Federal Register Vol. 83, No.214,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 214 (November 5, 2018)

Page Range55247-55452
FR Document

83_FR_214
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 55364 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
83 FR 55394 - Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Amendment to the 1997 Washington State Department of Natural Resources State Lands Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit; Extension of Public Comment PeriodPDF
83 FR 55338 - Air Plan Approval; KY; Minor Sources Infrastructure Requirement for the 2012 PM2.5PDF
83 FR 55401 - Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, as AmendedPDF
83 FR 55363 - Casmalia Resources Superfund Site; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis SettlementPDF
83 FR 55386 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 55379 - Proposed Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 55348 - National Estuarine Research Reserve SystemPDF
83 FR 55384 - Alabama; Emergency and Related DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 55378 - Kansas; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 55385 - South Carolina; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55384 - North Carolina; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55397 - Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey, ColoradoPDF
83 FR 55384 - Georgia; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55386 - South Carolina; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55380 - Final Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 55292 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2018 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Red SnapperPDF
83 FR 55399 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Currently Approved Collection; Strategic Planning Environmental Assessment OutreachPDF
83 FR 55293 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2018 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish; July Through December SeasonPDF
83 FR 55335 - Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: NOXPDF
83 FR 55354 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application Forms and Instructions for the Fulbright-Hays Seminars Abroad ProgramPDF
83 FR 55372 - Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 55396 - Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Skokomish Indian Tribe of WashingtonPDF
83 FR 55398 - Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment and Draft Land Use Plan Amendment for the OMYA Direct Land Sale Project, CaliforniaPDF
83 FR 55395 - Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis ReservationPDF
83 FR 55267 - Change of Address; Indian Child Welfare ActPDF
83 FR 55364 - Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate ReceivershipPDF
83 FR 55341 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Spring Pygmy SunfishPDF
83 FR 55360 - Delegation of Authority to the State of West Virginia To Implement and Enforce Additional or Revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Standards and New Source Performance StandardsPDF
83 FR 55362 - Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for the Performance-Based Measurement System for Fuels (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 55391 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Petition by Entrepreneur To Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident StatusPDF
83 FR 55389 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Application for Family Unity BenefitsPDF
83 FR 55393 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Genealogy Index Search Request and Genealogy Records RequestPDF
83 FR 55389 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Petition for U Nonimmigrant StatusPDF
83 FR 55400 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Occupational Safety and Health Onsite Consultation AgreementsPDF
83 FR 55392 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: Application for Waiver of Grounds of InadmissibilityPDF
83 FR 55374 - Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; NIH Office of Intramural Training & Education-Application, Registration, and Alumni Systems, Office of the DirectorPDF
83 FR 55377 - Draft Report on Health Research and Development To Stem the Opioid Crisis: A Federal Roadmap; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 55353 - Inland Waterways Users Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 55346 - Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018PDF
83 FR 55365 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
83 FR 55399 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
83 FR 55324 - Amount Determined Under Section 956 for Corporate United States ShareholdersPDF
83 FR 55355 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah River SitePDF
83 FR 55408 - Notice of Permit Modification Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
83 FR 55329 - The Standard for Determining Joint-Employer StatusPDF
83 FR 55408 - Notice of Appointments of Individuals To Serve as Members of Performance Review BoardsPDF
83 FR 55390 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection: InfoPassPDF
83 FR 55354 - Agency Information Collection ExtensionPDF
83 FR 55370 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Biosimilars User Fee ProgramPDF
83 FR 55264 - Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer ManualPDF
83 FR 55272 - Tankers-Automatic Pilot SystemsPDF
83 FR 55318 - Eliminating Youth Electronic Cigarette and Other Tobacco Product Use: The Role for Drug Therapies; Public Hearing; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 55266 - Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels: Questions and Answers Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 55323 - Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed at One Eating Occasion, Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed, Serving Size-Related Issues, Dual-Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous Topics; Draft Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 55451 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
83 FR 55450 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
83 FR 55332 - Safety Zone for Fireworks Display, Upper Potomac River, Washington Channel, DCPDF
83 FR 55284 - Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Miles 179 to 180, St. Louis, MOPDF
83 FR 55447 - Applications for Inclusion on the Binational Panels Roster Under the North American Free Trade AgreementPDF
83 FR 55366 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 55446 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition-Determinations: “Death in the Ice: The Mystery of the Franklin Expedition” ExhibitionPDF
83 FR 55447 - Fine Arts Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 55364 - Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate ReceivershipsPDF
83 FR 55445 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of North CarolinaPDF
83 FR 55445 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of North CarolinaPDF
83 FR 55445 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of GEORGIAPDF
83 FR 55449 - Approval of BNSF Railway Company Test Program To Evaluate Automated Track Inspection TechnologiesPDF
83 FR 55444 - Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana IslandsPDF
83 FR 55444 - Data Collection Available for Public CommentsPDF
83 FR 55356 - Lakeport Hydroelectric One, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing ProcessPDF
83 FR 55358 - Alabama Power Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare Environmental Impact Statement and Soliciting Scoping CommentsPDF
83 FR 55356 - Entergy Louisiana, LLC; Notice of FilingPDF
83 FR 55359 - Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Empire North Project; Empire Pipeline, Inc.PDF
83 FR 55247 - Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 Airplanes; Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS)PDF
83 FR 55376 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 55374 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 55377 - National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 55375 - National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 55377 - National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 55376 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 55376 - Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 55360 - Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public NoticePDF
83 FR 55356 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 55334 - Modification and Amendment of Regulations To Conform to the MMAPDF
83 FR 55408 - Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Advisory Committee; MeetingPDF
83 FR 55446 - Privacy Act of 1974; Matching ProgramPDF
83 FR 55365 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
83 FR 55385 - Florida; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55388 - Florida; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55383 - Florida; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55409 - Report on Changes to Low-Level Waste Burial ChargesPDF
83 FR 55368 - Marathon Petroleum Corp.; Analysis To Aid Public CommentPDF
83 FR 55438 - Cushing Asset Management, LP and Cushing ETF TrustPDF
83 FR 55365 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan Holding CompaniesPDF
83 FR 55385 - Florida; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency DeclarationPDF
83 FR 55381 - Final Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 55410 - Program for Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Pursuant to Rule 17d-2; Notice of Filing and Order Approving and Declaring Effective an Amended Plan for the Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities Between the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. and NYSE National, Inc.PDF
83 FR 55439 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Investments of the First Trust TCW Unconstrained Plus Bond ETFPDF
83 FR 55416 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of the BrandywineGLOBAL-Global Total Return ETF, a Series of Legg Mason ETF Investment Trust Under Nasdaq Rule 5735PDF
83 FR 55435 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Establish How the BZX Official Closing Price Would Be Determined for BZX-Listed SecuritiesPDF
83 FR 55451 - Notice of OFAC Sanctions ActionPDF
83 FR 55348 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Gustavus Ferry Terminal Improvements ProjectPDF
83 FR 55346 - Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 55286 - Utah: Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions, Codification and Incorporation by ReferencePDF
83 FR 55340 - Utah: Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions, Codification, and Incorporation by ReferencePDF
83 FR 55409 - New Postal ProductPDF
83 FR 55282 - Security Zone; Senior Government Official's Visit to Cleveland, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OHPDF
83 FR 55269 - Iranian Transactions and Sanctions RegulationsPDF
83 FR 55271 - Special Local Regulation: Fort Lauderdale Grand Prix of the Seas, Fort Lauderdale, FLPDF
83 FR 55400 - Notice of Lodging of Agreed Modification to Consent Decree Under the Clean Water ActPDF
83 FR 55263 - Changes to Surveillance and Broadcast ServicesPDF
83 FR 55258 - Airworthiness Directives; SOCATA AirplanesPDF
83 FR 55329 - Transitional Compensation (TC) for Abused DependentsPDF
83 FR 55311 - Federal-State Unemployment Compensation Program; Establishing Appropriate Occupations for Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants Under the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012PDF
83 FR 55310 - Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Williston, NDPDF
83 FR 55306 - Proposed Revocation of Class E Airspace; Beeville-Chase Field, TXPDF
83 FR 55308 - Proposed Amendment of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes; Western United StatesPDF
83 FR 55294 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS AirplanesPDF
83 FR 55255 - Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. Turboprop EnginesPDF
83 FR 55303 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS AirplanesPDF
83 FR 55297 - Airworthiness Directives; Embraer S.A. AirplanesPDF
83 FR 55252 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
83 FR 55299 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS AirplanesPDF
83 FR 55249 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., AirplanesPDF

