and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe strontium chromate, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.

    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 15, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.11 Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on October 25, 2018. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the Austria and France less-than-fair-value investigations.

    11See 19 CFR 351.303(b).

    Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the “industry.”

    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers, as a whole, of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,12 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.13

    12See section 771(10) of the Act.

    13See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation” (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition).

    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations.14 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that strontium chromate, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.15

    14See Volume I of the Petitions, at 11-16.

    15 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Strontium Chromate from Austria (Austria AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Strontium Chromate from Austria and France (Attachment II); and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Strontium Chromate from France (France AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building.

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of the Investigations,” in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.16 The petitioner states that it is the only known producer of strontium chromate in the United States; therefore, the Petitions are supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.17

    16See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit General-2.

    17Id., at 2-4; see also Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit II-16. For further discussion, see Austria AD Initiation Checklist and France AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petitions.18 First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).19 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.20 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions.21 Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.

    18Id.

    19Id.; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.

    20See Austria AD Initiation Checklist and France AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

    21Id.

    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that it is requesting that Commerce initiate.22

    22Id.

    Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.23

    23See Volume I of the Petitions, at 24-25 and Exhibit General-4.

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; reduced market share; underselling and price depression or suppression; decline in the domestic industry's shipments, financial performance, and employment levels; underutilized capacity; and lost sales and revenues.24 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, as well as cumulation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.25

    24Id. at 11, 18-30 and Exhibits General-2 through General-8 and General-16.

    25See Austria AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping Duty Petitions Covering Strontium Chromate from Austria and France (Attachment III); and France AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.

    Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less than fair value upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate AD investigations of imports of strontium chromate from Austria and France. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the Austria and France AD Initiation Checklists.

    Export Price

    For Austria and France, the petitioner based U.S. export prices (EP) on the transaction-specific average unit values for shipments of strontium chromate identified from each of these countries entered under the relevant Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading for one month during the POI into a specific port.26 Under this methodology, the petitioner linked shipment data from Port Import Export Reporting Service (PIERS) to monthly U.S. port-specific import statistics (obtained from the ITC's Dataweb).27 The petitioner made a deduction from U.S. price for movement expenses, consistent with the manner in which the data is reported in Dataweb.28

    26See Austria and France AD Initiation Checklists.

    27Id.

    28Id.

    Normal Value

    For Austria and France, the petitioner based NV on home market prices obtained through market research for strontium chromate produced in and sold, or offered for sale, in each country within the proposed POI.29 Where applicable, the petitioner calculated net home market prices, adjusting as appropriate for delivery terms and other price adjustments.30

    29Id.

    30Id.

    Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of strontium chromate from Austria and France are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for strontium chromate from Austria and France are 90.97 and 47.91 percent, respectively.31

    31Id.

    Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the Petitions, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of strontium chromate from Austria and France are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.

    Respondent Selection

    The petitioner named one company in Austria and one company in France as producers/exporters of strontium chromate.32 Following standard practice in AD investigations involving market economy countries, Commerce intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate HTSUS numbers listed with the “Scope of the Investigations,” in the Appendix.

    32See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit General-9; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1 and Exhibit 1.

    We also intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO on the record within five business days of publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on the record of these investigations. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for the initial comments. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.

    All respondent selection comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its entirety, by Commerce's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. ET by the dates noted above. We intend to finalize our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice.

    Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been provided to the governments of Austria and France via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

    ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act.

    Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of strontium chromate from Austria and/or France are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.33 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.34 Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.

    33See section 733(a) of the Act.

    34Id.

    Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 35 and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct.36 Time limits for the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.

    35See 19 CFR 351.301(b).

    36See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).

    Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.

    Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.37 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).38 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements.

    37See section 782(b) of the Act.

    38See also Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    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. Appendix Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations is strontium chromate, regardless of form (including but not limited to, powder (sometimes known as granular), dispersions (sometimes known as paste), or in any solution). The chemical formula for strontium chromate is SrCrO4 and the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry number is 7789-06-2.

    Strontium chromate that has been blended with another product or products is included in the scope if the resulting mix contains 15 percent or more of strontium chromate by total formula weight. Products with which strontium chromate may be blended include, but are not limited to, water and solvents such as Aromatic 100 Methyl Amyl Ketone (MAK)/2-Heptanone, Acetone, Glycol Ether EB, Naphtha Leicht, and Xylene. Subject merchandise includes strontium chromate that has been processed in a third country into a product that otherwise would be within the scope of these investigations if processed in the country of manufacture of the in-scope strontium chromate.

    The merchandise subject to these investigations is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheading 2841.50.9100. Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS subheading 3212.90.0050. While the HTSUS subheadings and CAS registry number are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-21406 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-944] Oil Country Tubular Goods From People's Republic of China: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2017 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from the People's Republic of China (China). The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Applicable October 2, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jessica Pomper or Nicholas Czajkowski, 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) 482-9122 or (202) 482-1395, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On January 2, 2018, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on OCTG from China for the POR.1 Commerce received a timely-filed request from Maverick Tube Corporation (Maverick), in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for an administrative review of 18 producers/exporters of OCTG from China: Anhui Tianda Oil Pipe Company Limited; Doright Co., Ltd.; DSC Pipes and Tubes Private Limited; Hainan Standard Stone Co., Ltd.; Hengyang Hongda Special Steel Tube Co. Ltd.; Hengyang Steel Tube Group International Trading Inc.; Hubei Xingegang Steel Co., Ltd.; Jiangsu Chengde Steel Tube Co., Ltd.; Jiangyi City Changlongde; Shanghai Jianeng Luggage Co., Ltd.; Tianjn Pipe International Economic & Trading Corporation; Wuxi Seamless Oil Pipe Co., Ltd.; Wuxi Zhenda Special Steel Tube Manufacturing Co., Ltd.; Yangzhou Chengde Steel Pipe Co., Ltd.; Yangzhou Lontrin Steel Tube Co., Ltd.; Yangzhou Shengde Crafts Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Gross Seamless Tube Co., Ltd.; and Zhejiang Xinghe Group.2 On March 16, 2018, the Department published a notice of initiation.3 This notice of initiation inadvertently omitted Yangzhou Shengde Crafts Co., Ltd. for which an administrative review was requested by Maverick. On September 10, 2018, Commerce published a notice of initiation to correct this omission.4 Subsequent to the Initiation Notices, Commerce requested from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of subject merchandise during the POR for the companies for which an administrative review was requested.5 The results of the CBP data inquiry demonstrated that there were no entries of subject merchandise exported by these companies during the POR.6 Commerce solicited interested party comments,7 and we received no comments.

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 83 FR 98 (January 2, 2018).

    2See letter from Maverick, “Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the People's Republic of China: Request for Administrative Review,” date January 31, 2018.

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 11686 (March 16, 2018).

    4See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 45596 (September 11, 2018).

    5See Memorandum “Certain Oil Tubular Goods from the People's Republic of China: Placement on the Record of Results of Inquiry to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for 2017 Period of Review,” dated April 19, 2018. See also Memorandum “Certain Oil Tubular Goods from the People's Republic of China: Placement on the Record of Results of Inquiry to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for 2017 Period of Review,” dated September 11, 2018.

    6Id.

    7Id.

    Rescission of Review

    It is Commerce's practice to rescind an administrative review of a countervailing duty order, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended.8 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(l). Therefore, for an administrative review to be conducted, there must be a reviewable, suspended entry that Commerce can order CBP to liquidate at the newly calculated countervailing duty assessment rate. Accordingly, in the absence of suspended entries of subject merchandise during the POR, we are now rescinding this administrative review of the countervailing duty order on OCTG from China, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

    8See, e.g., Lightweight Thermal Paper from The People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2015 82 FR 14349 (March 20, 2017).

    This determination and notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    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. 2018-21405 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG522 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting (webinar).

    SUMMARY:

    The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Pacific Council) Ad Hoc Climate Scenarios Investigation Committee (CSI) will hold a webinar, which is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The webinar meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 23, 2018, from 3 p.m. until 5:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via webinar. A public listening station is available at the Pacific Council office (address below). To attend the webinar (1) join the meeting by visiting this link http://www.gotomeeting.com/online/webinar/join-webinar, (2) enter the Webinar ID: 723-578-011, and (3) enter your name and email address (required). After logging in to the webinar, please (1) dial this TOLL number 1-562-247-8422, (2) enter the attendee phone audio access code 152-720-055, and (3) then enter your audio phone pin (shown after joining the webinar). Note: We have disabled Mic/Speakers as an option and require all participants to use a telephone or cell phone to participate. Technical Information and system requirements: PC-based attendees are required to use Windows® 7, Vista, or XP; Mac®-based attendees are required to use Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer; Mobile attendees are required to use iPhone®, iPad®, AndroidTM phone or Android tablet (See the https://www.gotomeeting.com/webinar/ipad-iphone-android-webinar-apps). You may send an email to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at [email protected] or contact him at (503) 820-2280, extension 411 for technical assistance.

    Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Kit Dahl, Pacific Council; telephone: (503) 820-2422.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Pacific Council formed the CSI in September 2018 to guide the development of future climate scenarios that will be developed under the Fishery Ecosystem Plan Climate and Communities Initiative. The CSI will report to the Pacific Council at its November 1-8, 2018 meeting on its work (see Agenda Item F.6.a, Supplemental Tri-State Report, September 2018). The purpose of this webinar is to present a draft report of their findings, explain the CSI's proposed activities, and gain feedback from the Pacific Council's Ad Hoc Ecosystem Workgroup, other Pacific Council committees, and the public.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may be discussed, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any issues arising after publication of this document that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt, (503) 820-2411, at least 10 business days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21399 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG360 Marine Mammals; File No. 20648 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that Heidi Pearson, Ph.D., University of Alaska—Southeast, 11120 Glacier Hwy., AND1, Juneau, AK 99801, has applied in due form for a permit to conduct scientific research on marine mammals in southern Alaskan waters.

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 20648 from the list of available applications.

    These documents are also available upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427-8401; fax (301) 713-0376.

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Courtney Smith or Carrie Hubard, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226), and the Fur Seal Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.).

    The applicant requests a five-year permit to conduct research that would assess the behavior, ecology, and movement patterns of cetaceans in the Gulf of Alaska with a focus on Southeast Alaska, particularly waters around Juneau. Fin (Balaenoptera physalus), humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae; range-wide including those from the endangered Mexico Distinct Population Segment), gray (Eschrichtius robustus), killer (Orcinus orca); minke (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), and sperm (Physeter macrocephalus) whales, Dall's (Hocoenoides dalli) and harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and Pacific white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) will be taken during vessel and unmanned aerial surveys. Researchers will use the following methods on all or some of the above listed species: Observation, photographic identification, photogrammetry, passive acoustic recording, tagging (suction-cup), remote biopsy and other biological sampling (breath/exhaled air, fecal, swabbed and sloughed skin). Humpback and killer whales may be remote biopsy sampled. Acoustic disturbance from sonar for prey mapping may also occur. Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus; Eastern and Western Distinct Population Segments) and harbor seals may be incidentally harassed during research activities.

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Julia Marie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21339 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Request for Nominations for the Interest Rate Benchmark Reform Subcommittee Under the Market Risk Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or Commission) is requesting nominations for membership on the Interest Rate Benchmark Reform Subcommittee (Subcommittee) under the Market Risk Advisory Committee (MRAC). The MRAC is a discretionary advisory committee established by the Commission in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

    DATES:

    The deadline for the submission of nominations is October 16, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Nominations should be emailed to [email protected] or sent by hand delivery or courier to Alicia L. Lewis, MRAC Designated Federal Officer and Special Counsel to Commissioner Rostin Behnam, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581. Please use the title “MRAC Interest Rate Benchmark Reform Subcommittee” for any nominations you submit.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alicia L. Lewis, MRAC Designated Federal Officer and Special Counsel to Commissioner Rostin Behnam at (202) 418-5862 or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Subcommittee was established to provide reports and recommendations to the MRAC regarding ongoing efforts to transition U.S. dollar derivatives and related contracts to a risk-free reference rate—the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR)—and the impact of this transition on the derivatives markets. Topics and issues this Subcommittee may consider include, but are not limited to, the following:

    • The treatment, under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, of existing derivatives contracts that are amended to include new fallback provisions or otherwise reference alternative risk-free rate benchmarks (“RFRs”) such as SOFR and new derivatives contracts that reference RFRs; and

    • Impact on liquidity in derivatives and related markets during the transition.

    The Subcommittee will report directly to the MRAC and will not provide reports and/or recommendations directly to the Commission. The Subcommittee has no authority to make decisions on behalf of the MRAC, and no determination of fact or policy will be made by the Subcommittee on behalf of the Commission.

    Subcommittee members will generally serve as representatives and provide advice reflecting the views of organizations and entities that constitute the structure of the derivatives and financial markets. The Subcommittee may also include regular government employees when doing so furthers its purpose. It is anticipated that the Subcommittee will hold at least three meetings per year. Subcommittee members serve at the pleasure of the Commission. In addition, Subcommittee members do not receive compensation or honoraria for their services, and they are not reimbursed for travel and per diem expenses.

    The Subcommittee will include as members individuals who are members of the MRAC and other individuals. For these other individuals who are not serving on the MRAC currently, the Commission seeks nominations of individuals from a wide range of perspectives, including from industry, academia, the government, and public interest. To advise the MRAC effectively, Subcommittee members must have a high-level of expertise and experience with interest rate benchmarks; efforts to transition to an RFR; assessing the impact of such efforts on the derivatives and related markets; and the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission regulations thereunder. To the extent practicable, the Commission will strive to select members reflecting wide ethnic, racial, gender, and age representation.

    The Commission invites the submission of nominations for Subcommittee membership. Each nomination submission should include the proposed member's name, title, organization affiliation and address, email address and telephone number, as well as information that supports the individual's qualifications to serve on the Subcommittee. The submission should also include the name, email address and telephone number of the person nominating the proposed Subcommittee member. Self-nominations are acceptable.

    Submission of a nomination is not a guarantee of selection as a member of the Subcommittee. As noted in the MRAC's Membership Balance Plan, the Commission seeks to ensure that the membership of a subcommittee is balanced relative to the particular issues addressed by the subcommittee in question. The Commission will identify members for the Subcommittee based on Commissioners' and Commission staff professional knowledge of ongoing efforts to transition to SOFR, consultation with knowledgeable persons outside the CFTC, and requests to be represented received from organizations. The office of the Commissioner primarily responsible for the MRAC and the Subcommittee plays a primary, but not exclusive, role in this process and makes recommendations regarding membership to the Commission. The Commission, by vote, authorizes members to serve on MRAC subcommittees.

    (Authority: 5 U.S.C. App. II) Dated: September 27, 2018. Robert Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21408 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; AmeriCorps Member Application AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, CNCS is proposing to renew an information collection.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the ADDRESSES section by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:

    (1) By mail sent to: Corporation for National and Community Service, AmeriCorps State & National; ATTN: Erin Dahlin, Deputy Chief of Program Operations, 250 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20525.

    (2) By hand delivery or by courier to the CNCS mailroom at the mail address given in paragraph (1) above, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

    (3) Electronically through www.regulations.gov.

    Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call 1-800-833-3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice may be made available to the public through regulations.gov. For this reason, please do not include in your comments information of a confidential nature, such as sensitive personal information or proprietary information. If you send an email comment, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. Please note that responses to this public comment request containing any routine notice about the confidentiality of the communication will be treated as public comment that may be made available to the public notwithstanding the inclusion of the routine notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Erin Dahlin, 202-606-6931 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: AmeriCorps Member Application.

    OMB Control Number: 3045-0054.

    Type of Review: Renewal.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 250,000.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 281,250.

    Abstract: Currently, CNCS is soliciting comments concerning its proposed renewal of the AmeriCorps Member Application Form. Applicants will respond to the questions included in this ICR in order to apply to serve as AmeriCorps members. CNCS also seeks to continue using the currently approved information collection until the revised information collection is approved by OMB. The currently approved information collection is due to expire on December 31, 2018.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (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; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. All written comments will be available for public inspection on regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 25, 2018. Erin Dahlin, Deputy Chief of Program Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21376 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Arbitration Panel Decisions Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act AGENCY:

    Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice lists arbitration panel decisions under the Randolph-Sheppard Act issued in January, February, and March 2018. This notice also lists any older decisions that the Department has made publicly available in accessible electronic format during that period. All decisions are available on the Department's website and by request.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Donald Brinson, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5045, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-7310. Email: [email protected] If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service, toll-free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For the purpose of providing individuals who are blind with remunerative employment, enlarging their economic opportunities, and stimulating greater efforts to make themselves self-supporting, the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 20 U.S.C. 107 et seq. (Act), authorizes individuals who are blind to operate vending facilities on Federal property and provides them with a priority for doing so. The vending facilities include, among other things, cafeterias, snack bars, and automatic vending machines. The Department administers the Act and designates an agency in each State—the State Licensing Agency (SLA)—to license individuals who are blind to operate vending facilities on Federal and other property in the State.

    The Act requires arbitration of disputes between SLAs and vendors who are blind and between SLAs and Federal agencies before three-person panels convened by the Department whose decisions constitute final agency action. 20 U.S.C. 107d-1. The Act also makes these decisions matters of public record and requires their publication in the Federal Register. 20 U.S.C. 107d-2(c).

    On September 5, 2017, the Department announced that it would publish quarterly lists of Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panel decisions in the Federal Register and that the full text of the decisions listed would be available on the Department's website or by request (see 82 FR 41941).

    In the first quarter of 2018, Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels issued the following decisions.

    Case name Docket No. Date State Opportunities for Ohioans with Disabilities v. Wright Patterson Air Force Base R-S/16-08 2/22/18 OH California Vendors Policy Committee v. California Department of Rehabilitation R-S/10-09 2/20/18 CA Taylor v. Wisconsin's Department of Workforce Development, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation R-S/12-01 2/05/18 WI Florida Department of Education v. Tyndall Air Force Base R-S/16-04 1/30/18 FL Hooks v. North Carolina Division of Services for the Blind R-S/15-16 1/02/18 NC

    These decisions, and other decisions that we have already posted, are searchable by key terms, are accessible under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, and are available in Portable Document Format (PDF) at www.ed.gov/programs/rsarsp/arbitration-decisions.html or by request to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    At the same site, we have posted the following decision from 2016.

    Case name Docket No. Date State Texas Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services v. Fort Bliss R-S/13-13 11/2/16 TX

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register.ou may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register in text or PDF. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Departmentpublished in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at www.federalregister.gov.

    Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Johnny W. Collett, Assistant Secretary, <E T="03">Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.</E>
    [FR Doc. 2018-21423 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Policy Statement on Developing Student Achievement Levels for the National Assessment of Educational Progress AGENCY:

    National Assessment Governing Board, U.S. Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Extension of Public Comment Period on Draft Policy Statement on Developing Student Achievement Levels for the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Assessment Governing Board (Governing Board) is soliciting public comment for guidance in finalizing a revised policy on Developing Student Achievement Levels for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which published September 10, 2018, in the Federal Register. Based on public comments received on the document, the comment period is being extended.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the draft policy statement published on September 10, 2018, at 83 FR 45618, is extended. Comments must be received no later than October 15, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be provided via email at [email protected] and may also be mailed to the following address: NAEP Achievement Level Setting Policy, National Assessment Governing Board, 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 825, Washington, DC 20002.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sharyn Rosenberg, National Assessment Governing Board, 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 825, Washington, DC 20002-4233, Telephone: (202) 357-6940.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    All responses will be taken into consideration before finalizing the updated policy on Developing Achievement levels for NAEP for Board adoption. Once adopted, the policy will be used in setting and reporting achievement levels for NAEP assessments. Additional information on this document can be found on the Governing Board website at https://www.nagb.gov/news-andevents/calendar/public-comment-onals-policy.html.

    Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister/index.html. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.

    Note:

    The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Lisa Stooksberry, Deputy Executive Director, National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), U.S. Department of Education.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21451 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho Cleanup Project AGENCY:

    Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Idaho Cleanup Project. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Thursday, October 25, 2018; 8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

    The opportunities for public comment are at 10:15 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.

    This time is subject to change; please contact the Federal Coordinator (below) for confirmation of times prior to the meeting.

    ADDRESSES:

    Sun Valley Lodge, Sage Room, 1 Sun Valley Road, Sun Valley, ID 83353.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brad Bugger, Federal Coordinator, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS-1203, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415. Phone (208) 526-0833; or email: [email protected] or visit the Board's internet home page at: https://energy.gov/em/icpcab/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

    Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the meeting; please contact Brad Bugger for the most current agenda):

    • Recent Public Outreach • Idaho Cleanup Project (ICP) Overview • Update on Integrated Waste Treatment Unit (IWTU) • Flour Idaho Safety Initiatives • Update on Accelerated Retrieval Project (ARP) V Incident • Report from the EM SSAB Chairs Meeting, EM National Cleanup Workshop and any motions to be discussed

    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Idaho Cleanup Project, welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Brad Bugger at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Brad Bugger at the address or telephone number listed above. The request must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Brad Bugger, Federal Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: https://energy.gov/em/icpcab/listings/cab-meetings.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on September 27, 2018. Latanya Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21439 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER18-2477-000] DXT Commodities North America LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of DXT Commodities North America 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 16, 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 26, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21413 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1198-000.

    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: APL 09-21-2018 MDU Delivery Point Filing to be effective 10/22/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/21/18.

    Accession Number: 20180921-5108.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1038-001.

    Applicants: Northern Border Pipeline Company.

    Description: Compliance filing Best Bid Evaluation—Compliance Filing to be effective 9/24/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5021.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1038-002.

    Applicants: Northern Border Pipeline Company.

    Description: Compliance filing Best Bid Evaluation—Compliance Amended to be effective 9/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5136.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1199-000.

    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Amendments to NC Agmts (BHP 31591 to MMGJ AR Upstream 31591) to be effective 9/28/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5034.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1200-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate-Bay State to BBPCs 797515 and 797514 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5037.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1201-000.

    Applicants: Gas Transmission Northwest LLC.

    Description: eTariff filing per 1430: GTN 501(g) Request for Waiver.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5079.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1202-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092418 Negotiated Rates—Hartree Partners, LP R-7090-05 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5081.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1203-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092418 Negotiated Rates—Hartree Partners, LP R-7090-06 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1204-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement Filing (SPS) to be effective 9/25/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5106.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1205-000.

    Applicants: Dominion Energy Questar Pipeline, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing Compliance filing in Docket CP18-192-000 to be effective 9/25/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5002.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1206-000.

    Applicants: PennEnergy Resources, LLC, R. E. Gas Development, LLC.

    Description: Joint Petition for Temporary Waiver of Capacity Release Regulations and Related Tariff Provisions, et al. of PennEnergy Resources, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 9/24/18.

    Accession Number: 20180924-5160.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/4/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1207-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—Boston Gas to BBPC 797549 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5029.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1208-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092518 Negotiated Rates—Wells Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-08 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5032.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1209-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092518 Negotiated Rates—Wells Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-09 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5033.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1210-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092518 Negotiated Rates—Wells Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-10 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5034.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1211-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092518 Negotiated Rates—Wells Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-11 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5035.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1212-000.

    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Shell Negotiated Rate—October 2018 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5036.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1213-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092518 Negotiated Rates—Wells Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-12 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5038.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1214-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 092518 Negotiated Rates—Wells Fargo Commodities, LLC R-7810-13 to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5039.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1215-000.

    Applicants: Fayetteville Express Pipeline LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Service Agreement on 9-25-18 to be effective 9/28/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5054.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1216-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—Eco-Energy 8953069 eff 10-1-18 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5055.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1217-000.

    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: TCO WBX NR and NC Agreements to be effective 10/25/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5118.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1218-000.

    Applicants: Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP.

    Description: eTariff filing per 1430: DECP—Request for Waiver of Requirement to File Form No. 501-G.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5121.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/9/18.

    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 26, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21412 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC18-162-000.

    Applicants: Mendota Hills, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Mendota Hills, LLC.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5133.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC18-163-000.

    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Citizens Sycamore-Penasquitos Transmission.

    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of San Diego Gas & Electric Company, et. al.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5034.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1883-001.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2018-09-26_SA 3132 Compliance Filing for METC-Wolverine T-T to be effective 6/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1974-001.

    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Notification of Effective Date to be effective 9/17/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5086.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2013-000.

    Applicants: Terra-Gen Dixie Valley, LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5096.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2474-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Attachment V GIA Pro Forma Clean-Up Filing to be effective 5/15/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5120.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2475-000.

    Applicants: Imperial Valley Solar 3, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Imperial Valley Solar 3, LLC Co-Tenancy and Shared Use Agreement to be effective 9/26/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5122.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2476-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Historical Cleanup Filing, MISO-PJM JOA, Section 9.4 to be effective 1/1/2014.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5098.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2477-000.

    Applicants: DXT Commodities North America LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market Based Rate to be effective 11/25/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5097.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2478-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.

    Description: Notice of cancellation of Interconnection Agreement (No. 102-SPS) of Southwestern Public Service Company.

    Filed Date: 9/25/18.

    Accession Number: 20180925-5138.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/16/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2479-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Third Revised ISA, SA No. 2962; Queue No. Z2-083 to be effective 8/28/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5039.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2480-000.

    Applicants: Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Termination of Agreements to be effective 6/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2481-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: PSCo-WAPA-Intercon-TSA-Agrmt-376-0.1.0 to be effective 10/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5095.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2482-000.

    Applicants: Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Rate Schedules to be effective 9/27/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5113.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES18-62-000.

    Applicants: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: Application under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Authorization to Issue Securities of Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company.

    Filed Date: 9/26/18.

    Accession Number: 20180926-5088.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21411 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 11834-068] Notice of Application for Amendment of License, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests; Brookfield White Pine Hydro, LLC

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Proceeding: Application for amendment of license.

    b. Project No.: 11834-068.

    c. Date Filed: August 28, 2018.

    d. Licensee: Brookfield White Pine Hydro, LLC.

    e. Name of Project: Upper and Middle Dams Storage Project.

    f. Location: The project is located on the Rapid River in Oxford and Franklin counties, Maine.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a—825r.

    h. Licensee Contact: Ms. Kelly Maloney, Brookfield Renewable, 150 Main Street, Lewiston, ME, (207) 233-1995, [email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Ms. Rebecca Martin, (202) 502-6012, [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing comments, interventions, and protests is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests and comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-11834-068.

    k. Description of Project Facilities: The project includes two developments: Upper Dam, which impounds Mooselookmeguntic Lake, and Middle Dam, which impounds Richardson Lake. The two dams operate as a single water storage project to regulate flows to the Androscoggin River for downstream hydroelectric generation, reduction of flood flows, and other beneficial uses. The proposed work would only occur at Middle Dam. Project works at the Middle Dam Development consist of the 244-foot-long Middle Dam equipped with a gatehouse containing: (a) Three 15-foot-wide by 12-foot-deep sluice gates: (b) five 6-foot-wide by 14.7-foot-deep gates; (c) six 7-foot-wide 14.7-foot-deep shoal gates; and (d) six 9-foot-wide by 12.3-foot deep spillway gates; a 560-foot-long earthen dike extending north of the gatehouse; a 200-foot-long earthen dike extending south of the gatehouse; the 7,470 acre reservoir; the 180-foot-long earthen dike (Black Cat Dike) located 2,000 feet to the southeast of Middle Dam; and appurtenant facilities.

    l. Description of Request: The licensee has filed a copy of its application with the Maine Land Use Planning Commission and the US Army Corps of Engineers for its proposed replacement of the spillway at the Middle Dam Development. Replacement of the Middle Dam Development spillway is being required under Part 12 of the Commission's regulations for safety of water power projects and project works. The proposal involves a multi-year, phased approach beginning with the installation of a bypass gate to pass all river flow during the removal of the existing dam and installation of the new dam. Black Cat Dike embankment would also be modified to meet Commission requirements. The proposed measures would not alter the basic footprint of the existing dam or involve substantial modification of the licensed operation of the project. Work is proposed to begin in May 2019 and be completed by December 15, 2023.

    m. This filing may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. 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, call 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction in the Commission's Public Reference Room located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371.

    n. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    o. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .212 and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    p. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to the surrender application that is the subject of this notice. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    q. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described proceeding. If any agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21414 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION Sunshine Act Meeting: Farm Credit Administration Board AGENCY:

    Farm Credit Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice, regular meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act, of the regular meeting of the Farm Credit Administration Board (Board).

    DATES:

    The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on October 11, 2018, from 9:00 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its business.

    ADDRESSES:

    Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090. Submit attendance requests via email to [email protected] See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further information about attendance requests.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dale Aultman, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Parts of this meeting of the Board will be open to the public (limited space available) and parts will be closed to the public. Please send an email to [email protected] at least 24 hours before the meeting. In your email include: Name, postal address, entity you are representing (if applicable), and telephone number. You will receive an email confirmation from us. Please be prepared to show a photo identification when you arrive. If you need assistance for accessibility reasons, or if you have any questions, contact Dale Aultman, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board, at (703) 883-4009. The matters to be considered at the meeting are:

    Open Session A. Approval of Minutes • September 13, 2018 B. New Business • AgFirst Farm Credit Bank Rural Housing Mortgage-backed Securities Program Closed Session *

    * Session Closed—Exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(8) and (9).

    • Office of Secondary Market Oversight Periodic Report Dated: September 28, 2018. Dale Aultman, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21580 Filed 9-28-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreements to the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by mail, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of agreements are available through the Commission's website (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202) 523-5793 or [email protected]

    Agreement No.: 201208-002.

    Agreement Name: Amended and Restated Marine Terminal Services Agreement Port of Houston Authority and NYK Line (North America) Inc.

    Parties: Nippon Yusen Kaisha; Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd.; and Port of Houston Authority.

    Filing Party: Chasless Yancy, Port of Houston Authority.

    Synopsis: The amendment assigns the MTSA such that ONE will assume all of NYK's rights, title, obligations, and liabilities under the MTSA, effective as of the date of the transfer of such entities' container shipping divisions to ONE.

    Proposed Effective Date: 9/20/2018.

    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/16293.

    Agreement No.: 011730-008.

    Agreement Name: GWF/Dole Space Charter and Sailing Agreement.

    Parties: Dole Ocean Cargo Express, LLC; Great White Fleet Corp.; and Great White Fleet Liner Services, Ltd.

    Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen O'Connor.

    Synopsis: The amendment removes Dole Ocean Cargo Express, Inc. as a party to the Agreement and replaces it with Dole Ocean Cargo Express, LLC.

    Proposed Effective Date: 11/10/2018.

    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/698.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Rachel Dickon, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21407 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 29, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. USB Bancorp Inc., Danbury, Connecticut; to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Union Savings Bank, Danbury, Connecticut.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 27, 2018. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21419 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The FTC intends to ask the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) to extend for an additional three years the current Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) clearance for information collection requirements contained in the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act Rule (“COPPA Rule” or “Rule”), which will expire on January 31, 2019.

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper, by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write “COPPA Rule: Paperwork Comment, FTC File No. P155408” on your comment, and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/coppapra, by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be addressed to Peder Magee, Attorney, (202) 326-3538, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The COPPA Rule, 16 CFR part 312, requires commercial websites to provide notice and obtain parents' consent before collecting, using, and/or disclosing personal information from children under age 13, with limited exceptions. The COPPA Rule contains certain statutorily required notice, consent, and other requirements that apply to operators of any commercial website or online service directed to children, and operators of any commercial website or online service with actual knowledge of collecting personal information from children. Covered operators must: provide online notice and direct notice to parents of how they collect, use, and disclose children's personal information; obtain the prior consent of the child's parent in order to engage in such collection, use, and disclosure, with limited exceptions; provide reasonable means for the parent to obtain access to the information and to direct its deletion; and, establish procedures that protect the confidentiality, security, and integrity of personal information collected from children.

    Burden Statement 1. Estimated Annual Hours Burden: 17,500 Hours (a) New Entrant Web Operators' Disclosure Burden

    Based on public comments received by the Commission during its 2013 COPPA Rule amendments rulemaking,1 FTC staff estimates that the Rule affects approximately 280 new operators per year.2 Staff maintains its longstanding estimate that new operators of websites and online services will require, on average, approximately 60 hours crafting a privacy policy, designing mechanisms to provide the required online privacy notice and, where applicable, the direct notice to parents.3 Applied to the estimated number of new operators per year, this yields a cumulative yearly total of 16,800 hours (280 new operators x 60 hours each).

    1 78 FR 3971 at 4005 (Jan. 17, 2013).

    2 This consists of certain traditional website operators, mobile app developers, plug-in developers, and advertising networks.

    3See, e.g., 78 FR at 4006; 76 FR 31334 (May 31, 2011); 73 FR 35689 (June 24, 2008); 70 FR 21107 (Apr. 22, 2005); 80 FR 57818 (Sept. 25, 2015); 80 FR 76491 (Dec. 9, 2015).

    (b) Safe Harbor Applicant Reporting Requirements

    Operators can comply with the COPPA Rule by meeting the terms of industry self-regulatory guidelines that the Commission approves after notice and comment.4 While the submission of industry self-regulatory guidelines to the agency is voluntary, the COPPA Rule sets out the criteria for approval of guidelines and the materials that must be submitted as part of a safe harbor application. Staff estimates that it would require, on average, 265 hours per new safe harbor program applicant to prepare and submit its safe harbor proposal in accordance with Section 312.11(c) of the Rule.5 In the past, industry sources have confirmed that this estimate is reasonable. Given that several safe harbor programs are already available to website operators, FTC staff believes that it is unlikely that more than one additional safe harbor applicant will submit a request within the next three years of PRA clearance sought. Thus, annualized burden attributable to this requirement would be approximately 88 hours per year (265 hours ÷ 3 years) or, roughly, 100 hours, for the estimated one additional safe harbor applicant.

    4 See Section 312.11(c). Approved self-regulatory guidelines can be found on the FTC's website at http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/privacyinitiatives/childrens_shp.html.