Issue

83 214 Monday, November 5, 2018 Contents Alcohol Tobacco Firearms Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Strategic Planning Environmental Assessment Outreach, 55399-55400 2018-24181 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee, 55346 2018-24063 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zones: Upper Mississippi River, Miles 179 to 180, St. Louis, MO, 55284-55286 2018-24120 Security Zones: Senior Government Official's Visit to Cleveland, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH, 55282-55284 2018-24059 Special Local Regulations: Fort Lauderdale Grand Prix of the Seas, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 55271-55272 2018-24055 Tankers—Automatic Pilot Systems, 55272-55282 2018-24127 PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Fireworks Display, Upper Potomac River, Washington Channel, DC, 55332-55334 2018-24121 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Copyright Royalty Board Copyright Royalty Board PROPOSED RULES Modification and Amendment of Regulations, 55334-55335 2018-24089 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

PROPOSED RULES Transitional Compensation for Abused Dependents, 55329-55332 2018-23964
Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application Forms and Instructions for the Fulbright-Hays Seminars Abroad Program, 55354 2018-24178 Employment and Training Employment and Training Administration PROPOSED RULES Federal-State Unemployment Compensation Program: Establishing Appropriate Occupations for Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants under the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, 55311-55318 2018-23952 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 55354-55355 2018-24131 Meetings: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah River Site, 55355 2018-24137
Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Meetings: Inland Waterways Users Board, 55353 2018-24147 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Utah; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions, Codification and Incorporation by Reference, 55286-55292 2018-24062 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Kentucky; Minor Sources Infrastructure Requirement for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 55338-55340 2018-24203 North Carolina; NOX Rule Revisions, 55335-55338 2018-24179 Utah; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions, Codification, and Incorporation by Reference, 55340-55341 2018-24061 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for the Performance-based Measurement System for Fuels, 55362-55363 2018-24159 Delegation of Authority to the State of West Virginia to Implement and Enforce Additional or Revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Standards and New Source Performance Standards, 55360-55362 2018-24160 Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis Settlement: Casmalia Resources Superfund Site, 55363-55364 2018-24201 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes, 55249-55252 2018-23687 Honeywell International Inc. Turboprop Engines, 55255-55258 2018-23775 SOCATA Airplanes, 55258-55263 2018-24007 The Boeing Company Airplanes, 55252-55255 2018-23690 Automatic Dependent Surveillance and Broadcast Services, 55263-55264 2018-24052 Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes; Enhanced Flight Vision System, 55247-55249 2018-24104 PROPOSED RULES Air Traffic Service Routes: Western United States, 55308-55310 2018-23891 Airworthiness Directives: Airbus SAS Airplanes, 55294-55297, 55299-55306 2018-23689 2018-23692 2018-23817 Embraer S.A. Airplanes, 55297-55299 2018-23691 Establishment of Class E Airspace: Williston, ND, 55310-55311 2018-23900 Revocation of Class E Airspace: Beeville-Chase Field, TX, 55306-55308 2018-23893 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Terminations of Receivership: Allied Bank, Mulberry, AR, 55364 2018-24172 Terminations of Receiverships, 55364 2018-24115 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 55364-55365 2018-24245 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations, 55386-55388 2018-24199 Emergency and Related Determinations: Alabama, 55384 2018-24195 Emergency Declarations: Florida; Amendment No. 1, 55385 2018-24073 Flood Hazard Determinations, 55380-55383 2018-24072 2018-24184 Flood Hazard Determinations; Proposals, 55379-55380 2018-24198 Major Disaster and Related Determinations: Kansas, 55378-55379 2018-24191 Major Disaster Declarations: Florida; Amendment No. 3, 55388 2018-24081 Florida; Amendment No. 4, 55385-55386 2018-24082 Florida; Amendment No. 5, 55383 2018-24080 Georgia; Amendment No. 2, 55384 2018-24186 North Carolina; Amendment No. 7, 55384-55385 2018-24188 South Carolina; Amendment No. 6, 55386 2018-24185 South Carolina; Amendment No. 7, 55385 2018-24190 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 55356-55357 2018-24095 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Empire Pipeline, Inc.; Empire North Project, 55359-55360 2018-24105 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Alabama Power Co., 55358-55359 2018-24107 Filings: Entergy Louisiana, LLC, 55356 2018-24106 License Applications: Lakeport Hydroelectric One, LLC, 55356 2018-24108 Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 55360 2018-24096 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Approval of BNSF Railway Company Test Program to Evaluate Automated Track Inspection Technologies, 55449-55450 2018-24111 Petitions for Waiver of Compliance, 55450-55451 2018-24122 2018-24123 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 55366-55368 2018-24118 Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 55365 2018-24083 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 55365-55366 2018-24143 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan Holding Companies, 55365 2018-24074 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Proposed Consent Agreements: Marathon Petroleum Corp., 55368-55370 2018-24078 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Species: Designation of Critical Habitat for the Spring Pygmy Sunfish, 55341-55345 2018-24162 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Amendment to the 1997 Washington State Department of Natural Resources State Lands Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit, 55394-55395 2018-24212 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Guidance: Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels: Questions and Answers Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals, 55266-55267 2018-24125 PROPOSED RULES Eliminating Youth Electronic Cigarette and Other Tobacco Product Use: The Role for Drug Therapies; Public Hearing, 55318-55323 2018-24126 Guidance: Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion, Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed, Serving Size-Related Issues, Dual-Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous Topics, 55323-55324 2018-24124 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Biosimilars User Fee Program, 55370-55371 2018-24130 Guidance: Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking, 55372-55374 2018-24177 Foreign Assets Foreign Assets Control Office RULES Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, 55269-55271 2018-24058 NOTICES Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties, 55451-55452 2018-24066 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

See

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau RULES Change of Address; Indian Child Welfare Act, 55267-55269 2018-24173 NOTICES Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, 55395-55396 2018-24174 Proclaiming Certain Lands as Reservation for the Skokomish Indian Tribe of Washington, 55396-55397 2018-24176 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Amount Determined Under Section 956 for Corporate United States Shareholders, 55324-55329 2018-24140 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Large Residential Washers from the Republic of Korea, 55346-55348 2018-24144 Justice Department Justice Department See

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau

NOTICES Modification to Consent Decrees: Clean Water Act, 55400 2018-24054
Labor Department Labor Department See

Employment and Training Administration

See

Workers Compensation Programs Office

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Occupational Safety and Health Onsite Consultation Agreements, 55400-55401 2018-24153
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: OMYA Direct Land Sale Project, CA, 55398-55399 2018-24175 Plats of Survey: Colorado, 55397-55398 2018-24187 Library Library of Congress See

Copyright Royalty Board

National Archives National Archives and Records Administration See

Office of Government Information Services

National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Intramural Training & Education—Application, Registration, and Alumni Systems, Office of the Director, 55374-55375 2018-24150 Draft Report: Health Research and Development to Stem the Opioid Crisis: A Federal Roadmap, 55377-55378 2018-24149 Meetings: Advisory Committee to the Director, 55376 2018-24097 Center for Scientific Review, 55376-55377 2018-24103 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 55374 2018-24102 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 55376 2018-24098 National Institute on Drug Abuse, 55375-55377 2018-24099 2018-24100 2018-24101 National Labor National Labor Relations Board PROPOSED RULES The Standard for Determining Joint-Employer Look; Extension of Comment Period, 55329 2018-24134 NOTICES Appointments of Individuals to Serve as Members of Performance Review Boards, 55408 2018-24133 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic: South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish; July through December Season; Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure, 55293 2018-24180 South Atlantic Red Snapper; Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure, 55292 2018-24182 NOTICES National Estuarine Research Reserve System, 55348 2018-24196 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Gustavus Ferry Terminal Improvements Project, 55348-55353 2018-24064 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places: Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 55399 2018-24142 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Permit Modification Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act, 55408-55409 2018-24136 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Report on Changes to Low-Level Waste Burial Charges, 55409 2018-24079 OGIS Office of Government Information Services NOTICES Meetings: Freedom of Information Act Advisory Committee, 55408 2018-24088 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Product, 55409-55410 2018-24060 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission RULES Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual, 55264-55266 2018-24128 NOTICES Applications: Cushing Asset Management, LP and Cushing ETF Trust, 55438-55439 2018-24077 Orders: Program for Allocation of Regulatory Responsibilities, 55410-55416 2018-24070 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc., 55435-55438 2018-24067 Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, 55416-55435 2018-24068 NYSE Arca, Inc., 55439-55444 2018-24069 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 55444 2018-24109 Disaster Declarations: Georgia; Amendment 2, 55445 2018-24112 North Carolina; Amendment 2, 55445-55446 2018-24114 North Carolina; Amendment 6, 55445 2018-24113 Northern Mariana Islands, 55444-55445 2018-24110 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Privacy Act; Matching Programs, 55446 2018-24085 State Department State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Death in the Ice: The Mystery of the Franklin Expedition, 55446-55447 2018-24117 Meetings: Fine Arts Committee, 55447 2018-24116 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES Applications: Binational Panels Roster Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, 55447-55449 2018-24119 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Foreign Assets Control Office

See

Internal Revenue Service

U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Family Unity Benefits, 55389-55390 2018-24156 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility, 55392-55393 2018-24152 Genealogy Index Search Request and Genealogy Records Request, 55393-55394 2018-24155 InfoPass, 55390-55391 2018-24132 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions on Permanent Resident Status, 55391-55392 2018-24157 Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status, 55389 2018-24154 Workers' Workers Compensation Programs Office NOTICES Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, as Amended, 55401-55408 2018-24202 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.

83 214 Monday, November 5, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. FAA-2016-4159; Special Conditions No. 25-735-SC] Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 Airplanes; Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final special conditions; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc. (Bombardier) Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. These airplanes will have a novel or unusual design feature associated with an enhanced flight-vision system. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES:

This action is effective on Bombardier on November 5, 2018. Send your comments by December 20, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2016-4159 using any of the following methods:

Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.

Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.

Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.

Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.

Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Stuber, FAA, Airframe and Cabin Safety Section, AIR-671, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, Washington 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3164; email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The substance of these special conditions previously has been published in the Federal Register for public comment. These special conditions have been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change from the substance contained herein. Therefore, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary, and finds that, for the same reason, good cause exists for adopting these special conditions upon publication in the Federal Register. Comments Invited

The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been submitted in response to prior opportunities for comment described above. We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.

We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive.

Background

On May 30, 2012, Bombardier applied for an amendment to type certificate no. T00003NY to include the new Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. These airplanes are derivatives of the Model BD-700 series of airplanes and are marketed as the Bombardier Global 7000 (Model BD-700-2A12) and Global 8000 (Model BD-700-2A13). These airplanes are twin-engine, transport-category, executive-interior business jets. The maximum passenger capacity is 19 and the maximum takeoff weights are 106,250 lbs. (Model BD-700-2A12) and 104,800 lbs. (Model BD-700-2A13).

Type Certification Basis

Under the provisions of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.101, Bombardier must show that the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes meet the applicable provisions of the regulations listed in Type Certificate No. T00003NY, or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.

If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16.

Special conditions are applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to the other model under § 21.101.

In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes must comply with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.

The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance with § 11.38, and they become part of the type certification basis under § 21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes will incorporate the following novel or unusual design features:

Installation of an enhanced flight-vision system (EFVS).

Discussion

When the FAA began to evaluate the display of enhanced flight-vision system (EFVS) imagery on the head-up display, significant potential to obscure the outside view became apparent, contrary to the requirements of § 25.773. Section 25.773 does not permit distortions and reflections in the pilot-compartment view that can interfere with normal duties, and was not written in anticipation of EFVS technology. The EFVS video image potentially interferes with the pilot's ability to see the natural scene in the center of the forward field of view.