    5 Staff believes that most of the records submitted with a safe harbor request would be those that these entities have kept in the ordinary course of business. Under 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2), OMB excludes from the definition of PRA burden the time and financial resources needed to comply with agency-imposed recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting requirements that customarily would be undertaken independently in the normal course of business.

    (c) Annual Audit and Report for Safe Harbor Programs

    The COPPA Rule requires safe harbor programs to audit their members at least annually and to submit annual reports to the Commission on the aggregate results of these member audits. The burden for conducting member audits and preparing these reports likely will vary for each safe harbor program depending on the number of members. Commission staff estimates that conducting audits and preparing reports will require approximately 100 hours per program per year. Aggregated for one new safe harbor (100 hours) and seven existing (700 hours) safe harbor programs, this amounts to an estimated cumulative reporting burden of 800 hours per year.

    (d) Safe Harbor Program Recordkeeping Requirements

    FTC staff believes that most of the records listed in the COPPA Rule's safe harbor recordkeeping provisions consist of documentation that such parties have kept in the ordinary course of business irrespective of the COPPA Rule. As noted above, OMB excludes from the definition of PRA burden, among other things, recordkeeping requirements that customarily would be undertaken independently in the normal course of business. In staff's view, any incremental burden, such as that for maintaining the results of independent assessments under section 312.11(d), would be marginal.

    2. Estimated Annual Labor Costs: $5,768,900 (a) New Entrant Web Operators' Disclosure Burden

    Consistent with its past estimates and based on its 2013 rulemaking record, FTC staff assumes that the time spent on compliance for new operators covered by the COPPA Rule would be apportioned five to one between legal (outside counsel lawyers or similar professionals) and technical (e.g., computer programmers, software developers, and information security analysts) personnel. Staff therefore estimates that outside counsel costs will account for 14,000 of the estimated 16,800 hours required as estimated in 1(a) above. Regarding outside counsel costs, FTC staff believes it reasonable to assume that the workload among law firm partners and associates for COPPA compliance questions would be distributed among attorneys at varying levels of seniority, and be weighted most heavily to junior attorneys. Assuming two-thirds of such work is done by junior associates at a rate of approximately $300 per hour, and one-third by senior partners at approximately $600 per hour, the weighted average of outside counsel costs would be about $400 per hour.6 Computer programmers responsible for posting privacy policies and implementing direct notices and parental consent mechanisms would account for the remaining 2,800 hours. FTC staff estimates an hourly wage of $44 for technical assistance, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics (“BLS”) data.7 Accordingly, associated annual labor costs would be $5,723,200 [(14,000 hours × $400/hour) + (2,800 hours × $44/hour)] for the estimated 280 new operators.

    6 These estimates are drawn from the “Laffey Matrix.” The Laffey Matrix is a fee schedule used by many United States courts for determining the reasonable hourly rates in the District of Columbia for attorneys' fee awards under federal fee-shifting statutes. It is used here as a proxy for market rates for litigation counsel in the Washington, DC area. For 2018, rates in table range from $302 per hour for most junior associates to $602 per hour for most senior partners. See Laffey Matrix, Civil Division of the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, United States Attorney's Office, District of Columbia, Laffey Matrix B 2015-2018, available at https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/file/796471/download.

    7 The estimated mean hourly wages for technical labor support ($44) is based on an average of the salaries for computer programmers, software developers, information security analysts, and web developers as reported by the Bureau of Labor statistics. See Occupational Employment and Wages—May 2017, Table 1 (National employment and wage data from the Occupational Employment Statistics survey by occupation, May 2017), available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.nr0.htm (hereinafter, “BLS Table 1”).

    (b) Safe Harbor Applicant Reporting Requirements

    Previously, industry sources have advised that all of the labor to comply with new safe harbor applicant requirements would be attributable to the efforts of in-house lawyers. To determine in-house legal costs, FTC staff applied an approximate average between the BLS reported mean hourly wage for lawyers ($68.22),8 and a rough approximation of in-house hourly attorney rates ($300) that staff believes more generally reflects the costs associated with Commission information collection activities, which yields an approximate hourly rate of $185. Accordingly, applying the estimated time for these tasks (100 hours) for the one new safe harbor applicant estimated in 1(b) above to the assumed hourly wage for in-house counsel ($185) yields $18,500 in labor costs per year.

    8See BLS Table 1 (attorneys).

    (c) Annual Audit and Report for Safe Harbor Programs

    Commission staff assumes that compliance officers, at a labor rate of $34, will prepare annual reports.9 Accordingly, applied to the 800 hours estimated per year in 1(c) above for all safe harbor programs, this amounts to $27,200 in aggregate yearly labor costs.

    9 See BLS Table 1 (compliance officers, $32.69).

    (d) Safe Harbor Program Recordkeeping Requirements

    For the reasons stated in 1(d) above, associated labor costs, for PRA purposes, would be marginal.

    3. Estimated Annual Non-Labor Costs: $0

    Because websites will already be equipped with the computer equipment and software necessary to comply with the Rule's notice requirements, the predominant costs incurred by the websites are the aforementioned estimated labor costs. Similarly, industry members should already have in place the means to retain and store the records that must be kept under the Rule's safe harbor recordkeeping provisions, because they are likely to have been keeping these records independent of the Rule. Capital and start-up costs associated with the Rule are minimal.

    Request for Comments

    Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, federal agencies must obtain approval from OMB for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” means agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. 44 U.S.C. 3502(3), 5 CFR 1320.3(c). As required by section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC is providing this opportunity for public comment before requesting that OMB extend the existing PRA clearance for the COPPA Rule (OMB Control Number 3084-0117).

    Pursuant to Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC invites comments on: (1) Whether the collection of information requirements are necessary, including whether the information will be practically useful; (2) the accuracy of our burden estimates, including whether the methodology and assumptions used are valid; (3) how to improve the quality, utility, and clarity of the disclosure requirements; and (4) how to minimize the burden of providing the required information to consumers.

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the FTC to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before December 3, 2018. Write “COPPA Rule: Paperwork Comment, FTC File No. P155408” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public Commission website, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of discretion, the Commission tries to remove individuals' home contact information from comments before placing them on the Commission website.

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online, or to send them to the Commission by courier or overnight service. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/coppapra, by following the instructions on the web-based form. When this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that website.

    If you file your comment on paper, write “COPPA Rule: Paperwork Comment, FTC File No. P155408” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail it to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

    Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov/, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your comment should not include any sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

    Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the public FTC website—as legally required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from the FTC website, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

    The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before December 3, 2018. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.

    Heather Hippsley, Deputy General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21377 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-PBS-2018-05; Docket No. 2018-0002; Sequence No. 17] Redesignation of Federal Buildings AGENCY:

    Public Buildings Service (PBS), General Services Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of a bulletin.

    SUMMARY:

    The attached Federal Management Regulation bulletin announces the redesignation of two Federal buildings.

    DATES:

    This bulletin is applicable October 2, 2018. However, the building redesignations announced by this bulletin will remain in effect until canceled or superseded.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    General Services Administration, Public Buildings Service, Attn: Ms. Joanna Rosato, Regional Commissioner, 100 S Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19016, email [email protected], or telephone 215-446-4640.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This bulletin announces the redesignation of two Federal buildings. Public Law 107-217, 116 STAT. 1143, dated August 21, 2002, permits the redesignation of the “Computer Center Building,” and the “Utility Building,” as the “Perimeter East Building,” and the “Perimeter East Utility Building,” respectively.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Emily Murphy, Administrator of General Services. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION REDESIGNATION OF FEDERAL BUILDING PBS-2018-05 TO: Heads of Federal Agencies SUBJECT: Redesignation of Federal Buildings 1. What is the purpose of this bulletin? This bulletin announces the redesignation of two Federal buildings. 2. When does this bulletin expire? The building redesignations announced by this bulletin will remain in effect until canceled or superseded. 3. Redesignation. The former and new names of the redesignated buildings are as follows: Former name New name Computer Center Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Woodlawn, MD 21235 Perimeter East Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Woodlawn, MD 21235. Former name New name Utility Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Woodlawn, MD 21235 Perimeter East Utility Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Woodlawn, MD 21235. 4. Who should we contact for further information regarding redesignation of these Federal buildings? U.S. General Services Administration, Public Buildings Service, Attn: Ms. Joanna Rosato, Regional Commissioner, 100 S. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA, 19016, email [email protected], or telephone 215-446-4640.

    Dated: September 26, 2018.

    Emily Murphy, Administrator of General Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21360 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-A6-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [Document Identifier: OS-0990-0460] Agency Information Collection Request. 60-Day Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments on the ICR must be received on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments to [email protected] or by calling (202) 795-7714.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the document identifier 0990-0460-60D and project title for reference, to [email protected], or call the Reports Clearance Officer, (202) 795-7714.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    Title of the Collection: Office of Adolescent Health Pregnancy Assistance Fund (PAF) Performance Data Collection, FY2018-FY2020.

    Type of Collection: (Revision).

    OMB No. 0990-0460—Office of Adolescent Health.

    Abstract: The Office of Adolescent Health seeks a revision of the Pregnancy Assistance Fund (PAF) performance measures data collection. A new cohort of 23 PAF grantees was funded in 2018. PAF provides funding to States and Tribes to provide expectant and parenting teens, women, fathers and their families with a seamless network of supportive services to help them complete high school or postsecondary degrees; and to help states improve services to expectant females who experience intimate partner violence or stalking, Additional measures have been proposed for addition to the existing menu of approved measures. A 3 year clearance period is requested. The respondents would be the 23 state and tribal entities receiving PAF awards in 2018. Data would be collected annually.

    Annualized Burden Hour Table Forms
  • (if necessary)
  • Respondents
  • (if necessary)
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondents
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • PAF Performance Measures Form All PAF Grant Recipients 23 1 29 667 Services for PAF grantees funding State Attorney General Offices PAF Grantees funding State Attorney General Offices 2 1 2 4 Total 1 671
    Terry Clark, Asst. Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21403 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4168-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [Document Identifier: OS-0990—new] Agency Information Collection Request; 60-Day Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments on the ICR must be received on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments to [email protected] or by calling (202) 795-7714.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the document identifier 0990-New-60D and project title for reference, to [email protected], or call the Reports Clearance Officer, (202) 795-7714.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    Title of the Collection: Cohort 3 Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) Program Performance Measures.

    Type of Collection: New.

    OMB No. 0990-NEW—Office of Adolescent Health, OS.

    Abstract: The Office of Adolescent Health Requests a new clearance for the collection of performance measures from the cohort 3 Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) grant recipients, anticipated to be awarded in September 2018. OAH released a funding announcement to support Phase 1 of a third cohort of TPP grantees in the spring of 2018, subject to the availability of funding, with awards expected to be made in September 2018. Phase 1 cohort 3 TPP grants shall be issued in for an anticipated 2 year period of performance. A subset of successful Phase 1 grantees will be selected for Phase 2 grants. A 3 year clearance is requested for this request. TPP phase 1 grant recipients will be expected to report data twice each year.

    Annualized Burden Hour Table Forms
  • (if necessary)
  • Respondents
  • (if necessary)
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondents
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • TPP Grantees, Performance Measures Form Grant Recipients 60 2 7 840 TPP Participants Pre/Post Test Compilation Grant Recipients 60 2 3 360 TPP Participants Pre/Post Test Participants in TPP-grant funded projects 45,000 2 5/60 7,500 Total 2 8,700
    Terry Clark, Office of the Secretary, Asst. Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Office.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21402 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4168-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council.

    Date: October 30, 2018.

    Open: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To discuss program policies and issues.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Building 35A Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 12:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Building 35A Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Laura K. Moen, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Research Activities National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7100, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0260, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: www.nhlbi.nih.gov/meetings/nhlbac/index.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 26, 2018. Ronald J. Livingston, Jr., Program Analyst Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21371 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Charter Renewal

    In accordance with Title 41 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Section 102-3.65(a), notice is hereby given that the Charter for the National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates was renewed for an additional two-year period on August 17, 2018.

    It is determined that the National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health by law, and that these duties can best be performed through the advice and counsel of this group.

    Inquiries may be directed to Claire Harris, Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 1000, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (Mail Stop Code 4875), [email protected] or Telephone (301) 496-2123.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21372 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Current List of HHS-Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies AGENCY:

    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITF) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines).

    A notice listing all currently HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs is published in the Federal Register during the first week of each month. If any laboratory or IITF certification is suspended or revoked, the laboratory or IITF will be omitted from subsequent lists until such time as it is restored to full certification under the Mandatory Guidelines.

    If any laboratory or IITF has withdrawn from the HHS National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) during the past month, it will be listed at the end and will be omitted from the monthly listing thereafter.

    This notice is also available on the internet at http://www.samhsa.gov/workplace.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charles LoDico, Division of Workplace Programs, SAMHSA/CSAP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02C, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 240-276-2600 (voice).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITF) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines). The Mandatory Guidelines were first published in the Federal Register on April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and subsequently revised in the Federal Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908); September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118); April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644); November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858); December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75122); April 30, 2010 (75 FR 22809); and on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920).

    The Mandatory Guidelines were initially developed in accordance with Executive Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Law 100-71. The “Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs,” as amended in the revisions listed above, requires strict standards that laboratories and IITFs must meet in order to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens for federal agencies.

    To become certified, an applicant laboratory or IITF must undergo three rounds of performance testing plus an on-site inspection. To maintain that certification, a laboratory or IITF must participate in a quarterly performance testing program plus undergo periodic, on-site inspections.

    Laboratories and IITFs in the applicant stage of certification are not to be considered as meeting the minimum requirements described in the HHS Mandatory Guidelines. A HHS-certified laboratory or IITF must have its letter of certification from HHS/SAMHSA (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests that it has met minimum standards.

    In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines dated January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920), the following HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens:

    HHS-Certified Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Dynacare, 6628 50th Street NW, Edmonton, AB Canada T6B 2N7, 780-784-1190 (Formerly: Gamma-Dynacare Medical Laboratories) HHS-Certified Laboratories ACM Medical Laboratory, Inc., 160 Elmgrove Park, Rochester, NY 14624, 844-486-9226 Alere Toxicology Services, 1111 Newton St., Gretna, LA 70053, 504-361-8989/800-433-3823 (Formerly: Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., Laboratory Specialists, Inc.) Alere Toxicology Services, 450 Southlake Blvd., Richmond, VA 23236, 804-378-9130 (Formerly: Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc.; Kroll Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc.) Baptist Medical Center-Toxicology Laboratory, 11401 I-30, Little Rock, AR 72209-7056, 501-202-2783 (Formerly: Forensic Toxicology Laboratory Baptist Medical Center) Clinical Reference Laboratory, Inc., 8433 Quivira Road, Lenexa, KS 66215-2802, 800-445-6917 Cordant Health Solutions, 2617 East L Street, Tacoma, WA 98421, 800-442-0438 (Formerly: STERLING Reference Laboratories) DrugScan, Inc., 200 Precision Road, Suite 200, Horsham, PA 19044, 800-235-4890 Dynacare*, 245 Pall Mall Street, London, ONT, Canada N6A 1P4, 519-679-1630 (Formerly: Gamma-Dynacare Medical Laboratories) ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., 5 Industrial Park Drive, Oxford, MS 38655, 662-236-2609 Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 7207 N Gessner Road, Houston, TX 77040, 713-856-8288/800-800-2387 Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 69 First Ave., Raritan, NJ 08869, 908-526-2400/800-437-4986 (Formerly: Roche Biomedical Laboratories, Inc.) Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 1904 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 919-572-6900/800-833-3984 (Formerly: LabCorp Occupational Testing Services, Inc., CompuChem Laboratories, Inc.; CompuChem Laboratories, Inc., A Subsidiary of Roche Biomedical Laboratory; Roche CompuChem Laboratories, Inc., A Member of the Roche Group) Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, 1120 Main Street, Southaven, MS 38671, 866-827-8042/800-233-6339 (Formerly: LabCorp Occupational Testing Services, Inc.; MedExpress/National Laboratory Center) LabOne, Inc. d/b/a Quest Diagnostics, 10101 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219, 913-888-3927/800-873-8845 (Formerly: Quest Diagnostics Incorporated; LabOne, Inc.; Center for Laboratory Services, a Division of LabOne, Inc.) MedTox Laboratories, Inc., 402 W. County Road D, St. Paul, MN 55112, 651-636-7466/800-832-3244 Legacy Laboratory Services—MetroLab, 1225 NE 2nd Ave., Portland, OR 97232, 503-413-5295/800-950-5295 Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Forensic Toxicology Laboratory, 1 Veterans Drive, Minneapolis, MN 55417, 612-725-2088, Testing for Veterans Affairs (VA) Employees Only National Toxicology Laboratories, Inc., 1100 California Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93304, 661-322-4250/800-350-3515 One Source Toxicology Laboratory, Inc., 1213 Genoa-Red Bluff, Pasadena, TX 77504, 888-747-3774 (Formerly: University of Texas Medical Branch, Clinical Chemistry Division; UTMB Pathology-Toxicology Laboratory) Pacific Toxicology Laboratories, 9348 DeSoto Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, 800-328-6942 (Formerly: Centinela Hospital Airport Toxicology Laboratory) Pathology Associates Medical Laboratories, 110 West Cliff Dr., Spokane, WA 99204, 509-755-8991/800-541-7891x7 Phamatech, Inc., 15175 Innovation Drive, San Diego, CA 92128, 888-635-5840 Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 1777 Montreal Circle, Tucker, GA 30084, 800-729-6432 (Formerly: SmithKline Beecham Clinical Laboratories; SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories) Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 400 Egypt Road, Norristown, PA 19403, 610-631-4600/877-642-2216 (Formerly: SmithKline Beecham Clinical Laboratories; SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories) Redwood Toxicology Laboratory, 3700 Westwind Blvd., Santa Rosa, CA 95403, 800-255-2159 U.S. Army Forensic Toxicology Drug Testing Laboratory, 2490 Wilson St., Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-5235, 301-677-7085, Testing for Department of Defense (DoD) Employees Only

    * The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) voted to end its Laboratory Accreditation Program for Substance Abuse (LAPSA) effective May 12, 1998. Laboratories certified through that program were accredited to conduct forensic urine drug testing as required by U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations. As of that date, the certification of those accredited Canadian laboratories will continue under DOT authority. The responsibility for conducting quarterly performance testing plus periodic on-site inspections of those LAPSA-accredited laboratories was transferred to the U.S. HHS, with the HHS' NLCP contractor continuing to have an active role in the performance testing and laboratory inspection processes. Other Canadian laboratories wishing to be considered for the NLCP may apply directly to the NLCP contractor just as U.S. laboratories do.

    Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to be qualified, HHS will recommend that DOT certify the laboratory (Federal Register, July 16, 1996) as meeting the minimum standards of the Mandatory Guidelines published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920). After receiving DOT certification, the laboratory will be included in the monthly list of HHS-certified laboratories and participate in the NLCP certification maintenance program.

    Charles P. LoDico, Chemist.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21345 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [USCG-2017-0894] RIN 1625-ZA37 Update to the 2016 National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Guidelines AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability of the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard announces the availability of the final 2016.1 National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) Guidelines. The Coast Guard publishes this notice on behalf of the Preparedness for Response Exercise Program Compliance, Coordination, and Consistency Committee (PREP 4C). The PREP 4C includes representatives from the Coast Guard under the Department of Homeland Security, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration under the Department of Transportation, and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement under the Department of the Interior.

    DATES:

    The 2016.1 PREP Guidelines are effective on October 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines, as well as documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type “USCG-2017-0894” and click “Search.” Then click the “Open Docket Folder.”

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information about the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines, call Mr. Jonathan Smith, Office of Marine Environmental Response Policy, Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-2675; Mr. Troy Swackhammer, Office of Emergency Management, Regulations Implementation Division, Environmental Protection Agency, telephone 202-564-1966; Mr. John Caplis, Oil Spill Preparedness Division, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, telephone 703-787-1364; and Mr. Eddie Murphy, Office of Pipeline Safety, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-4595.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abbreviations BSEE Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement CFR Code of Federal Regulations EPA Environmental Protection Agency FR Federal Register HSEEP Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program IMT Incident Management Team MSEL Master Scenario Event List PREP Preparedness for Response Exercise Program PREP 4C PREP Compliance, Coordination, and Consistency Committee QI Qualified Individual RAC Remote Assessment and Consultation SMFF Salvage and Marine Firefighting TTX Tabletop exercise II. Background

    On December 22, 2017, the Coast Guard, on behalf of the Preparedness for Response Exercise Program Compliance, Coordination, and Consistency Committee (PREP 4C), published for public comment a draft update to the 2016 PREP Guidelines in the Federal Register (82 FR 60693). We referred to the draft update as the “2016.1 PREP Guidelines.” On February 26, 2018, the Coast Guard published for public comment (83 FR 8290) an economic analysis of the potential deregulatory savings that may result from the draft update. During the 2 public comment periods, we received 11 comments. One commenter submitted an identical comment three times. Therefore, the docket reflects 13 submissions. All comments are posted on http://www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG-2017-0894. Below are our responses to the public comments and a discussion of the changes made as a result of the public comments.

    III. Summary of Comments and Changes

    Of the 11 comment submissions received over the 2 comment periods, 9 addressed the proposed reduction to the Remote Assessment and Consultation (RAC) drill frequency. Four of these submissions were generally unsupportive of the proposed reduction to the RAC drill frequency, while five were generally supportive. None of the comments regarding the frequency of RAC drills were submitted by plan holders. With the exception of one, all comments in support of reducing the frequency of RAC drills were from salvage providers. One salvage provider opposed reducing the frequency of RAC drills. The other commenters who opposed reducing the frequency of RAC drills were from individual citizens and citizens' advisory councils who felt that reducing RAC drill frequency from one drill per year to once every 3 years is inadequate for purposes of ensuring the salvage providers fully recognize the scope of area for which they are responsible to cover. Three comment submissions addressed concerns regarding the language for Incident Management Team (IMT) exercises for offshore facilities regulated by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE), which include (1) the members of an IMT which must be exercised, (2) the involvement of participating IMT members in the design phase of the exercise, (3) the exercising of source control positions, and (4) the requirement that IMT exercises must be a functional exercise rather than a tabletop exercise for offshore facilities as outlined in section 6.2 and appendix B of the PREP Guidelines. One comment submission addressed concerns over response timelines for facilities regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in remote locations.

    Coast Guard Response to Industry Comments

    One commenter noted the Coast Guard “committed waste by conducting a deregulatory savings analysis for guidelines that are voluntary to regulated industry and for which, the Coast Guard did not identify any costs or potential cost savings associated with the Federal Government.” The commenter also noted the annualized cost savings analysis to the maritime industry is a benefit to private industry that apparently outweighs the Coast Guard's own policy to ensure adequate spill response planning and preparedness. Finally, the commenter noted, “the potential costs and benefits were originally determined to be found `not significant.' ”

    Response: As mentioned above, the Coast Guard conducted a deregulatory savings analysis for the population affected by a reduction in RAC drills, which are plan holders that would be required to conduct RAC drills for vessels listed in their respective response plans. As stated in our deregulatory savings analysis, we did not identify any cost savings associated with the Federal Government. We disagree with the commenter that the “benefit to private industry apparently outweighs the Coast Guard's own policy to ensure adequate spill response planning and preparedness . . .” First and foremost, we do not believe plan holders' response preparedness will degrade by reducing RAC drills. Our intent in reducing the frequency of RAC drills is to establish adequate spill response planning and preparedness without imposing an undue burden on plan holders. Finally, we are unsure what the commenter is referring to when the commenter states, “the potential costs and benefits [. . .] were originally determined to be found not significant.” The Coast Guard did not make a prior statement regarding the significance or non-significance of the potential costs and benefits in either the deregulatory savings analysis or the notice of availability, in which we invited the public to comment on the deregulatory savings analysis.

    Reduction of RAC drill frequency: As mentioned above, 9 of the 11 comment submissions concerned the proposed Coast Guard change that reduced the RAC drill frequency from one annual RAC drill per vessel to one triennial RAC drill per plan holder, noting that a single plan holder may have responsibility over a fleet of vessels and not just one vessel. The supportive comments cited the financial and administrative burden of the current RAC drill frequency, and one commenter noted that the proposed reduction in frequency is more reasonable and would not degrade response preparedness. The opposing comments noted that the reduction in RAC drills would diminish vessel master or crew familiarity with Salvage and Marine Firefighting (SMFF) emergency protocols, and would degrade overall preparedness. Additionally, the unsupportive comments cited the importance of keeping RAC drills as unique, vessel-centric drills that emphasize interaction between vessel crew and salvage provider, versus plan holder-centric drills. Additionally, commenters that opposed the reduction in RAC drills were concerned that the proposed reduction in drill frequency would diminish the SMFF provider's ability to accurately assess a condition that may be compromising to the safety of a vessel and that, in turn, could impair the effectiveness of a response.

    Response: The purpose of a required RAC drill is to exercise the procedure for a RAC performed between the SMFF provider and the vessel owner or operator. We expect these drills to be more than just notifications and, instead, seek to encourage substantive interaction between the vessel master and crew and the SMFF provider. The Coast Guard believes the benefit of exercising one vessel in a plan will extend to all vessels in the plan.

    Randomized selection of a vessel within a fleet for RAC drill purposes: One commenter noted the need to add language specifying random selection of a vessel within a fleet for purposes of performing a RAC drill.

    Response: Under the final 2016.1 PREP Guidelines, the plan holder has discretion for vessel selection. Nevertheless, this suggestion has merit and we urge plan holders to conduct random selections when determining which vessel, within a fleet of vessels, performs a RAC drill. Moreover, the Coast Guard will consider adding a “random selection” requirement in future revisions to the PREP Guidelines.

    Recordkeeping for RAC drills: One commenter noted some confusing language in the guidelines regarding whether both the Qualified Individual (QI) and the vessel are required to retain records.

    Response: Coast Guard regulations require the vessel owner to maintain records for training and exercises. Pursuant to 33 CFR 155.1060(f), a vessel owner or operator must ensure that exercise records are maintained and available to the Coast Guard for 3 years following the completion of the exercise. Under existing PREP guidelines, the vessel owner or operator must maintain RAC exercise records for manned vessels in a minimum of two locations, on the vessel and with one of the following: The U.S. location of the QI, the vessel owner or operator, the IMT, or the SMFF provider. The Vessel Response Plan must state the location of the records. This requirement remains unchanged in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines. Currently, PREP guidelines require RAC exercise records for unmanned tank barges to be kept either on board the barge or with the Vessel Response Plan for the barge. This requirement remains unchanged in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines. However, the Coast Guard may consider changing the required location of RAC exercise records for both manned and unmanned vessels now that the requirement applies to plan holders, and may include a fleet of vessels covered by a plan. Until that time, we encourage plan holders to maintain RAC exercise records on board each vessel on the plan. This will assist the Coast Guard when it verifies compliance with exercise requirements during vessel inspections.

    Environmental Protection Agency-Regulated Facilities Comments

    Alternative timelines for extreme situations: One commenter suggested that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allow regional administrators to develop alternative timelines for “extreme situations” when it is unfeasible to secure oil spill recovery equipment on scene within response timelines specified in 40 CFR part 112 because of the geographic remoteness of some facilities.

    Response: The EPA's Facility Response Plan regulation in 40 CFR part 112, subpart D, does not include a provision to request alternate timeframes outlined in appendix E for responses to small, medium, and worst-case discharge planning levels. However, the EPA encourages plan holders to evaluate the specific response needs (both equipment and personnel considerations) for their facilities, which may include partnerships with companies operating in the same oil fields.

    Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement-Regulated Offshore Facilities Comments

    Participation of the Incident Commander during an IMT exercise: One commenter stated that the proposed change in section 6.2 of the guidelines, which involves including the “command and general staffs, at a minimum,” would require the participation by every member of the IMT in each IMT exercise. The commenter recommended changing the language to state that the “incident command, as well as the command and general staff, may be exercised with appropriate objectives during an IMT exercise.”

    Response: BSEE agrees with the commenter that not all members of the entire IMT must participate in each IMT exercise, but rather participation by the command and general staff in any particular IMT exercise should be driven by the objectives being tested. BSEE has adjusted the language to clarify this point in section 6.2 of the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines. The primary purpose for adjusting the language in section 6.2 is to clarify that the participating incident commander is considered part of the IMT that is being exercised and, as such, should not be given access to the script and Master Scenario Event List (MSEL) prior to the start of the exercise.

    Including source control positions as exercise participants: One commenter stated that some IMT exercises might have source control objectives that are minimal in nature, such as only activating a source control provider, and would not require further participation of source control positions. This commenter suggested clarifying the language to state that source control positions should participate in an IMT exercise “as appropriate.”

    Response: BSEE agrees that source control positions do not always need to be exercised for every scenario that has a source control component. The language in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines states that a source control branch should be exercised when source control objectives are a significant element of the scenario. BSEE believes the existing language leads to the same outcome that the commenter wants, and that the existing language provides greater clarity regarding the agency's intent regarding this matter. As such, the existing language will remain unchanged.

    Ensuring IMT exercise participants do not have prior knowledge of the exercise scenario: Three commenters commented on this issue. The first commenter stated that while there may be times when portions of the exercise specifics may have to be divulged to certain IMT members that will be playing in the exercise, those instances should be kept to a minimum. This commenter also noted that having advance knowledge of the scenario allows the players to develop tactics and strategies prior to the exercise. However, the commenter felt that developing solutions collaboratively between industry, government agencies, and other stakeholders during exercises provides a more valuable overall learning experience for participants.

    Response: BSEE agrees.

    The second commenter stated that the exercise scenario script is typically general in nature and does not greatly affect how the response is organized or conducted. The commenter also recommended amending language in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines to refer to the MSEL instead of the scenario script.

    Response: BSEE considers the MSEL to be a critical supporting document to the exercise scenario script, and agrees with the commenter that IMT members who participate in the exercise should not have prior access to or knowledge of the MSEL. BSEE has amended the language in section 6.2 of the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines to include a reference to the MSEL in addition to the scenario script.

    The third commenter agreed that preventing IMT participants from having prior access to the information on the exercise scenario results in a better test of preparedness. However, this commenter requested that BSEE clarify that these exercises test the overall preparedness of the company, rather than evaluate each IMT member's performance.

    Response: BSEE believes that IMT exercises should test both the overall preparedness of the company and the individual preparedness of each member of the IMT, as appropriate, based on the exercise objectives. The performance of IMT members during an exercise is an important indicator of the plan holder's overall preparedness to respond to an actual incident, and should be evaluated. BSEE does not agree with, and has not adopted, the change requested by the commenter.

    Exercising source control and subsea containment capabilities: One commenter stated that source control operations are the weak link in a major oil spill response and source control equipment should be exercised in the same way as any other spill response equipment, including offshore deployments.

    Response: While BSEE agrees that source control is a critical part of any response, BSEE disagrees that source control equipment should be exercised in the same manner as all other spill response equipment. While this comment is outside of the scope of the changes proposed in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines, this subject was addressed at length in the preamble of the Federal Register notice that published the final 2016 PREP Guidelines (81 FR 21362). As outlined in Notices to Lessees 2010-N10 and 2012-N06,1 30 CFR part 254 requires a plan holder to describe a Worst Case Discharge in its plan, and then exercise how it will respond to the discharge, including identifying any equipment necessary to contain and recover the discharge. BSEE interprets this regulatory language to be inclusive of any resources necessary to contain and secure the source of a potential or actual discharge, which could include the use of well control capabilities such as capping stacks, cap and flow equipment, subsea containment devices, and other supporting equipment. As the current regulations in 30 CFR part 254 do not establish a required interval for the deployment of this type of equipment, the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines cannot provide any additional guidance on a specific exercise frequency requirement at this time. In the absence of any defined scope and frequency interval in the regulations, BSEE will continue to conduct deployments of source control capabilities at the discretion of the BSEE Oil Spill Preparedness Division Chief, in consultation with the appropriate BSEE Regional Director, as needed in order to assess and verify the overall preparedness of a plan holder, or group of plan holders, to operate in an Outer Continental Shelf region. As the scope and cost of such deployment exercises can be quite large, BSEE does not intend to require plan holders or providers of source control, subsea containment, and supporting equipment to conduct deployment exercises at the same semi-annual or annual frequency as required for other spill response equipment. BSEE purposely added section 6.5 to the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines to provide specific interim guidance for exercising source control and subsea containment equipment. BSEE will work to clarify expectations and requirements in the regulations in a future rulemaking.

    1 Notices to Lessees can be found on BSEE's website at https://www.bsee.gov/guidance-and-regulations/guidance/notice-to-lessees.

    The Nature of IMT exercises for offshore facilities: One commenter stated that the title of section 6.2 of the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines should be changed from “Functional Exercise (FE): Incident Management Team Exercise—Offshore Facility” to “Tabletop Exercise (TTX): Incident Management Team Exercise—Offshore Facility” to better align with language in 30 CFR part 254.

    Response: While this comment is outside of the scope of the proposed changes made in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines, the BSEE feels it is important to provide clarification on this important issue. When the PREP 4C published the 2016 PREP Guidelines, it updated many terms and concepts to align with developments that have occurred in the National Response System since the previous version was published in 2002. This included adopting the term “Incident Management Team,” as opposed to “Spill Management Team,” as well as incorporating many elements of today's exercise typology and terminology as established by the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). As such, the 2016 PREP Guidelines changed “SMT Tabletop Exercises (TTX)” to “IMT Exercise.” This language was purposely adopted to allow each PREP agency the flexibility to determine the type and scope of the IMT exercise. As defined in HSEEP and the 2016 PREP Guidelines, a TTX is a type of discussion-based exercise intended to generate discussion of various issues regarding a hypothetical, simulated emergency. The 2016 PREP Guidelines also state that discussion-based exercises focus on strategic, policy-oriented issues, with facilitators or presenters usually leading the discussion to keep participants on track to meet exercise objectives. In addition, the 2016 PREP Guidelines state that functional exercises focus on exercising plans, policies, and procedures, and staff members are involved in management, direction, command, and control functions. In functional exercises, events are projected through an exercise scenario with event updates that drive activity at the management level, and are conducted in a realistic, real-time environment, even though the movement of personnel and equipment is usually simulated. The BSEE believes that functional exercises, as currently defined by the terminology under HSEEP and the 2016 PREP Guidelines, more closely capture the stated intent of 30 CFR 254.42(b)(1), which provides that “the exercise must test the spill management team's organization, communication and decision-making in managing a response.” Therefore, the BSEE will retain the “Functional Exercise (FE)” language in the existing title for section 6.2 of the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines. However, in a future regulatory update, the BSEE will amend the exercise terminology in 30 CFR 254.42(b)(1) to reflect that an annual IMT functional exercise is required to properly align the CFR terminology with today's HSEEP and the PREP guidance. For additional background information on the adoption of HSEEP exercise terminology for the 2016 PREP Guidelines, see 81 FR 21362.