The FAA issued special conditions for such HUD/EFVS installations to ensure that the level of safety required by § 25.773 would be met even when the image might partially obscure the outside view. Unlike the pilot's natural forward vision, the EFVS image is infrared-based, monochrome, 2-dimensional (i.e., providing no depth perception), and of lower resolution. Although the pilot may be able to see around and through small, individual symbols on the HUD, the pilot may not be able to see around or through the image that fills the display without some interference of the outside view. Nevertheless, the EFVS may be capable of meeting the required level of safety when considering the combined view of the image and the outside scene visible to the pilot through the image. It is essential that the pilot can use this combination of image and natural view of the outside scene as safely and effectively as is the pilot-compartment view currently available without the EFVS image.

Because § 25.773, at the applicable amendment level, does not provide for any alternatives or considerations for a novel or unusual design feature, the FAA establishes safety requirements that assure an equivalent level of safety and effectiveness of the pilot-compartment view as intended by that rule. The purpose of these special conditions is to provide the unique pilot-compartment-view requirements for the EFVS installation.

Compliance with these special conditions is required for the EFVS to be found acceptable, for the following intended functions, in accordance with §  91.176(b):

1. Presenting an image that would aid the pilot during a straight-in instrument approach.

2. Enable the pilot to determine the “enhanced flight visibility,” as required by §  91.176(b)(3), for descent and operation below MDA/DH.

3. Enable the pilot to use the EFVS imagery to detect and identify the “visual references for the intended runway,” required by §  91.176(b)(3), to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 100 feet height above touchdown-zone elevation.

Note:

The term “Enhanced Vision System,” or EVS, commonly refers to a system comprising a HUD, imaging sensor(s), and avionics interface(s) that displays the sensor imagery on the HUD and overlays it with alpha-numeric and symbolic flight information. However, the term has also been used to refer to systems that display the sensor imagery, with or without other flight information, on a head-down display. Therefore, to avoid confusion, the FAA has defined the term “Enhanced Flight Vision System” (EFVS) to refer to certain EVS that meet the requirements of §  91.176(b), in particular the requirement for a HUD and specified flight information, and the ability to determine “enhanced flight visibility.” Accordingly, an EFVS can be considered a subset of systems otherwise labeled EVS.

These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

Applicability

As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. Should Bombardier Inc. apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on two models of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority Citation

The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes.

1. EFVS imagery on the HUD must not degrade the safety of flight, nor interfere with the effective use of outside visual references for required pilot tasks, during any phase of flight in which it is to be used.

2. To avoid unacceptable interference with the safe and effective use of the pilot-compartment view, the EFVS device must meet the following requirements:

a. EFVS design must minimize unacceptable display characteristics or artifacts (e.g. noise, “burlap” overlay, running water droplets) that obscure the desired image of the scene, impair the pilot's ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, distract the pilot, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety.

b. Control of EFVS display brightness must be sufficiently effective, in dynamically changing background (ambient) lighting conditions, to prevent full or partial blooming of the display that would distract the pilot, impair the pilot's ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety. If automatic control for image brightness is not provided, it must be shown that a single manual setting is satisfactory for the range of lighting conditions encountered during a time-critical, high-workload phase of flight (e.g., low-visibility instrument approach).

c. A readily accessible control must be provided that permits the pilot to immediately deactivate and reactivate display of the EFVS image on demand, without removing the pilot's hands from the primary flight controls (yoke or equivalent) or thrust control.

d. The EFVS image on the HUD must not impair the pilot's use of guidance information, or degrade the presentation and pilot awareness of essential flight information displayed on the HUD, such as alerts, airspeed, attitude, altitude and direction, approach guidance, wind-shear guidance, TCAS resolution advisories, and unusual-attitude recovery cues.

e. The EFVS image and the HUD symbols, which are spatially referenced to the pitch scale, outside view, and image, must be scaled and aligned (i.e., conformal) to the external scene and, when considered singly or in combination, must not be misleading, cause pilot confusion, or increase workload. Airplane attitudes or cross-wind conditions may cause certain symbols, such as the zero-pitch line or flight-path vector, to reach field-of-view limits such that they cannot be positioned conformably with the image and external scene. In such cases, these symbols may be displayed, but with an altered appearance (e.g., “ghosting”) which makes the pilot aware that they are no longer displayed conformally.

f. A HUD system that displays EFVS images must, if previously certified, continue to meet all of the requirements of the original approval.

3. The safety and performance of the pilot tasks associated with the use of the pilot-compartment view must be not be degraded by the display of the EFVS image. Pilot tasks, which must not be degraded by the EFVS image, include:

a. Detection, accurate identification, and maneuvering, as necessary, to avoid traffic, terrain, obstacles, and other hazards of flight.

b. Accurate identification and utilization of visual references required for every task relevant to the phase of flight.

4. Use of EFVS for instrument approach operations must be in accordance with the provisions of the applicable § 91.176 operational rule. Appropriate limitations must be stated in the Operating Limitations section of the Airplane Flight Manual to prohibit the use of the EFVS for functions that have not been found to be acceptable.

Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 29, 2018. Victor Wicklund, Manager, Transport Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-24104 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0585; Product Identifier 2018-NM-070-AD; Amendment 39-19481; AD 2018-22-08] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports that non-conforming FIREX squib wire harness connectors may have been installed, which could result in FIREX squib wire harness connectors being connected to the wrong FIREX bottle connectors on affected aircraft. This AD requires a visual inspection of the connections between the FIREX squib wire harness connectors and FIREX bottle connectors, installation of split ring lanyards on the FIREX squib wire harness connectors, and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 10, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0585.

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-2018-0585; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John DeLuca, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7369; fax 516-794-5531; email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 6, 2018 (83 FR 31491). The NPRM was prompted by reports that non-conforming FIREX squib wire harness connectors may have been installed, which could result in FIREX squib wire harness connectors being connected to the wrong FIREX bottle connectors on affected aircraft. The NPRM proposed to require a visual inspection of the connections between the FIREX squib wire harness connectors and FIREX bottle connectors, installation of split ring lanyards on the FIREX squib wire harness connectors, and corrective actions if necessary.

We are issuing this AD to address this wiring discrepancy, which, in the event of an engine fire, could result in misrouting the supply of fire extinguishing agent to the wrong engine, or limit the supply from both FIREX bottles to only one engine, which could result in the inability to extinguish an engine fire.

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2018-08R1, dated March 2, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states:

Bombardier Inc. has been made aware that non-conforming squib connector wire harnesses may have been installed on one of the two engine FIREX bottle installations on some of the affected aeroplanes. The subject non conformity of squib connector wire length can allow cross connection between the two squib connectors on one of the engine FIREX bottles, preventing proper function of the engine FIREX system.

In the event of an engine fire, this wiring discrepancy may potentially misroute the supply of fire extinguishing agent to the wrong engine, or limit the supply from both FIREX bottles to only one engine, hence impacting the operational safety of the aeroplane.