    IV. Cost Savings Analysis

    Since our affected population and projected cost estimates have remained the same from when we published the potential deregulatory savings analysis in February 2018, we have retained the projected cost-saving estimates for this notice, which we present below. As stated in the aforementioned economic analysis, which is available in the public docket, we estimate the net cost savings to the U.S. maritime industry to be $1,084,671 annually ($1,177,975 for drills under prior PREP Guidelines—$93,304 for drills under new PREP Guidelines), undiscounted. We estimate the discounted net cost savings to the U.S. maritime industry over a 10-year period of analysis to be between $7.6 million and $9.3 million at 7- and 3-percent discount rates, respectively. The Coast Guard did not identify any costs or potential cost savings associated with the Federal government as a result of the changes in the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines.

    V. Public Availability of 2016.1 PREP Guidelines

    The PREP 4C has finalized the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines, which are now publicly available. The Coast Guard is releasing the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines on behalf of the PREP 4C.

    In addition to the docket, the 2016.1 PREP Guidelines are available at https://homeportr.uscg.mil/missions/incident-management-and-preparedness/contingency-exercises/port-level-exercises/port-level-exercises-general-information.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. K. M. Sligh, Acting Chief, Office of Marine Environmental Response Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21450 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0018] Agency Information Collection Activities: Ship's Store Declaration AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The information collection is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted no later than November 1, 2018 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, Telephone number (202) 325-0056 or via email [email protected] Please note that the contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. Individuals seeking information about other CBP programs should contact the CBP National Customer Service Center at 877-227-5511, (TTY) 1-800-877-8339, or CBP website at https:/www.cbp.gov/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (Volume 83 FR Page 26072) on June 5, 2018, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (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) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Overview of This Information Collection:

    Title: Ship's Stores Declaration.

    OMB Number: 1651-0018.

    Form Number: CBP Form 1303.

    Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours. There is no change to the information collected.

    Type of Review: Extension (without change).

    Affected Public: Businesses.

    Abstract: CBP Form 1303, Ship's Stores Declaration, is used by the carriers to declare articles to be retained on board the vessel, such as sea stores, ship's stores (e.g. alcohol and tobacco products), controlled narcotic drugs or bunker fuel in a format that can be readily audited and checked by CBP. This form collects information about the ship, the ports of arrival and departure, and the articles on the ship. CBP Form 1303 form is provided for by 19 CFR 4.7, 4.7a, 4.81, 4.85 and 4.87 and is accessible at: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms?title=1303&=Apply.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 8,000.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 13.

    Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 104,000.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 26,000.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Seth D. Renkema, Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21394 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4363-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Indiana; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Indiana (FEMA-4363-DR), dated May 4, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The change occurred on September 7, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Steven W. Johnson, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    This action terminates the appointment of David G. Samaniego as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21392 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4394-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] South Carolina; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of South Carolina (FEMA-4394-DR), dated September 16, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued September 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated September 16, 2018, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of South Carolina resulting from Hurricane Florence beginning on September 8, 2018, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the State of South Carolina.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide assistance for emergency protective measures (Category B) under the Public Assistance program in the designated areas, Hazard Mitigation throughout the State, and any other forms of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem appropriate subject to completion of Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDAs). Direct Federal assistance is authorized.

    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Elizabeth Turner, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the State of South Carolina have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester, Georgetown, Horry, Marion, Orangeburg, and Williamsburg Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    All areas within the State of South Carolina are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21393 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID: FEMA-2018-0022; OMB No. 1660-0059] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; National Flood Insurance Program Call Center and Agent Referral Enrollment Form AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission will describe the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection instruments FEMA will use.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection should be made to Director, Information Management Division, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, email address [email protected] or Susan Bernstein, Insurance Specialist, FIMA, Marketing and Outreach Branch, (202) 701-3595.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection previously published in the Federal Register on June 15, 2018 at 83 FR 28007 with a 60-day public comment period. FEMA received one public comment that did not require any adjudication related to the information collection. Under Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Section 2(a)(6), 42 U.S.C. 4002(a)(6), Congress finds it is in the public interest for persons already living in flood prone areas to have an opportunity to purchase flood insurance and access to more adequate limits of coverage to be indemnified for their losses in the event of future flood disasters. To this end, FEMA established and carries out a National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which enables interested persons to purchase insurance against loss resulting from physical damage to or loss of real or personal property arising from any flood occurring in the United States. 42 U.S.C. 4011. In carrying out the NFIP, FEMA operates a call center in conjunction with the FloodSmart website (www.FloodSmart.gov). Together these methods of marketing and outreach provide the mechanism for current and potential policyholders to learn more about floods and flood insurance, contact an agent, or assess their risk. The information collected from callers/visitors is used to fulfill requests for published materials, email alerts, policy rates, and agent contact information.

    Additionally, FEMA and the NFIP offer Agents.FloodSmart.gov as a resource for agents. Upon website registration, agents can enroll in the Agent Referral Program to receive free leads through the consumer site or the call center as outlined above. This information collection seeks approval to continue collecting name, address and telephone number information from: (1) Business and residential property owners and renters who voluntarily call to request flood insurance information and possibly an insurance agent referral and, (2) insurance agents interested in enrolling in the agent referral service.

    Collection of Information

    Title: National Flood Insurance Program Call Center and Agent Referral Enrollment Form.

    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection.

    OMB Number: 1660-0059.

    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 517-0-1, National Flood Insurance Program Agent Site Registration; FEMA Form 512-0-1, National Flood Insurance Program Agent Referral Questionnaire.

    Abstract: Consumer names, addresses, and telephone numbers collected through the Call Center or FloodSmart website will be used exclusively for providing information on flood insurance and/or facilitate the purchase of a flood insurance policy through referrals or direct transfers to insurance agents in the agent referral service. Agent names, addresses, telephone numbers, and business information is retained for dissemination to interested consumers who would like to talk to an agent about purchasing a flood insurance policy as part of the agent referral program.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households; Businesses or other for-profit.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 59,194.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 59,194.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,819 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $103,335.52.

    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: $0.

    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: $0.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $406,941.

    Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    William Holzerland, Director, Information Management Division, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21404 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4383-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Wisconsin; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Wisconsin (FEMA-4383-DR), dated August 10, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The change occurred on September 7, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Steven W. Johnson, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    This action terminates the appointment of David G. Samaniego as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21391 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4381-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Michigan; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Michigan (FEMA-4381-DR), dated August 2, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The change occurred on September 7, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Steven W. Johnson, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    This action terminates the appointment of David G. Samaniego as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21390 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4394-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] South Carolina; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of South Carolina (FEMA-4394-DR), dated September 16, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued September 21, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of South Carolina is hereby amended to include Individual Assistance for the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 16, 2018.

    Dillon and Marlboro Counties for Individual Assistance and emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    Horry and Marion Counties for Individual Assistance (already designated for emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance under the Public Assistance program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21388 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4388-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Montana; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Montana (FEMA-4388-DR), dated August 30, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued September 18, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Montana is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 30, 2018.

    Petroleum County for Public Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant. Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21389 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520; OMB Control Number 1029-0116] Agency Information Collection Activities: Revisions; Renewals; and Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Permit Rights AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing our intention to request renewed approval for the collection of information for persons seeking permit revisions, renewals, transfer, assignment, or sale of their permit rights for coal mining activities.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Attn: John Trelease, 1849 C Street NW; Mail Stop 4559, Washington, DC 20240. Comments may also be submitted electronically to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Trelease by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 208-2783.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the OSMRE; (2) is the estimate of burden accurate; (3) how might the OSMRE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) how might the OSMRE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    This notice provides the public with 60 days in which to comment on the following information collection activity:

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 774—Revisions; Renewals; and Transfer, Assignment, or Sale of Permit Rights.

    OMB Control Number: 1029-0116.

    Abstract: This Part implements the requirements in Sections 506 and 511 of 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. which provides that persons seeking permit revisions, renewals, transfer, assignment, or sale of their permit rights for coal mining activities submit relevant information to the regulatory authority to allow the regulatory authority to determine whether the applicant meets the requirements for the action anticipated.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Surface coal mining permit applicants and State regulatory authorities.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: Varies from 271 to 2,603 permit applicants; and 266 to 2,528 responses from State regulatory authorities, depending on the activity.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 4,311 responses from permit applicants and 4,229 responses from State regulatory authorities.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: Varies from 2 to 60 hours per response for permit applicants; and from 2 to 22.25 hours for State regulatory authorities, depending on the activity.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 302,815 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Once.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $1,059,644.

    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.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    John A. Trelease, Acting Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21382 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520; OMB Control Number 1029-0080] Agency Information Collection Activities: Permanent Regulatory Program Requirements—Standards for Certification of Blasters AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) are announcing our intention to request renewed approval for the collection of information used to identify and evaluate new blaster certification programs. This information collection activity was previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and assigned control number 1029-0080.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments on this information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget's Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at [email protected]; or via facsimile to (202) 395-5806. Please provide a copy of your comments to John Trelease, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1849 C Street NW, Mail Stop 4559, Washington, DC 20240; or by email to [email protected] Please reference OMB Control Number 1029-0080 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Trelease by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 208-2783. You may also view the ICR at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provides the requested data in the desired format.

    A Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on July 12, 2018 (83 FR 32326). No comments were received.

    We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of OSMRE; (2) is the estimate of burden accurate; (3) how might OSMRE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) how might OSMRE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 850—Permanent Regulatory Program Requirements—Standards for Certification of Blasters.

    OMB Control Number: 1029-0080.

    Abstract: The information is used to identify and evaluate new blaster certification programs. Part 850 implements Section 719 of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). Section 719 requires the Secretary of the Interior to issue regulations which provide for each State regulatory authority to train, examine and certify persons for engaging in blasting or use of explosives in surface coal mining operations. Each State that wishes to certify blasters must submit a blasters certification program to OSMRE for approval.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State regulatory authorities and Indian Tribes.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 1 State or Tribe every three years.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1 every three years.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: 960 hours.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 320 hours per year.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Once.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $0.

    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.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    John A. Trelease, Acting Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21385 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520; OMB Control Number 1029-0049] Agency Information Collection Activities: Special Permanent Program Performance Standards—Operations in Alluvial Valley Floors AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing our intention to request renewed approval for the collection of information to protect alluvial valley floors from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations west of the 100th meridian. This information will be used by the regulatory authorities to make that determination.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Attn: John Trelease, 1849 C Street NW; Mail Stop 4559, Washington, DC 20240. Comments may also be submitted electronically to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Trelease by email at [email protected].gov, or by telephone at (202) 208-2783.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the OSMRE;(2) is the estimate of burden accurate; (3) how might the OSMRE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) how might the OSMRE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    This notice provides the public with 60 days in which to comment on the following information collection activity:

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 822—Special Permanent Program Performance Standards—Operations in Alluvial Valley Floors.

    OMB Control Number: 1029-0049.

    Abstract: This Part implements the requirements in Sections 510(b)(5) and 515(b)(10)(F) of the Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Act of 1977 (the Act) to protect alluvial valley floors from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations west of the 100th meridian. Part 822 requires the permittee to install, maintain, and operate a monitoring system in order to provide specific protection for alluvial valley floors. This information is necessary to determine whether the unique hydrologic conditions of alluvial valley floors are protected according to the Act.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Coal mine operators and State regulatory authorities.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 33 coal mining operators who operate on alluvial valley floors and approximately 4 State regulatory authorities.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 33 coal mining operators who operate on alluvial valley floors and 33 State regulatory authority responses.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: Varies from 3 to 90 hours per response from Coal mine operators, with an average of 80 hours; and an average of 10 hours for State regulatory authorities.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 2,970 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Annually.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $0.

    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.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    John A. Trelease, Acting Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21384 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520; OMB Control Number 1029-0113] Agency Information Collection Activities: General Reclamation Requirements AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing our intention to request renewed approval for the collection of information for land and water eligibility requirements, reclamation objectives and priorities and reclamation contractor responsibility.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Attn: John Trelease, 1849 C Street NW; Mail Stop 4559, Washington, DC 20240. Comments may also be submitted electronically to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Trelease by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 208-2783.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the OSMRE; (2) is the estimate of burden accurate; (3) how might the OSMRE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) how might the OSMRE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    This notice provides the public with 60 days in which to comment on the following information collection activity:

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 874—General Reclamation Requirements.

    OMB Control Number: 1029-0113.

    Abstract: Part 874 establishes land and water eligibility requirements, reclamation objectives and priorities and reclamation contractor responsibility. 30 CFR 874.17 requires consultation between the AML agency and the appropriate Title V regulatory authority on the likelihood of removing the coal under a Title V permit and concurrences between the AML agency and the appropriate Title V regulatory authority on the AML project boundary and the amount of coal that would be extracted under the AML reclamation project.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State regulatory authorities and Indian tribes.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 8 States and Tribes.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 8.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: 83 hours per response.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 664 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Once.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $0.

    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.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    John A. Trelease, Acting Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21383 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520; OMB Control Number 1029-0030] Agency Information Collection Activities: State Processes for Designating Areas Unsuitable for Surface Coal Mining Operations AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing our intention to request renewed approval for the collection of information which provides authority for citizens to petition States to designate lands unsuitable for surface coal mining operations, or to terminate such designation.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to: The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Attn: John Trelease, 1849 C Street NW; Mail Stop 4559, Washington, DC 20240. Comments may also be submitted electronically to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Trelease by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 208-2783.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the OSMRE;(2) is the estimate of burden accurate; (3) how might the OSMRE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) how might the OSMRE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    This notice provides the public with 60 days in which to comment on the following information collection activity:

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 764—State Processes for Designating Areas Unsuitable for Surface Coal Mining Operations.

    OMB Control Number: 1029-0030.

    Abstract: This part implements the requirement of section 522 of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA), 30 U.S.C 1201 et seq., which provides authority for citizens to petition States to designate lands unsuitable for surface coal mining operations, or to terminate such designation. The regulatory authority uses the information to identify, locate, compare and evaluate the area requested to be designated as unsuitable, or terminate the designation, for surface coal mining operations.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or groups that petition the States, and the State regulatory authorities that process the petitions.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 1 petitioner and 1 State regulatory authority.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 2.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: 600 hours per petition and 4,000 hours per regulatory authority.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 4,600 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Once.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $120.

    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.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    John A. Trelease, Acting Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21380 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement [S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 189S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 SX064A000 18XS501520; OMB Control Number 1029-0057] Agency Information Collection Activities: Reclamation on Private Lands AGENCY:

    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing our collection of information which authorizes Federal, State, and Tribal governments to reclaim private lands and allows for the establishment of procedures for the recovery of the cost of reclamation activities on privately owned lands.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written comments on this information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget's Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at [email protected]; or via facsimile to (202) 395-5806. Please provide a copy of your comments to John Trelease, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1849 C Street NW, Mail Stop 4559, Washington, DC 20240; or by email to [email protected] Please reference OMB Control Number 1029-0057 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Trelease by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 208-2783. You may also view the ICR at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provides the requested data in the desired format.

    A Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on July 12, 2018 (83 FR 32324). No comments were received.

    We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of OSMRE; (2) is the estimate of burden accurate; (3) how might OSMRE enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) how might OSMRE minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 882—Reclamation on Private Lands.

    OMB Control Number: 1029-0057.

    Abstract: Public Law 95-87 authorizes Federal, State, and Tribal governments to reclaim private lands and allows for the establishment of procedures for the recovery of the cost of reclamation activities on privately owned lands. These procedures are intended to ensure that governments have sufficient capability to file liens so that certain landowners will not receive a windfall from reclamation.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State governments and Indian Tribes.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 1 State or Tribe.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: 120 hours.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 120 hours.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Once.

    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $0.

    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.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    John A. Trelease, Acting Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21387 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-05-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731-TA-1189 (Review)] Large Power Transformers From Korea; Determination

    On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject five-year review, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on large power transformers from Korea would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.

    1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).

    Background

    The Commission, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), instituted this review on July 3, 2017 (82 FR 30896) and determined on October 6, 2017 that it would conduct a full review (82 FR 49229, October 24, 2017). Notice of the scheduling of the Commission's review and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on April 10, 2018 (83 FR 15398). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on July 26, 2018, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel.

    The Commission made this determination pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its determination in this review on September 26, 2018. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4826 (September 2018), entitled Large Power Transformers from Korea: Investigation No. 731-TA-1189 (Review).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: September 26, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2018-21398 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-1133] Certain Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Components Thereof; Institution of Investigation AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on August 30, 2018, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Autel Robotics USA LLC of Bothell, Washington. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain unmanned aerial vehicles and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,979,174 (“the '174 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 9,260,184 (“the '184 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 10,044,013 (“the '013 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute.

    The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

    ADDRESSES:

    The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Katherine Hiner, The Office of Docket Services, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-1802.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2018).

    Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on September 26, 2018, ordered that

    (1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-8 and 14-17 of the '174 patent; claims 1-5 and 11 of the '184 patent; and claims 1, 3-16, 18, and 21-24 of the '013 patent; and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;

    (2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language description of the accused products or category of accused products, which defines the scope of the investigation, is “drones, rotors, rotor assemblies, actuators, propulsion assemblies, batteries, battery components, battery assemblies, controllers, processors, processing components, modules, chips, and circuits used therein or therewith”;

    (3) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:

    (a) The complainant is:

    Autel Robotics USA LLC, 22522 29th Dr. SE, Suite 101, Bothell, WA 98021

    (b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:

    SZ DJI Technology Co. Ltd., 14th Floor, West Wing, Skyworth, Semiconductor Design Building, No. 18, Gaoxin South 4th Ave., Nanshan District, Shenzhen, China 518063 DJI Europe B.V., Bijdorp-Oost 6, 2992 LA Barendrecht, Netherlands DJI Technology Inc., 201 S Victory Blvd., Burbank, CA 91502 iFlight Technology Co. Ltd., Units 912-916, 9/F, Building 16W, No. 16 Science Park West Avenue, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong 999077 DJI Baiwang Technology Co. Ltd., Building 9, 7, 2, 1, Baiwang Creative Factory, No. 1051, Songbai Road, Xili, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, China 518105 DJI Research LLC, 435 Portage Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306 DJI Service LLC, 17301 Edwards Road, Cerritos, CA 90703 DJI Creative Studio LLC, 201 S. Victory Boulevard, Burbank, CA 91502

    (3) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.

    The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party in this investigation.

    Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.

    Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: September 26, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21362 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Space Enterprise Consortium

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 23, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), Space Enterprise Consortium (“SpEC”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities of the parties to the venture and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.

    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties to the venture are: Accion Systems, Inc., Boston, MA; Adcole Maryland Aerospace, LLC, Marlborough, MA; Advanced Space, LLC, Boulder, CO; AKELA, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA; Alpha Space Test & Research Alliance LLC, Houston, TX; AMERGINT Technologies, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; Applied Defense Solutions, Inc., Columba, MD; ASTRA, LLC, Boulder, CO; ATA Engineering, Inc., San Diego, CA; A-Tech Corporation, Albuquerque, NM; ATS-MER, LLC, Tucson, AZ; Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., Boulder, CO; Blue Canyon Technologies, Inc., Boulder, CO; Blue Residuum, LLC DBA Blue Residuum Space Alliances, Centreville, VA; Braxton Technologies, LLC, Colorado Springs, CO; Brilligent Solutions, Inc., Fairborn, OH; Charles River Analytics, Inc., Cambridge, MA; CMA Technologies, Inc., Orlando, FL; Cosmic Advanced Engineered Solutions, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; Decisive Analytics Corporation, Arlington, VA; Electric Drivetrain Technologies, LLC, Castle Valley, UT; ExoAnalytic Solutions, Inc., Mission Viejo, CA; General Atomics, San Diego, CA; Harris Corporation, Palm Bay, FL; Hughes Network Systems, LLC, Germantown, MD; IERUS Technology, Inc., Huntsville, AL; Innoflight, Inc., San Diego, CA; Intelligent Fusion Technology, Inc., Germantown, MD; Iris Technology Corporation, Irvine, CA; Kratos Technology and Training Solutions, Inc., San Diego, CA; L-3 Communication E.O.-IR, Inc., Santa Rosa, CA; Leidos, Inc., Reston, VA; Lockheed Martin Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA; Measurement Analysis Corporation, Torrance, CA; MEI Technologies, Inc., Houston, TX; Microwave Innovations, Inc., Furlong, PA; Millennium Space Systems, El Segundo, CA; MMA Design LLC, Boulder, CO; Modern Technology Solutions, Inc., Alexandria, VA; Moog Inc., Elma, NY; MTEQ (Manufacturing Techniques, Inc.), Lorton, VA; NanoRacks, LLC, Houston, TX; NDP, LLC, Boulder, CO; Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, Azusa, CA; NovaWurks, Inc., Los Alamitos, CA; Orbital Science Corporation, Dulles, VA; Parabilis Space Technologies, Inc., San Marcos, CA; Parson's Government Services, Inc., Pasadena, CA; Phoebus Optoelectronics LLC, Potsdam, NY; Princeton Satellite Systems, Inc., Plainsboro, NJ; Pumpkin, Inc., San Francisco, CA; Pyramid Imaging, Inc., Tampa, FL; Quantum Dimension, Inc., Huntington Beach, CA; Raytheon Company, Waltham, MA; Real Time Logic, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; Riverside Research, New York, NY; Rocket Communications, Inc., San Francisco, Ca; SciTec, Inc., Princeton, NJ; Sierra Nevada Corporation-Space Systems, Louisville, CO; Solers, Inc., Arlington, VA; Sonalyst, Inc., Waterford, CT; Southern Aerospace Company, LLC, Madison, AL; Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX; Space Information Laboratories, LLC, Santa Maria, CA; Space Micro, Inc., San Diego, CA; Space Systems Loral, LLC, Palo Alto, CA; SRI International, Menlo Park, CA; Stratolaunch Federal, Inc., Seattle, WA; Summit Technical Solutions, LLC, Colorado Springs, CO; Systems & Materials Research Corporation, Austin, TX; Systems Engineering Associates, Inc., Torrance, CA; The Boeing Company, Huntington Beach, CA; The Charles Stark Draper Lab, Inc., Cambridge, MA; The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems Inc., Irvine, CA; United Launch Alliance, LLC, Centennial, CO; Universities Space Research Association, Columbia, MD; Utah State University Research Foundation, DBA Space Dynamics Laboratory, North Logan, UT; Vector Launch, Inc., Tucson, AZ; Visionary Products, Inc., Draper, UT; VMware, Inc., Palo Alto, CA; ATA Aerospace, Albuquerque, NM; a.i. solutions, Inc., Lanham, MD; ACTA, LLC, Torrance, CA; Ampex Data Systems Corporation, Hayward, CA; Assurance Technology Corporation, Carlisle, MA; AT&T Government Solutions, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; ATLAS Space Operations, Inc., Traverse City, MI; BAE Systems Information & Electronic Systems Integration, Inc., San Diego, CA; Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., McLean, VA; Canyon Consulting, LLC, El Segundo, CA; Carahsoft Technology, Corp., Reston, VA; Centil, Broomfield, CO; Chandah Space Technologies, Houston, TX; Cimarron Software Services, Inc., Houston, TX; Colorado Engineering, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; Deloitte Consulting LLP, Manhattan Beach, CA; DSoft Technology Company, Colorado Springs, CO; Dynetics Technical Solutions, Inc., Huntsville, AL; Emergent Space Technologies, Inc., Laurel, MD; ENSCO, Inc., Falls Church, VA; Epoch Concepts, LLC, Highlands Ranch, CO; Eutelsat America Corp., Washington, DC; ExoTerra Resource, LLC, Littleton, CO; Falcon ExoDynamics, Inc., Redondo Beach, CA; Frontier Technology Inc., Beavercreek, OH; General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc., Scottsdale, AZ; Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, Palo Alto, CA; Infinity Systems Engineering, LLC, Colorado Springs, CO; Inmarsat Government, Inc., Reston, VA; Intelsat General Corp., McLean, VA; INVOCON, Inc., Conroe, TX; Ki Ho Military Acquisition Consulting, Inc. DBA KIHOMAC, Inc., Reston, VA; L-3 Communications Cincinnati Electronics Corporation, Mason, OH; L3 Technologies, Inc., Communication Systems-West, Salt Lake City, UT; L3 Telemetry & RF Products, San Diego, CA; Loft Orbital Solutions, Inc., San Francisco, CA; M42 Technologies, LLC, Seattle, WA; Made In Space, Inc., Jacksonville, FL; MDA Information Systems, LLC, Gaithersburg, MD; Microcosm, Inc., Torrance, CA; NextGen Federal Systems, LLC, Morgantown, WV; Numerica Corporation, Ft. Collins, CO; Oakman Aerospace, Inc., Littleton, CO; Omitron, Inc., Beltsville, MD; Oracle America, Inc., Reston, VA; Polaris Alpha, LLC, Colorado Springs, CO; QuesTek Innovations, LLC, Evanston, IL; Radiance Technologies, Inc., Huntsville, AL; Rampart Technologies Corporation, Littleton, CO; Research Innovations, Incorporated, Alexandria, VA; Rincon Research Corporation, Tucson, AZ; River Front Services, Inc., Chantilly, VA; RKF Engineering Solutions, LLC, Bethesda, MD; SaraniaSat, Inc., Los Angeles, CA; Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Reston, VA; SEAKR Engineering Inc., Centennial, CO; Silicon Space Technology dba VORAGO Technologies, Austin, TX; Space Vector Corporation, Chatsworth, CA; SysCom, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; The Genus Group, LLC, North Potomac, MC; Ultramet, Pacoima, CA; Ursa Major Technologies, Inc., Berthoud, CO; Vencore, Inc., Chantilly, VA; VIASAT, Inc., Carlsbad, CA; X-Band LLC, Cambridge, MA; Technology Advancement Group, Inc., Dulles, VA; MaXentric Technologies, LLC, Fort Lee, NJ; XL Scientific, LLC DBA Verus Research, Albuquerque, NM; The Design Knowledge Company, Fairborn, OH; Roccor, LLC, Longmont, CO; Matterwaves Antenna Technology Co., Torrance, CA; Stellar Exploration, Inc., San Luis Obispo, CA; Spectrum Laser & Technologies, Inc. DBA Spectrum Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; Zin Technologies, Inc., Middleburg Heights, OH; Trident Systems Incorporated, Fairfax, VA; L3 Technologies, Inc., Communication Systems-East Division, Camden, NJ; XIA LLC, Hayward, CA; IDEAS Engineering & Technology, LLC, Albuquerque, NM; Linear Space Technology LLC, Hamilton, NJ; Planet Labs, Inc., San Francisco, CA; Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA; Solidyn Solutions, LLC, Greenwood Village, CO; Sensing Strategies, Inc., Pennington, NJ; Vox Space, LLC, El Segundo, CA; Airbus Defense and Space, Inc., Herndon, VA; SES Government Solutions, Inc., Reston, VA; Altamira Corporation, McLean, VA; Blacknight Cybersecurity International, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; NXTRAC, Rolling Hills Estates, CA; Dynetics, Inc., Huntsville, AL; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Relativity Space, Inc., Inglewood, CA; Corvid Technologies, LLC, Mooresville, NC; Honeywell International Inc., Clearwater, FL; Yotta Navigation Corporation, Santa Clara, CA; Stotler Henke Associates, Inc., San Mateo, CA; Stellar Solutions, Inc., Palo Alto, CA; Bryce Space and Technology, LLC, Alexandria, VA; and Earth Resources Technology, Inc., Laurel, MD.

    The general area of SpEC's planned activity is (1) minimize barriers to entry businesses and non-traditional vendors to work with the U.S. Government and to identify and realize teaming opportunities among entities to promote integrated research and prototyping efficiencies, and (2) reducing the cost of prototype development.

    Suzanne Morris, Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics Unit, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21431 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Digital Manufacturing Design Innovation Institute

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 19, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), Digital Manufacturing Design Innovation Institute (“DMDII”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, The Coca-Cola Company, Atlanta, GA; Phynsa LLC, Cincinnati, OH; PUNDITAS LLC, Wakefield, MA; United Electric Corporation, Canonsburg, PA; Mira Labs, Inc., Los Angeles, CA; ClearObject, Inc., Fishers, IN; Aegis Industrial Software Corporation, Horsham, PA; CH Hanson LLC, Naperville, IL; Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP, Chicago, IL; ARC Precision, Isanti, MN; Authenticiti, Inc., San Francisco, CA; DiMonte Group, Warrenville, IL; Applied Automation Technologies, Inc., Rochester Hills, MI; Janiero Digital, Chicago, IL; Simio, Pittsburgh, PA; Aunalytics, South Bend, IN; American Gear Manufacturers Association, Alexandria, VA; ML Design Technologies, Palo Alto, CA; Bain & Company, Boston, MA; Eural USA, Chicago, IL; Sigmaxim, Inc., Norwood, MA; Electric Imp., Los Altos, CA; Entringa, Chicago, IL; Fraight Inc., Chicago, IL; Xcelgo, Atlanta, GA; Duracell, Chicago, IL; ProMANAGE, Chicago, IL; DP Technology Corp., Camarillo, CA; ClearBlade, Austin, TX; CyberPoint International, Baltimore, MD; Proto Labs, Maple Plain, MN; SWARM Engineering, San Juan, Capistrano, CA; Catalytic, Naperville, IL; CyPhy Works, Danvers, MA; VANTIQ, Walnut Creek, CA; Alta Via Consulting, Palos Heights, IL; Beacon Interactive, Waltham, MA; Cimetrix Inc., Midvale, UT; Factory Physics, Bryan, TX; Ekta Flow LLC, Chicago, IL; Machine Metrics, Inc., Northampton, MA; RetoLogic, Santa Clara, CA; University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH; Consolidated Nuclear Security, Oak Ridge, TN; Design Interactive, Inc., Orlando, FL; EMNS, Inc., Downers Grove, IL; Supply Dynamics, Loveland, OH; Vision Three, Bloomington, IN; University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL; DMR International, Woodstock, IL; iBASEt, Foothill Ranch, CA; Shape Fidelity, Huntsville, AL; AE Machines, Champaign, IL; Montronix, Ann Arbor, MI; Transco Products, Chicago, IL; Hardinge, Inc., Elmira, NY; The Northridge Group, Rosemont, IL; BEET, Plymouth, MI; and Hallsten Innovations, Barberton, OH, have been added as parties to this venture.

    Also, Warwick Analytics, Chicago, IL; Wittenstein North America, Bartlett, IL; Hallsten Innovations Ltd., Chicago, IL; Metrosage LLC, Volcano, CA; CUBRC, Buffalo, NY; Building Blocks, Inc., Chicago, IL; Manufacturing Renaissance, Chicago, IL; 3 Degrees LLC, Chicago, IL; Concurrent Technologies Corporation, Johnstown, PA; Alliance for Industry & Manufacturing, Chicago, IL; Strong Oak, Chicago, IL; Koneksys LLC, San Francisco, CA; Isola USA Corp., Chandler, AZ; Sera Laser Precision, Libertyville, IL; EDM Department, Inc., Bartlett, IL; Sensorhound, West Lafayette, IN; Actvcontent, Sunnyvale, CA; 4D Technology, Tucson, AZ; Huntington Ingalls, Inc., Pascagoula, MS; Grant Thornton, Chicago, IL; Agility Network Services, Chicago, IL; Isomorph Development, Inc., Cleveland, OH; Golden Corridor Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, Schaumburg, IL; Sandalwood Engineering & Ergonomics, Livonia, MI; Renaissance Service, Inc., Fairborn, OH; WW Grainger Inc., Lake Forest, IL; Tech Mahindra Americas Inc., Plano, TX; Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA; CapGemini US LLC, Atlanta, GA; SaltFlats Labs, Santa Clara, CA; Verena Solutions LLC, Chicago, IL; Siewert Solutions, Wylie, TX; Rocky Mountain Technology Alliance, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO; Prairiefire Consulting Inc., Urbana, IL; Wiegel Tool Works, Wood Dale, IL; and Source3, New York, NY, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and DMDII intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On January 5, 2016, DMDII filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on March 9, 2016 (81 FR 12525).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 26, 2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on August 15, 2017 (82 FR 38709).

    Suzanne Morris, Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics Unit, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21432 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Rhodes Technologies ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published a document in the Federal Register on August 15, 2018, concerning a notice of application that inadvertently did not include the controlled substance Fentanyl (9801).

    Correction

    In the Federal Register on August 15, 2018, in FR Doc No: 2018-17605 (83 FR 158) on pages 40567 and 40568, correct the table to include the following basic class of controlled substance:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Fentanyl 9801 II Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21352 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: AMPAC Fine Chemicals, LLC ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on March 14, 2018, AMPAC Fine Chemicals, LLC, Highway 50 and Hazel Avenue, Building 05001, Rancho Cordova, California 95670 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug
  • code
  • Schedule
    Methylphenidate 1724 II Levomethorphan 9210 II Levorphanol 9220 II Thebaine 9333 II Remifentanil 9739 II Tapentadol 9780 II

    The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21348 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    Registrants listed below have applied for and been granted registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as bulk manufacturers of various classes of schedule I and II controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The companies listed below applied to be registered as bulk manufacturers of various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on previously published notices is listed in the table below. No comments or objections were submitted for these notices.