Bombardier Inc. issued service bulletins (SB) 700-26-011, 700-26-5003, 700-26-6003, and 700-1A11-26-004, for the affected model aeroplanes, to address the potentially unsafe condition caused by the non-conforming FIREX bottle squib connector wiring.

The original version of this [Canadian] AD was issued to mandate compliance with the above-mentioned SBs, as applicable.

Revision 1 of this [Canadian] AD is issued to correct an error in the applicability section of the original AD.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0585.

Comments

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

Request To Refer to Revised Service Information

Bombardier requested that the NPRM be updated to reference the current revision of certain service information to avoid issuing an Alternate Means of Compliance (AMOC) following the release of this AD. Bombardier noted that four service bulletins referred to in the NPRM have been revised. Bombardier stated that the latest revisions correct a minor error in the original weight and balance section. Bombardier also noted that a previous revision to the service information included mention of the Canadian AD CF-2018-08R1, as well as a clarifying note in the close-out instruction of the service information for operator convenience and ease of use.

We agree with the commenter's request. Because the revised service information does not include any additional actions, we have updated the preamble and figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD to refer to the revised service information.

Bombardier also requested that we revise the NPRM to include previous revisions of the service information as credit for operators who have already accomplished the required actions to avoid issuance of AMOCs following the release of this AD.

We agree with the commenter's request. Because the previous revisions of the service information do not include any additional actions, we have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to provide credit for actions accomplished prior to the effective date of this AD using the applicable Bombardier service information identified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(12) of this AD.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

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

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

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Bombardier, Inc. issued the following service information:

• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-26-004, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-011, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-5003, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-6003, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

This service information describes procedures for a visual inspection of the connections between the FIREX squib wire harness connectors and the FIREX bottle connectors to determine whether the connectors are installed correctly, and installation of split ring lanyards on the FIREX squib wire harness connectors. This service information also describes procedures for reconnecting incorrectly installed connectors to the appropriate mating connectors and an operational test of the fire extinguishing system. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models in different configurations. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 358 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Inspection/Modification 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 $55 $225 $80,550

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all known costs in our cost estimate.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2018-22-08 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-19481; Docket No. FAA-2018-0585; Product Identifier 2018-NM-070-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 9001 through 9839 inclusive, and serial number 9998.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 26, Fire protection.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that non-conforming FIREX squib wire harness connectors may have been installed, which could result in FIREX squib wire harness connectors being connected to the wrong FIREX bottle connectors on affected aircraft. We are issuing this AD to address this wiring discrepancy, which, in the event of an engine fire, could result in misrouting the supply of fire extinguishing agent to the wrong engine, or limit the supply from both FIREX bottles to only one engine, which could result in the inability to extinguish an engine fire.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Required Actions

    Within 1,000 flight hours or 15 months, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, perform a visual inspection for correct connections between the FIREX squib wire harness connectors and FIREX bottle connectors, and install split ring lanyards on the FIREX squib wire harness connectors, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information listed in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD. If any incorrect connections are found: Before further flight, re-connect the connectors to the appropriate mating connecters and do an operational test of the fire extinguishing system, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service information specified in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD.

    ER05NO18.000 (h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using the applicable service information listed in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(12) of this AD.

    (1) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-26-004, dated December 28, 2017.

    (2) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-26-004, Revision 01, dated February 15, 2018.

    (3) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-26-004, Revision 02, dated July 27, 2018.

    (4) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-011, dated December 28, 2017.

    (5) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-011, Revision 01, dated February 15, 2018.

    (6) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-011, Revision 02, dated July 27, 2018.

    (7) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-5003, dated December 28, 2017.

    (8) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-5003, Revision 01, dated February 15, 2018.

    (9) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-5003, Revision 02, dated July 27, 2018.

    (10) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-6003, dated December 28, 2017.

    (11) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-6003, Revision 01, dated February 15, 2018.

    (12) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-6003, Revision 02, dated July 27, 2018.

    (i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7300; fax 516-794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

    (j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2018-08R1, dated March 2, 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-2018-0585.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact John DeLuca, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Electrical Systems Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7369; fax 516-794-5531; email [email protected]

    (k) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-26-004, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-011, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

    (iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-5003, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

    (iv) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-26-6003, Revision 03, dated August 24, 2018.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; internet http://www.bombardier.com.

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

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

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 22, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23687 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0027; Product Identifier 2017-NM-118-AD; Amendment 39-19482; AD 2018-22-09] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 787 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports that, under certain conditions, the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) out function and air traffic control/traffic alert and collision avoidance system (ATC/TCAS) functions can transmit incorrect data. This AD requires an inspection or records review to determine if certain software is installed, the installation of new software for the integrated surveillance system (ISS) operational program software (OPS) if necessary, a software check, and applicable on-condition actions. For certain airplanes, this AD also requires the installation of new software for the ISS OPS, ISS option selection software (OSS) file, and ISS airline selectable option (ASO) file; and installation of a new ISS definition file database within the displays and crew alerting (DCA) system. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0027.

    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-2018-0027; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nelson O. Sanchez, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3543; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company Model 787 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on February 9, 2018 (83 FR 5741). The NPRM was prompted by reports that, under certain conditions, the ADS-B out function and ATC/TCAS functions can transmit incorrect data. The NPRM proposed to require an inspection or records review to determine if certain software is installed, the installation of new software for the ISS OPS if necessary, a software check, and applicable on-condition actions. For certain airplanes, this AD also requires the installation of new software for the ISS OPS, ISS OSS file, ISS ASO file, and installation of a new ISS definition file database within the DCA database system.

    We are issuing this AD to address the transmission of incorrect position and pressure altitude data, which could result in potential mid-air collisions.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment. The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) expressed support for the NPRM. United Airlines had no objection to the NPRM.

    Request To Allow for Later-Approved Service Bulletins in Paragraph (h)

    American Airlines requested that we consider revising paragraph (h) of the proposed AD to include later-approved service bulletins regarding software loading. American said this change would eliminate the need to obtain alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) when software is updated.

    We partially agree with the commenter's request. We cannot allow operators to use later-approved revisions of the service bulletins, since we may not refer to any document that does not yet exist in an AD. To allow operators to use later revisions of service bulletins (issued after publication of the AD), we must revise the AD to reference specific later revisions, or operators must request approval to use later revisions as an AMOC to the AD. However, we may allow for later-approved software versions if they are approved as a replacement for the applicable software, and are approved as part of the type design by the FAA or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) after issuance of the service bulletins specified in this AD. Therefore, we have revised paragraph (h) of this AD to allow for later-approved versions of the software. Since paragraph (i) of this AD specifies a similar requirement for certain airplanes, we have also revised paragraph (i) of this AD to allow for later-approved software versions.