    Company FR docket Published American Radiolabeled Chem 83 FR 28664 June 20, 2018. Cerilliant Corporation 83 FR 28664 June 20, 2018.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of these registrants to manufacture the applicable basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated each of the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing each company's physical security systems, verifying each company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing each company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the DEA has granted a registration as a bulk manufacturer to the above listed companies.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21353 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Cambrex Charles City ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this is notice that on June 8, 2018, Cambrex Charles City, 1205 11th Street, Charles City, Iowa 50616 applied to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid 2010 I Amphetamine 1100 II Lisdexamfetamine 1205 II Methylphenidate 1724 II 4-Anilino-N-phenethyl-4-piperidine (ANPP) 8333 II Phenylacetone 8501 II Cocaine 9041 II Codeine 9050 II Oxycodone 9143 II Hydromorphone 9150 II Hydrocodone 9193 II Morphine 9300 II Oripavine 9330 II Thebaine 9333 II Opium extracts 9610 II Opium fluid extract 9620 II Opium tincture 9630 II Opium, powdered 9639 II Oxymorphone 9652 II Noroxymorphone 9668 II Fentanyl 9801 II

    The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for conversion to other controlled substances and sale to its customers, for dosage form development, for clinical trials, and for use in stability qualification studies.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21351 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Registration ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    Registrants listed below have applied for and been granted registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as importers of various classes of schedule I or II controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The companies listed below applied to be registered as importers of various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on previously published notices are listed in the table below. No comments or objections were submitted and no requests for hearing were submitted for these notices.

    Company FR Docket Published AMRI Rensselaer, Inc 83 FR 15176 April 9, 2018. S&B Pharma, Inc 83 FR 31421 July 5, 2018. Cerilliant Corporation 83 FR 32906 July 16, 2018. Shertech Laboratories, LLC 83 FR 34879 July 23, 2018. Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC 83 FR 34878 July 23, 2018. VHG Labs DBA LGC Standards 83 FR 34875 July 23, 2018. Catalent Pharma Solutions, LLC 83 FR 34874 July 23, 2018. Fisher Clinical Services, Inc 83 FR 34879 July 23, 2018. Anderson Brecon, Inc 83 FR 37525 August 1, 2018.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the registration of the listed registrants to import the applicable basic classes of schedule I or II controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971.

    The DEA investigated each company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing each company's physical security systems, verifying each company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing each company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the DEA has granted a registration as an importer for schedule I or II controlled substances to the above listed companies.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21354 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: R & D Systems, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before November 1, 2018. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before November 1, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearings must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for hearings should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Comments and requests for hearings on applications to import narcotic raw material are not appropriate. 72 FR 3417, (January 25, 2007).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated his authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Assistant Administrator of the DEA Diversion Control Division (“Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on April 9, 2018, R & D Systems, Inc., 614 McKinley Place NE, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413-5541 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Drug code Schedule Mephedrone (4-Methyl-N-methylcathinone) 1248 I JWH-018 (also known as AM678) (1-Pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole) 7118 I CP-47,497 (5-(1,1-Dimethylheptyl)-2-[(1R,3S)-3-hydroxycyclohexyl-phenol) 7297 I Marihuana 7360 I Tetrahydrocannabinols 7370 I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine 7391 I 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine 7405 I Dimethyltryptamine 7435 I Psilocyn 7438 I Pentobarbital 2270 II Phencyclidine 7471 II Cocaine 9041 II

    The company plans to import bulk active controlled substances for distribution to its customers for research and analytical purposes. In reference to drug codes marihuana (7360) and tetrahydrocannabinols (7370) the company plans to import a synthetic cannabidiol and a synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol. No other activity for these drug codes is authorized for this registration.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21334 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Registration ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    The registrant listed below has applied for and been granted registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as an importer of various classes of schedule I or II controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The company listed below applied to be registered as an importer of various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on the previously published notice is listed in the table below. No comments or objections were submitted and no requests for hearing were submitted for this notice.

    Company FR docket Published Ultra Scientific Inc. 83 FR 37525 August 1, 2018.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the registration of the listed registrant to import the applicable basic classes of schedule I or II controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the DEA has granted a registration as an importer for schedule I or II controlled substances to the above listed company.

    Dated: September 20, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21336 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office of Justice Programs [OJP (OJJDP) Docket No. 1751] Notice of Charter Renewal of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention AGENCY:

    Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Justice.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Charter Renewal.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice that the charter of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention has been renewed.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Visit the website for the Coordinating Council at www.juvenilecouncil.gov or contact Jeff Slowikowski, Designated Federal Official (DFO), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, by telephone at (202) 616-3646 (not a toll-free number) or via email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This Federal Register Notice notifies the public that the Charter of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency has been renewed in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Section 14(a)(1). The renewal Charter was signed by U.S. Attorney General Jefferson B. Sessions on June 29, 2018. One can obtain a copy of the renewal Charter by accessing the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's website at www.juvenilecouncil.gov.

    Jeff Slowikowski, Senior Advisor to the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21379 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Parole Commission Sunshine Act Meetings Record of Vote of Meeting Closure (Pub. L. 94-409) (5 U.S.C. 552b)

    I, Patricia K. Cushwa, of the United States Parole Commission, was present at a meeting of said Commission, which started at approximately 1:30 p.m., on Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at the U.S. Parole Commission, 90 K Street NE, Third Floor, Washington, DC 20530. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss original jurisdiction cases pursuant to 28 CFR 2.25. and 28 CFR 2.68(i)(1) Two Commissioners were present, constituting a quorum when the vote to close the meeting was submitted.

    Public announcement further describing the subject matter of the meeting and certifications of the General Counsel that this meeting may be closed by votes of the Commissioners present were submitted to the Commissioners prior to the conduct of any other business. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the following Commissioners voted that the meeting be closed: Patricia K. Cushwa and Charles T. Massarone.

    In witness whereof, I make this official record of the vote taken to close this meeting and authorize this record to be made available to the public.

    Dated: September 26, 2018. Patricia K. Cushwa, Acting Chairperson, U.S. Parole Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21566 Filed 9-28-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4410-31-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (18-072)] Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Term License AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent to grant an exclusive term license.

    SUMMARY:

    NASA hereby gives notice of its intent to grant an exclusive term license in the United States to practice the invention described and claimed in U.S. Patent No. 9,749,342 entitled, “System and Method for Detecting Unauthorized Device Access by Comparing Multiple Independent Spatial-Time Data Sets from Other Devices” to Equator Corporation, having its principal place of business in Stafford, VA.

    DATES:

    The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless NASA receives written objections, including evidence and argument October 17, 2018, that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements regarding the licensing of federally owned inventions as set forth in the Bayh-Dole Act and implementing regulations. Competing applications completed and received by NASA no later than October 17, 2018 will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license. Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act.

    ADDRESSES:

    Objections relating to the prospective license may be submitted to Patent Counsel, Bryan A. Geurts, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, M/S 140.1, Greenbelt, MD 20771. Phone (301) 286-7351. Facsimile (301) 286-9502.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dennis Small, Innovative Partnerships Program Office, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, M/S 102.0, Greenbelt, MD 20771. Phone (301) 286-7960.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice of intent to grant an exclusive patent license is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective exclusive license will comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

    Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at http://technology.nasa.gov.

    Mark Dvorscak, Agency Counsel for Intellectual Property.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21428 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of permit applications received.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish a notice of permit applications received to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act in the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of permit applications received.

    DATES:

    Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by November 1, 2018. This application may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, at the above address, 703-292-8030, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The National Science Foundation, as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541, 45 CFR 671), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain animals and certain geographic areas a requiring special protection. The regulations establish such a permit system to designate Antarctic Specially Protected Areas.

    Application Details Permit Application: 2019-011 1. Applicant: John Kennedy, 917 Porphyry, Ophir, CO 81426.

    Activity for Which Permit is Requested: Waste Management. The applicant proposes to operate a sailing yacht, conduct shore excursions, and operate a remotely piloted aircraft system in the Antarctic Peninsula region. The yacht would carry up to 1200 liters of diesel fuel in a combination of internal and external storage tanks, up to 50 liters of gasoline, and two, 8-kg bottles of propane. A spill kit and absorbent pads would be available during all fueling and fuel transfers. Garbage and food waste, including poultry products, would be stored onboard the vessel and disposed of outside Antarctica. Human waste generated during shore excursions would be contained, stored on the vessel, and disposed of outside Antarctica. The applicant would operate small, battery-operated remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) consisting, in part, of a quadcopter equipped with cameras to aid in navigation and to collect footage of the Antarctic. The quadcopter would not be flown over wildlife, or over Antarctic Specially Protected Areas or Historic Sites and Monuments. The RPAS would only be operated by a pilot with extensive experience and flights would not occur if the aircraft cannot be flown in GPS mode. Several measures would be taken to prevent against loss of the quadcopters including painting the them a highly visible color; only flying when the wind is less than 20 knots; terminating flights with at least 40% battery life remaining; having an observer on the lookout for wildlife, people, and other hazards; and ensuring that the separation between the operator and quadcopter does not exceed visual line of sight. The applicant is seeking a Waste Permit to cover any accidental releases that may result from operating the vessel, conducting shore excursions, or operating the RPAS.

    Location: Antarctic Peninsula region.

    Dates of Permitted Activities: December 5, 2018-January 5, 2019.

    Permit Application: 2019-012 2. Applicant: Conrad Combrink, Senior Vice President, Strategic Development Expeditions and Experiences, Silversea Cruises, Ltd., Wells Fargo Center, 333 Southeast 2nd Avenue, Suite 2600, Miami, Florida 33131.

    Activity for Which Permit is Requested: Waste Management. The applicant proposes to operate small, battery-operated remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) consisting, in part, of a quadcopter equipped with cameras to collect commercial and educational footage of the Antarctic. The quadcopter would not be flown over concentrations of birds or mammals, or over Antarctic Specially Protected Areas or Historic Sites and Monuments. The RPAS would only be operated by pilots with extensive experience, who are pre-approved by the Expedition Leader. Several measures would be taken to prevent against loss of the quadcopter including painting the them a highly visible color; only flying when the wind is less than 25 knots; flying for only 15 minutes at a time to preserve battery life; having prop guards on propeller tips, a flotation device if operated over water, and an “auto go home” feature in case of loss of control link or low battery; having an observer on the lookout for wildlife, people, and other hazards; and ensuring that the separation between the operator and quadcopter does not exceed an operational range of 500 meters. The applicant is seeking a Waste Permit to cover any accidental releases that may result from operating the RPAS.

    Location: Antarctic Peninsula Region.

    Dates of Permitted Activities: November 11, 2018-March 30, 2022.

    Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21415 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permit Modification Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of permit modification request received and permit issued.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish a notice of requests to modify permits issued to conduct activities regulated and permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act in the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of a requested permit modification and permit issued.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; 703-292-8224; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF), as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-541, 45 CFR 671), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain animals and certain geographic areas a requiring special protection.

    1. NSF issued a permit (ACA 2016-008) to David Rootes, Environmental Manager, Antarctic Logistics and Expeditions, LLC, on October 23, 2015. The issued permit allows the applicant to operate a remote camp at Union Glacier, Antarctica, and provide logistical support services for scientific and other expeditions, film crews, and tourists. These activities include aircraft support, cache positioning, camp and field support, resupply, search and rescue, medevac, medical support and logistic support for some National Operators.

    A recent modification to this permit, dated October 6, 2017, permitted the permit holder to continue permitted activities, including minimization, mitigation, and monitoring of waste, for the 2017-2018 Antarctic season.

    Now the permit holder proposes a permit modification to continue permitted activities, including minimization, mitigation, and monitoring of waste, for the 2018-2019 Antarctic season. One addition is the establishment and operation of a small camp near the base of Mount Sporli. The Environmental Officer has reviewed the modification request and has determined that the amendment is not a material change to the permit, and it will have a less than a minor or transitory impact.

    Dates of Permitted Activities: October 1, 2018-February 28, 2020.

    2. NSF issued a permit (ACA 2018-015) to Brandon Harvey, Director, Expedition Operations, Polar Latitudes, Inc., on November 2, 2017. The issued permit allows the permit holder to conduct waste management activities associated with coastal camping and operating remotely piloted aircraft systems.

    Now the permit holder proposes a permit modification to continue permitted activities, including minimization, mitigation, and monitoring of waste, for the 2018-2019 Antarctic season. In addition, Hayley Shephard now holds the position of Director of Expedition Operations. The Environmental Officer has reviewed the modification request and has determined that the amendment is not a material change to the permit, and it will have a less than a minor or transitory impact.

    Dates of Permitted Activities: October 30, 2018-March 30, 2022.

    These permit modifications were issued on September 25, 2018.

    Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-21417 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 030-39071; EA-18-033; NRC-2018-0214] In the Matter of Harman International Industries, Inc.; Confirmatory Order AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Confirmatory order; issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a confirmatory order (Order) to Harman International Industries, Inc. (Harman), to memorialize the agreements reached during an alternative dispute resolution mediation session held on August 16, 2018. This Order will resolve the issues that were identified during an NRC records review related to Harman's import, possession, and distribution of lamps containing byproduct material (krypton-85). This Order is effective upon its issuance.

    DATES:

    The confirmatory order became effective on September 27, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0214 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0214. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; e-mail: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sophie Holiday, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-001; telephone: 301-415-7865, e-mail: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The text of the Order is attached.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of September 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Anne T. Boland, Director, Office of Enforcement.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

    In the Matter of: Harman International Industries, Inc., Northridge, California

    Docket No. 030-39071 License No. 04-35446-01E EA-18-033
    CONFIRMATORY ORDER MODIFYING LICENSE (EFFECTIVE UPON ISSUANCE) I

    Harman International Industries, Incorporated, (Harman or Licensee) is the holder of Materials License No. 04-35446-01E issued on December 15, 2017, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) pursuant to Part 30 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material. The license authorizes Harman to distribute lamps containing byproduct material (krypton-85) to persons exempt from the regulations. Harman was located in Elkhart, Indiana (IN), prior to June 2018, and is currently located in Northridge, California (CA), with a distribution facility located in Moreno Valley, CA.

    This Confirmatory Order is the result of an agreement reached during an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mediation session conducted on August 16, 2018.

    II

    The NRC conducted a review on October 2016 through February 2018, related to the import, possession, and distribution of licensed materials (lamps containing krypton-85) by Harman in areas of NRC jurisdiction without having the required NRC licenses.

    On June 7, 2018, the NRC issued a letter to Harman that identified the results of the records review and outlined three apparent violations. The apparent violations involved:

    (1) initially transferring, for sale or distribution, lamps containing krypton-85 without an NRC license for such activity pursuant to 10 CFR Sections 30.3(a), 30.15(a)(8)(iv), and 32.14; (2) possession of material (krypton-85) without an NRC license for such activity pursuant to 10 CFR 30.3; and (3) importing material (krypton-85) into the United States (U.S.) without an NRC or Agreement State license for possession of the material containing byproduct material pursuant to 10 CFR 110.5, 110.9a, 110.20(a), and 110.27(a).

    In the June 7, 2018, letter, the NRC offered Harman the choice to: (1) attend a Pre-decisional Enforcement Conference (PEC); or (2) participate in an ADR mediation session in an effort to resolve these concerns.

    In response to the NRC's letter, Harman requested ADR. On August 16, 2018, Harman and the NRC met in an ADR session mediated by a professional mediator, arranged through Cornell University's Institute on Conflict Resolution. The ADR process is one in which a neutral mediator, with no decision-making authority, assists the parties in reaching an agreement on resolving any differences regarding the dispute. This Confirmatory Order is issued pursuant to the agreement reached during the ADR process.

    III

    During the ADR session, Harman and the NRC reached a preliminary settlement agreement. The elements of the agreement included Harman acceptance of the violations for a period of non-compliance from approximately March 2016 to February 2017, corrective actions that Harman stated were completed as described below, agreed upon future actions, and general provisions as follows:

    Harman Completed Corrective Actions to Restore Compliance:

    1. As of mid-February 2017, Harman stopped the shipment into the U.S. of finished products containing krypton-85 lamps and krypton-85 spare bulbs.

    2. As of mid-February 2017, Harman stopped the shipment to dealers, end users, etc. in the U.S. of Harman's finished products containing krypton-85 lamps and krypton-85 spare bulbs.

    3. As of April 2017, the licensee quarantined all remaining product in the Quality Assurance cage (QA cage) to further ensure no product would be distributed (which requires the Quality Manager signature to release).

    4. As of May 18, 2017, no radioactive material remained at the Elkhart, IN, location, and all remaining imported bulbs in Elkhart were shipped back to the manufacturer.

    5. On June 29, 2017, Harman submitted an application to the State of California, and on December 15, 2017, received a California license for possession of krypton-85 at Harman's facility located in Moreno Valley, CA.

    6. Harman submitted an application for a distribution license in September 2017, and on December 15, 2017, NRC issued to Harman distribution license No. 04-35446-01E.

    7. Harman engaged the services of a consultant to assist with the NRC license application.

    8. Harman has established the position of Compliance Manager. This role is in addition to the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) for the license. The Compliance Manager is responsible for ensuring compliance with NRC requirements.

    9. Harman has established the New Product Introduction/Product Lifecycle Management (NPI/PLM) process.

    a. The NPI/PLM is a multistep process that includes determination of whether NRC requirements apply, and ensures compliance with NRC requirements.

    b. All new or changed products (to overall or component design), new or changed processes, or transfers of product undergo the process.

    c. When radioactive material is identified, the Compliance Manager and the RSO must approve that the process/component changes are consistent with NRC requirements.

    Harman Future Actions to Enhance Compliance:

    1. Harman will maintain the position of Compliance Manager. This role is in addition to the RSO for the license. The Compliance Manager is responsible for ensuring compliance with NRC requirements.

    2. Harman will maintain the NPI/PLM process as described above.

    3. Within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order, Harman will ensure that:

    a. The documented NPI/PLM process prompts the identification and application of NRC requirements (including regulatory, license, and Order).

    b. Applicable documents define the roles and responsibilities of the Compliance Manager and RSO, in the NPI/PLM process, as they relate to NRC requirements.

    4. Within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order, Harman will issue a letter from the Compliance Manager to the President, Vice Presidents, and the Directors who report to the Vice President for Operations and Procurement, to ensure awareness of the violations and actions taken. The letter will include:

    a. A description of the violations, including a copy of the NRC letter dated June 7, 2018.

    b. The actions taken to restore compliance, including a copy of this Confirmatory Order.

    5. Within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order, Harman will issue a communication to foreign suppliers of lighting products to Harman to promote awareness of the NRC requirements.

    a. The communication will include:

    i. That there are U.S. requirements for products containing radioactive material that will be imported and distributed within the U.S.

    ii. That selling product to customers could result in putting those entities in non-compliance with U.S. requirements.

    iii. Contact information for the NRC.

    iv. A request to pass the communication to the suppliers' affiliates and potentially impacted customers.

    b. Harman will provide a copy of the letter to NRC, 30 days in advance of issuance.

    6. Harman will conduct training for the participants in the NPI/PLM process.

    a. Harman will review and modify, if not already included, the current Compliance Training to ensure that it contains the following:

    i. NRC regulatory framework.

    ii. Applicable requirements for the activities being conducted.

    iii. The role of each NPI/PLM participant in ensuring compliance and the specific role of the Compliance Manager and RSO.

    b. The training will include an initial training and annual periodic training.

    c. The initial training will be completed within 180 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order.

    d. Harman will maintain documentation of individuals trained.

    7. Harman will continue to conduct training for all employees handling radioactive material.

    a. Content will include radiation safety and NRC requirements.

    b. The training will include an initial training and annual periodic training.

    c. The next training will be completed within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order.

    d. Harman will maintain documentation of individuals trained.

    8. Beginning in calendar year 2020, Harman will perform an annual audit to ensure compliance with NRC requirements. The audit will be completed in the first quarter of each calendar year.

    9. By March 31, 2019:

    a. Harman will conduct an audit using an independent third-party consultant to evaluate compliance with NRC requirements.

    b. The audit will not commence prior to December 31, 2018.

    c. The audit will:

    i. Include review of compliance with NRC requirements.

    ii. Be documented by an audit report, including the scope, observations, and findings.

    d. Harman will provide to the NRC a copy of the consultant report, and a description of any corrective actions taken as a result of the audit.

    General provisions:

    1. For the purposes of this agreement, the term “requirements” includes NRC rules, license and Order requirements.

    2. Unless otherwise specified, all dates are calendar days from the date of issuance of this Confirmatory Order.

    3. Unless otherwise specified, all documents required to be submitted to the NRC will be sent to: Director, Division of Materials Safety, Security, State and Tribal Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, with copies to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, and to the Branch Chief, Materials Safety Licensing Branch, Division of Materials Safety, Security, State and Tribal Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738. Harman will also endeavor to provide courtesy electronic copies to the above individuals, at their NRC email addresses.

    4. NRC agrees not to issue a separate Notice of Violation.

    5. NRC will categorize the violations as one Severity Level III problem, with a civil penalty of half the base in the amount of $7,250.

    6. The Confirmatory Order will be considered escalated action consistent with the current NRC Enforcement Policy for future enforcement.

    7. In the event of the transfer of the possession and/or distribution licenses of Harman to another entity, the terms and conditions set forth hereunder shall continue to apply to the new entity and accordingly survive any transfer of ownership or license.

    8. Based on the completed actions described above, and the commitments described in Section V below, the NRC agrees to not pursue any further enforcement action based on the apparent violations identified in the NRC's June 7, 2018, letter.

    On September 21, 2018, Harman consented to issuing this Confirmatory Order with the commitments, as described in Section V below. Harman further agreed that this Confirmatory Order is to be effective upon issuance, the agreement memorialized in this Confirmatory Order settles the matter between the parties, and that it has waived its right to a hearing.

    IV

    I find that the Harman actions completed, as described in Section III above, combined with the commitments as set forth in Section V, are acceptable and necessary, and conclude that with these commitments the public health and safety are reasonably assured. In view of the foregoing, I have determined that public health and safety require that Harman's commitments be confirmed by this Confirmatory Order. Based on the above and Harman's consent, this Confirmatory Order is effective upon issuance.

    V

    Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 161(b), 161(i), 161(o), 182, and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR part 30, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, EFFECTIVE UPON ISSUANCE, THAT LICENSE NO. 04-35446-01E IS MODIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

    1. Harman will maintain the position of Compliance Manager. This role is in addition to the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) for the license. The Compliance Manager is responsible for ensuring compliance with NRC requirements.

    2. Harman will maintain the New Product Introduction/Product Lifecycle Management (NPI/PLM) process as described in Section III above.

    3. Within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order, Harman will ensure that:

    a. The documented NPI/PLM process prompts the identification and application of NRC requirements (including regulatory, license, and Order).

    b. Applicable documents define the roles and responsibilities of the Compliance Manager and RSO, in the NPI/PLM process, as they relate to NRC requirements.

    4. Within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order, Harman will issue a letter from the Compliance Manager to the President, Vice Presidents, and the Directors who report to the Vice President for Operations and Procurement, to ensure awareness of the violations and actions taken. The letter will include:

    a. A description of the violations, including a copy of the NRC letter dated June 7, 2018.

    b. The actions taken to restore compliance, including a copy of this Confirmatory Order.

    5. Within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order, Harman will issue a communication to foreign suppliers of lighting products to Harman to promote awareness of the NRC requirements.

    a. The communication will include:

    i. That there are U.S. requirements for products containing radioactive material that will be imported and distributed within the U.S.

    ii. That selling product to customers could result in putting those entities in non-compliance with U.S. requirements.

    iii. Contact information for the NRC.

    iv. A request to pass the communication to the suppliers' affiliates and potentially impacted customers.

    b. Harman will provide a copy of the letter to NRC, 30 days in advance of issuance.

    6. Harman will conduct training for the participants in the NPI/PLM process.

    a. Harman will review and modify, if not already included, the current Compliance Training to ensure that it contains the following:

    i. NRC regulatory framework.

    ii. Applicable requirements for the activities being conducted.

    iii. The role of each NPI/PLM participant in ensuring compliance and the specific role of the Compliance Manager and RSO.

    b. The training will include an initial training and annual periodic training.

    c. The initial training will be completed within 180 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order.

    d. Harman will maintain documentation of individuals trained.

    7. Harman will continue to conduct training for all employees handling radioactive material.

    a. Content will include radiation safety and NRC requirements.

    b. The training will include an initial training and annual periodic training.

    c. The next training will be completed within 90 days of the date of this Confirmatory Order.

    d. Harman will maintain documentation of individuals trained.

    8. Beginning in calendar year 2020, Harman will perform an annual audit to ensure compliance with NRC requirements. The audit will be completed in the first quarter of each calendar year.

    9. By March 31, 2019:

    a. Harman will conduct an audit using an independent third-party consultant to evaluate compliance with NRC requirements.

    b. The audit will not commence prior to December 31, 2018.

    c. The audit will:

    i. Include review of compliance with NRC requirements.

    ii. Be documented by an audit report, including the scope, observations, and findings.

    d. Harman will provide to NRC a copy of the consultant report, and a description of any corrective actions taken as a result of the audit.

    10. Harman will pay a civil penalty in the amount of $7,250.

    For the purposes of this agreement, the term “requirements” includes NRC rules, license and Order requirements.

    Unless otherwise specified, all dates are calendar days from the date of issuance of the Confirmatory Order.

    Unless otherwise specified, all documents required to be submitted to the NRC will be sent to: Director, Division of Materials Safety, Security, State and Tribal Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, with copies to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, and to the Branch Chief, Materials Safety Licensing Branch, Division of Materials Safety, Security, State and Tribal Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738. Harman will also endeavor to provide courtesy electronic copies to the above individuals, at their NRC email addresses.

    The Confirmatory Order will be considered escalated action consistent with NRC current Enforcement Policy for future enforcement.

    In the event of the transfer of the possession and/or distribution licenses of Harman to another entity, the terms and conditions set forth hereunder shall continue to apply to the new entity and accordingly survive any transfer of ownership or license.

    The Director, Office of Enforcement, NRC, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon written request by Harman, and demonstration by Harman or its successors of good cause.

    VI

    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR 2.309, any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other than Harman, may request a hearing within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of issuance of this Confirmatory Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good cause for the extension.

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene (hereinafter “petition”), and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended by 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's Public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by e-mail to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) first class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an Order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click “Cancel” when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

    The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for any hearing that will be held and designating the Presiding Officer. A notice granting a hearing will be published in the Federal Register and served on the parties to the hearing.

    If a person (other than Harman) requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and (f).

    If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any hearings. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Confirmatory Order should be sustained.

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), any person adversely affected by this Order, may, in addition to demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations, or error. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section V above shall be final thirty (30) calendar days from the date of issuance of this Confirmatory Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section V shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received.

    A request for hearing shall not stay the effectiveness of this order.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

    Anne T. Boland, Director, Office of Enforcement.

    Dated this 27th day of September 2018.

    cc: The State of California
    [FR Doc. 2018-21397 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0199] Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    License amendment request; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; order imposing procedures.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is considering approval of two amendment requests. The amendment requests are for Oconee Nuclear Station and Wolf Creek Generating Station. For each amendment request, the NRC proposes to determine that they involve no significant hazards consideration. Because the amendment requests contain sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI) and safeguards information (SGI) an order imposes procedures to obtain access to SUNSI and SGI for contention preparation.

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by November 1, 2018. A request for a hearing must be filed by December 3, 2018. Any potential party as defined in § 2.4 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who believes access to SUNSI and/or SGI is necessary to respond to this notice must request document access by October 12, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0199. Address questions about NRC DOCKET ID in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-7996, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0199, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0199.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0199, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Background

    Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the NRC is publishing this notice. The Act requires the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person.

    This notice includes notices of amendments containing SUNSI and/or SGI.

    III. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below.

    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period if circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish a notice of issuance in the Federal Register. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards consideration determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

    A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.

    As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.

    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.

    Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.

    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

    If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.

    B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

    For further details with respect to these license amendment applications, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional direction on accessing information related to this document, see the “Accessing Information and Submitting Comments” section of this document.

    Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South Carolina

    Date of amendment request: February 12, 2018, as supplemented by letter dated August 8, 2018. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18046A080 and ML18225A076, respectively.

    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains safeguards information (SGI). The amendments would revise the Duke Energy Physical Security Plan for Oconee Nuclear Station to include additional protective measures during a specific infrequent short-term operating state, including a modification that provides additional access restriction.

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment makes changes to the Duke Energy Physical Security Plan (PSP) for Oconee Nuclear Station that include additional protective measures during a specific infrequent short-term operating state as well as a modification that provides additional access restriction. The proposed changes do not modify the reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure boundary, nor make any physical changes to the facility design, material, or construction standards. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the operation of any safety-related System, Structure, or Component (SSC) or the ability of any safety-related SSC to perform its designed safety function. The probability of a credited design basis accident (DBA) is not affected by this change, nor are the consequences of any credited DBA affected by this change.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment makes changes to the Duke Energy PSP for Oconee Nuclear Station that include additional protective measures during a specific infrequent short-term operating state as well as a modification that provides additional access restriction. These proposed changes do not alter the plant configuration (no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or make changes in methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the operation of any safety-related SSC or the ability of any safety-related SSC to perform its designed safety function. The physical change being proposed does not introduce a new failure mode that would inhibit any safety-related SSC from performing its safety function. Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated is not created.

    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

    Response: No.

    The proposed amendment makes changes to the Duke Energy PSP for Oconee Nuclear Station that include additional protective measures during a specific infrequent short-term operating state as well as a modification that provides additional access restriction. These proposed PSP changes do not involve: (1) A physical alteration of the Oconee Units; (2) the installation of new or different equipment associated with plant operations; or (3) any impact on the fission product barriers or safety limits. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.

    Attorney for licensee: Kate Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, Duke Energy Carolinas, 550 South Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202.

    NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.

    Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS), Coffey County, Kansas

    Date of amendment request: January 17, 2017, as supplemented by letters dated March 22, May 4, July 13, October 18, and November 14, 2017; and January 15, January 29, April 19, June 19, and August 9, 2018. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML17054C103, ML17088A635, ML17130A915, ML17200C939, ML17297A478, ML17325A982, ML18024A477, ML18033B024, ML18114A115, ML18177A198, and ML18232A058, respectively.

    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed amendment would revise the WCGS Technical Specification (TSs) to replace the existing Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation methodology for performing core design, non-loss-of-coolant-accident (non-LOCA) and LOCA safety analyses (for Post-LOCA Subcriticality and Cooling only) with standard Westinghouse developed and NRC-approved analysis methodologies at WCGS.

    In addition, the proposed amendment would revise the WCGS licensing basis by adopting the alternative source term (AST) as described in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.183, “Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors,” dated July 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003716792).

    This notice is being reissued in its entirety due to the revised scope of the license amendment request resulting from supplements dated July 13, October 18, and November 14, 2017; and January 15, January 29, April 19, June 19, and August 9, 2018. The proposed no significant hazards consideration determination is identical to the one published in the Federal Register on July 5, 2017 (82 FR 31084).

    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    The new core design, non-LOCA and Post-LOCA Subcriticality and Cooling analyses and resulting TS changes will continue to ensure the applicable safety limits are not exceeded during any conditions of normal operation, for design basis accidents (DBAs) as well as any Anticipated Operational Occurrence (AOO). The methods used to perform the affected safety analyses are based on methods previously found acceptable by the NRC and conform to applicable regulatory guidance. Application of these NRC approved methods will continue to ensure that acceptable operating limits are established to protect the integrity of the RCS and fuel cladding during normal operation, DBAs, and any AOOs. The requested TS changes proposed to conform to the new methodologies do not involve any operational changes that could affect system reliability, performance, or the possibility of operator error. The proposed changes do not affect any postulated accident precursors, or accident mitigation systems, and do not introduce any new accident initiation mechanisms.

    Adoptions of the AST and pursuant TS changes and the changes to the atmospheric dispersion factors have no impact to the initiation of DBAs. Once the occurrence of an accident has been postulated, the new accident source term and atmospheric dispersion factors are an input to analyses that evaluate the radiological consequences. The proposed changes do not involve a revision to the design or manner in which the facility is operated that could increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated in Chapter 15 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR).

    The structures, systems and components affected by the proposed changes act to mitigate the consequences of accidents. Based on the AST analyses, the proposed changes do revise certain performance requirements; however, the proposed changes do not involve a revision to the parameters or conditions that could contribute to the initiation of an accident previously discussed in Chapter 15 of the USAR. Plant specific radiological analyses have been performed using the AST methodology and new atmospheric dispersion factors. Based on the results of these analyses, it has been demonstrated that the control room dose consequences of the limiting events considered in the analyses meet the regulatory guidance provided for use with the AST, and the offsite doses are within acceptable limits. This guidance is presented in 10 CFR 50.67 [“Accident source term”] and RG 1.183.

    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated?

    Response: No.

    Implementation of the new core design, non-LOCA and Post-LOCA Subcriticality and Cooling analyses and resulting TS changes do not alter or involve any design basis accident initiators and do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed). The proposed change does not adversely affect the design function or mode of operations of structures, systems and components in the facility important to safety. The structures, systems and components important to safety will continue to operate in the same manner as before, therefore, no new failure modes are created by this proposed change. As such, the proposed change does not create any new failure modes for existing equipment or any new limiting single failures. Additionally the proposed change does not involve a change in the methods governing normal plant operation and all safety functions will continue to perform as previously assumed in accident analyses. Thus, the proposed change does not adversely affect the design function or operation of any structures, systems, and components important to safety. The proposed change does not involve changing any accident initiators.

    Implementation of AST and the associated proposed TS changes and new atmospheric dispersion factors do not alter or involve any design basis accident initiators. A de