    Request To Include Additional Software

    Boeing suggested that we revise the Summary section and “Related Service Information under 1 CFR part 51” section of the NPRM and paragraph (i) of the proposed AD to include the following additional software: ISS OSS file, ISS ASO file, and installation of a new ISS definition file database within the DCA system. Boeing asserted that this would clarify which software may be impacted when considering all configurations in service.

    We agree with the commenter's request. We have revised this final rule accordingly. We have also added this same information to the Discussion section of this final rule.

    Request To Add Other Software Part Numbers to Paragraphs (g), (h), and (j) of the Proposed AD

    Boeing suggested adding certain software part numbers to paragraphs (g), (h), and (j) of the proposed AD. Boeing observed that although the part numbers provided in the proposed AD represent the latest software installed in production, additional software might still be installed in-service. According to Boeing, the suggested additions would result in updates to paragraphs (g), (h), and (j) of the proposed AD to include all possible software part numbers.

    We partially agree with the commenter's request because software part numbers COL40-0010-0010, COL41-0010-0011, and ISS SysIO OPS COL46-0007-0010, identified by Boeing, also have the potential to transmit incorrect data, which is the basis for the unsafe condition. However, we disagree with the suggestion to include more software part numbers because that would expand the scope of this AD and require a supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) and re-opening of the comment period, thereby delaying issuance of this final rule to address the identified unsafe condition. We are considering additional rulemaking applicable to all Boeing Model 787 airplanes to address the additional part numbers. This AD has not been changed with regard to this request.

    Request To Give Credit for Prior Accomplishment of Requirements

    Naftaly Wambugu requested that the FAA give credit to operators who will have accomplished Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017, across their Boeing 787 fleet.

    We acknowledge the commenter's request and agree to clarify. Paragraph (f) of this AD provides credit to operators who have already accomplished the AD requirements, including those involving Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017, before the effective date of this AD. Therefore, this AD has not been changed with regard to this request.

    Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

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

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

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

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017. This service information describes procedures for the installation of new software for the ISS OPS (which includes main input/output (IO) software and traffic transponder (XPDR) airborne collision avoidance system (ACAS) software), a software check, and applicable on-condition actions.

    We also reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340005-00, Issue 002, dated April 27, 2016. This service information describes procedures for the installation of new software for the ISS OPS, ISS OSS file, ISS ASO file, and for the ISS definition file database within the DCA system.

    This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 136 airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that 115 airplanes will require installation and check of new software, and 54 airplanes will require the concurrent installation of other software. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Costs for Required Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Records Review/Inspection (136 airplanes) 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $0 $85 $11,560 Installation and Check (115 airplanes) 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 0 340 39,100 Concurrent Installation (54 airplanes) 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 0 85 4,590

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

    Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 $0 $340

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all available costs in our cost estimate.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2018-22-09 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19482; Docket No. FAA-2018-0027; Product Identifier 2017-NM-118-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 787 series airplanes, certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports that under certain conditions the automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) out and air traffic control (ATC)/traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) functions can transmit incorrect position and pressure altitude information in the data that is used by ATC to coordinate aircraft separation. We are issuing this AD to address the transmission of incorrect position and pressure altitude data, which could result in potential mid-air collisions.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection or Records Review

    For airplanes that have an original certificate of airworthiness or export certificate of airworthiness issued on or before the effective date of this AD: Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, inspect to determine if integrated surveillance system (ISS) operational program software (OPS) part number (P/N) COL40-0010-0100 or COL46-0007-0100 is installed. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number of the software can be conclusively determined from that review.

    (h) Required Actions

    If, during any inspection or records review required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any ISS OPS P/N COL40-0010-0100 or COL46-0007-0100 is found: Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do all applicable actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017; except where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017, specifies installing software P/Ns COL41-0010-0101 and COL44-0007-0102, this AD requires installing P/Ns COL41-0010-0101 and COL44-0007-0102, or later-approved software versions. Later-approved software versions are only those Boeing software versions that are approved as a replacement for the applicable software, and are approved as part of the type design by the FAA or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) after issuance of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017.

    (i) Additional Actions for Group 1 Airplanes

    For Group 1 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017: Prior to accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, install new software for the ISS OPS, ISS option selection software (OSS) file, and ISS airline selectable option (ASO) file; and install a new ISS definition file database within the displays and crew alerting (DCA) system; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340005-00, Issue 002, dated April 27, 2016; except where Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340005-00, Issue 002, dated April 27, 2016, specifies installing certain software, this AD requires installing that software or later-approved software versions. Later-approved software versions are only those Boeing software versions that are approved as a replacement for the applicable software, and are approved as part of the type design by the FAA or the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA after issuance of Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340005-00, Issue 002, dated April 27, 2016.

    (j) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install ISS OPS part number COL40-0010-0100 or COL46-0007-0100 on any airplane, except in accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD.

    (k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340005-00, Issue 001, dated December 11, 2015.

    (l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

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

    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    (4) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as RC, the provisions of paragraphs (l)(4)(i) and (l)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.

    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

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

    (m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Nelson O. Sanchez, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3543; email: [email protected]

    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.

    (n) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340036-00, Issue 001, dated June 30, 2017.

    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB340005-00, Issue 002, dated April 27, 2016.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

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

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

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 22, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23690 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0216; Product Identifier 1988-ANE-18-AD; Amendment 39-19474; AD 2018-22-01] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. Turboprop Engines AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 88-12-10 for certain Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) TPE331 turboprop engines. AD 88-12-10 required reducing the life limit for certain second stage turbine rotors. This AD requires removing certain second stage turbine rotors from service at a reduced life limit. This AD was prompted by report that a TPE331-11U engine experienced an uncontained rotor separation. In addition, cracks were discovered through eddy current inspection (ECI) in the bore of the second stage turbine rotor assembly after publication of AD 88-12-10. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Honeywell International Inc., 111 S 34th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034-2802; phone: 800-601-3099; internet: https://myaerospace.honeywell.com/wps/portal. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7759. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0216.

    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-2018-0216; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5246; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 88-12-10, Amendment 39-5910 (53 FR 19766, May 31, 1988), (“AD 88-12-10”). AD 88-12-10 applied to Honeywell TPE331-10, -10R, -10U, -10UA, -10UF, -10UG, -10UGR, -10UR, and -11U turboprop engines equipped with 2nd stage turbine rotors, part numbers 3102106-1, -6, and -8, installed. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2018 (83 FR 28550). The NPRM was prompted by a report that a TPE331-11U engine installed on an M7 Aerospace LP SA227 airplane experienced an uncontained rotor separation. In addition, cracks were discovered through ECI in the bore of the second stage turbine rotor assembly after publication of AD 88-12-10. The NPRM proposed to remove certain second stage turbine rotors from service at a reduced life limit. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    Comments

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

    Request To Revise Compliance Times

    Honeywell requested that we remove from the NPRM the statement that the FAA finds that allowing an additional 100 cycles-in-service before their removal provides a sufficient level of safety for applicable second stage turbine rotors that have been in service for 30 years after the publication of AD 88-12-10. Honeywell indicated it believes that most of the IN100 rotors have been replaced at around 3,500 cycles during hot section inspection. Honeywell noted that the rotors would not make it to the next hot section inspection with a life of 4,800 cycles. Honeywell noted that there is a not a lot of field experience for IN100 rotors beyond 3,500 cycles.

    Honeywell commented that the removal schedule in the Honeywell service bulletin needs to remain the same (within 100 cycles-in-service for 3,301 to 4,000 cycles since new (CSN) rotors and within 50 cycles-in-service for 4,001 to 4,800 CSN rotors) since the event rotor failed at around 4,100 cycles. Additionally, Honeywell has also found rotors through eddy current inspection that had long cracks at around 4,300 cycles.

    We disagree. We would normally only require removal of parts within 50 cycles-in-service after the effective date of an AD when the risk justifies immediate action. The FAA assessed the risk of the affected rotors based on service experience and IN100 rotor propagation life of cracked and failed rotors. We found that the additional cycles in service allowed by this AD before the removal of the second stage turbine rotors provides an acceptable level of safety. We did not change this AD.

    Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed.

    Related Service Information

    We reviewed Honeywell Service Bulletin (SB) TPE331-72-A2319, Revision 0, dated April 25, 2018, and TPE331-72-A2310, Revision 0, dated January 26, 2018. These SBs describe procedures for replacement of the second stage turbine rotor assembly installed on TPE331-8, -10, -10N, -10R, -10U, -10UA, -10UF, -10UG, -10UGR, -10UR, and -11U model engines.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 100 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate that 20 commercial engines and 80 general aviation engines will need this turbine rotor replacement to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Scheduled rotor replacement 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $7,500 $7,585 $379,250 Unscheduled rotor replacement 41 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,485 7,500 10,985 549,250
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

    We have 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 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) 88-12-10, Amendment 39-5910 (53 FR 19766, May 31, 1988), and adding the following new AD: 2018-22-01 Honeywell International Inc. (Type Certificate previously held by AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett Engine Division; Garrett Turbine Engine Company; and AiResearch Manufacturing Company of Arizona): Amendment 39-19474; Docket No. FAA-2018-0216; Product Identifier 1988-ANE-18-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 88-12-10, Amendment 39-5910 (53 FR 19766, May 31, 1988).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) TPE331-8, -10, -10N, -10R, -10U, -10UA, -10UF, -10UG, -10UGR, -10UR, and -11U turboprop engines with second stage turbine rotor assemblies, part number (P/Ns) 3102106-1, -6, and -8 or P/N 3101514-1, -10 and -12, installed.

    (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine Section.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that a TPE331-11U engine installed on an M7 Aerospace LP SA227 airplane experienced an uncontained rotor separation and the discovery of cracks in the bore of the second stage turbine rotor assembly after publication of AD 88-12-10. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the second stage turbine rotor. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in uncontained release of the second stage turbine rotor, damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Required Actions

    (1) Remove from service the applicable second stage turbine rotor assembly, P/Ns 3102106-1, -6 and -8, according to the schedule in Table 1 to Paragraph (g)(1) of this AD:

    Table 1 to Paragraph (g)(1) of This AD—Removal of Second Stage Rotor, P/Ns 3102106-1, -6 and -8 Second stage turbine rotor cycles since new (CSN) on the effective date of the AD Removal schedule 0 to 2,600 Prior to 3,000 CSN. 2,601 to 3,300 Within 400 cycles-in-service (CIS) after the effective date of this AD or 3,600 CSN, or at next access, whichever occurs first. 3,301 to 4,000 Within 200 cycles-in-service after the effective date of this AD or 4,100 CSN, or at next access, whichever occurs first. 4,001 to 4,800 Within 100 cycles-in-service after the effective date of this AD or 4,800 CSN, or at next access, whichever occurs first.

    (2) Remove from service the applicable second stage turbine rotor assembly, P/Ns 3101514-1, -10 and -12, per the schedule in Table 2 to Paragraph (g)(2) of this AD:

    Table 2 to Paragraph (g)(2) of This AD—Removal of Second Stage Rotors, P/Ns 3101514-1, -10 and -12 Second stage turbine rotor CSN on the effective date of the AD Removal schedule 0 to 2,600 Prior to 3,000 CSN. 2,601 to 3,200 Within 400 CIS after the effective date of this AD or 3,600 CSN, or at next access, whichever occurs first. 3,201 to 3,800 Within 200 CIS after the effective date of this AD or 4,100 CSN, or at next access, whichever occurs first. 3,801 to 4,400 Within 100 CIS after the effective date of this AD or 4,400 CSN, or at next access, whichever occurs first. (h) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, “next access” is defined as when the applicable second stage turbine rotor assembly is removed from the engine.

    (i) Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, do not install second stage turbine rotor assemblies, P/Ns 3102106-1, -6, and -8 and P/Ns 3101514-1, -10, and -12 on any engine.

    (j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

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

    (k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5246; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

    (l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on October 23, 2018. Karen M. Grant, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23775 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0326; Product Identifier 2018-CE-006-AD; Amendment 39-19464; AD 2018-21-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; SOCATA Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 98-16-03 for SOCATA Model TB 9 and Model TB 10 airplanes. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as fatigue cracking of the wing front attachments on the wing and fuselage sides. We are issuing this AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective December 10, 2018.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of December 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0326; or in person at Docket Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

    For service information identified in this AD, contact SOCATA, Direction des services, 65921 Tarbes Cedex 9, France; phone: +33 (0) 5 62 41 73 00; fax: +33 (0) 5 62 41 76 54; email: [email protected]; internet: https://www.mysocata.com/login/accueil.php. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Policy and Innovation Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329-4148. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2018-0326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Quentin Coon, Aerospace Engineer, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4168; fax: (816) 329-4090; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 98-16-03, Amendment 39-10677 (63 FR 40359, July 29, 1998) (“AD 98-16-03”). The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on May 9, 2018 (83 FR 21199), and proposed to correct an unsafe condition for SOCATA Model TB 9, Model TB 10, and Model TB 200 airplanes. We based the NPRM on MCAI originated by an aviation authority of another country. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, issued EASA AD No. 2018-0030, dated January 31, 2018 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”). The MCAI states that:

    During a scheduled maintenance inspection, cracks were found on the wing front attachments of a TB 10 aeroplane.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane.

    Prompted by these findings, SOCATA issued SB 10-081-57 to provide inspection and modification instructions, and DGAC France issued AD 94-264(A), later revised, to require repetitive inspections of wing front attachments of TB 9 and TB 10 aeroplanes (all MSN up to 822 inclusive, with some excluded). That [DGAC France] AD also required installation of reinforcement kits, applied as repair (if cracks were found) or as modification (if no cracks were found), of the wing front attachments, on both wing and fuselage sides, and repetitive replacement of those reinforcements afterwards.

    Since DGAC France AD 94-264(A) R1 was issued, cracks have been found on wing front attachments, on the wing side, on TB10 aeroplanes to which the AD did not apply, i.e. which were not subject to repetitive inspections as required by that [DGAC France] AD. Consequently, SOCATA revised SB 10-081-57 (now at revision (rev) 3), extending the Applicability to all TB 10 aeroplanes, as well as to TB 200 aeroplanes, and improving the repair solution of the wing front attachment on wing side.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of DGAC France AD 94-264(A) R1, which is superseded, expands the Applicability to all MSN for TB 9 and TB 10 aeroplanes and includes TB 200 aeroplanes, and requires an improved repair solution of the wing front attachment on wing side.

    The MCAI can be found in the AD docket on the internet at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FAA-2018-0326-0003.

    Comments

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

    Request for an Explanation of Compliance Time

    Daher requested that we explain why the compliance times in the NPRM are presented in landings and do not match the compliance times in the EASA AD, which uses both hours time-in-service (TIS) and number of landings.

    The NPRM retained the compliance times from AD 98-16-03, which were based in landings instead of hours TIS. The NPRM also retained the formula for converting hours TIS to landings from AD 98-16-03 for airplanes with an unknown number of landings. Because we also retained the effective date of AD 98-16-03 for certain actions, we determined the NPRM would not use both landings and hours TIS, as in the EASA AD.

    Change to the Final Rule

    In the NPRM, in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) and table 4 to paragraph (i)(1), we inadvertently referenced the incorrect paragraph designator in the retained compliance times as, “See paragraph (g) of this AD.” In this AD, we corrected the paragraph designator to read, “See paragraph (k) of this AD.”

    We also revised the incorporation by reference of the service information to specify the provisions required for each action, instead of the entire service document.

    Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed except for the changes previously described and other minor editorial changes. We have determined that these changes:

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

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

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Daher Service Bulletin SB 10-081, Revision 3, dated December 2017. The service bulletin describes procedures for inspecting the front attachments and installing modification kits. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 126 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 3 work-hours per product to comply with the inspection requirements of this AD. We also estimate that it would take about 25 work-hours per product to comply with the replacement/modification (wing and fuselage sides) requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $3,000 per product.

    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $677,880, or $5,380 per product.

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions to replace the wing attachment on the wing side, resulting from the repetitive inspections, would take about 9 work-hours and require parts costing $3,000, for a cost of $3,765 per product. We have no way of determining the number of products that may need these actions.

    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 small airplanes, gliders, balloons, airships, domestic business jet transport airplanes, and associated appliances to the Director of the Policy and Innovation 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 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.

    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-2018-0326; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    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) 98-16-03, Amendment 39-10677 (63 FR 40359, July 29, 1998) and adding the following new AD: 2018-21-06 SOCATA: Amendment 39-19464; Docket No. FAA-2018-0326; Product Identifier 2018-CE-006-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective December 10, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 98-16-03, Amendment 39-10677 (63 FR 40359, July 29, 1998) (“AD 98-16-03”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to SOCATA airplanes listed in the following groups, certificated in any category:

    (1) Group 1 airplanes: Model TB 9, all manufacturer serial numbers (MSN); and Model TB 10, MSN 001 through 803, 805, 806, 809 through 815, and 820 through 822; and

    (2) Group 2 airplanes: Model TB 10, MSN 804, 807, 808, 816 through 819, and 823 through 2229; and Model TB 200, all MSNs.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 57: Wings.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as fatigue cracking of the wing front attachments on the wing and fuselage sides. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the wing front attachments, which could lead to structural failure of the airplane and loss of control.

    (f) Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions listed in paragraphs (g) through (j) of this AD. The compliance times of this AD are presented in landings instead of hours time-in-service (TIS). If the number of landings is unknown, multiply the number of hours TIS by 1.5. For the purposes of this AD, the “XX” in the kit numbers can be any numerical value.

    (g) Actions for Airplanes NOT EQUIPPED With Modification Kit OPT109110XX

    (1) Within the compliance time specified in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, do an initial inspection of the wing front attachments on the wing side. Inspect repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 landings. Follow paragraphs B(1) through B(4) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SOCATA Daher Service Bulletin SB 10-081, Revision 3, December 2017 (SB 10-081, Revision 3).

    ER05NO18.003

    (2) If a crack was found during any inspection required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, before further flight, install the modification reinforcement kit OPT10911002 for the front attachment on the wing side. Follow paragraph B(5) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    (3) Within the compliance time specified in table 2 to paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, unless already done as corrective action as specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, install the modification reinforcement kit OPT10911002 for the front attachment on the wing side. Follow paragraph B(5) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    ER05NO18.004 (h) Actions for Airplanes EQUIPPED With Modification Kit OPT109110XX

    (1) Within the compliance time specified in table 3 to paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, do an initial inspection of the reinforced front attachment on the wing side. Inspect repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 landings. Follow paragraphs B(1) through B(4) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    ER05NO18.005

    (2) Replacing kit OPT109110XX with kit OPT10911002 on an airplane, at intervals not to exceed 6,000 landings, is acceptable to comply with the inspection requirements of paragraph (h)(1) of this AD for that airplane. Follow paragraph B(5) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    (3) If a crack was found during any inspection required in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further flight, do the applicable corrective actions. Follow paragraph B(5) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    (i) Actions for Group 1 Airplanes

    (1) Within the compliance time specified in table 4 to paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, do an initial inspection of the wing front attachments on the fuselage side. Inspect repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 landings. Follow paragraphs B(1) through B(4) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    ER05NO18.006

    (2) If a crack was found during any inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, before further flight, do the applicable corrective actions. Follow paragraph B(5) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    (3) Unless already done as corrective action required in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, within the compliance time specified in table 5 to paragraph (i)(3) of this AD, reinforce the front attachment on fuselage side. Follow paragraph B(5)(b) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    ER05NO18.007

    (4) Before or upon accumulating 12,000 landings after the reinforcement modification required in paragraph (i)(2) or (3) of this AD, replace the reinforced front attachment on the fuselage side. Follow paragraph B(5)(c) under the Description of Accomplishment Instructions in SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    (j) Replacement of the Reinforced Front Attachment

    Replacement of the reinforced front attachment on the wing side and/or replacement of the reinforced front attachment on the fuselage side does not terminate the inspections required in paragraphs (h)(1) and (i)(1) of this AD. After replacement, the initial and repetitive inspection cycle starts over.

    (k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This AD allows credit for the initial inspections required in paragraphs (g)(1), (h)(1), and (i)(1) of this AD if done before the effective date of this AD by following Socata Service Bulletin No. SB 10-081-57, Revision 1, dated August 1996 or Revision 2, dated January 2017. This AD also allows credit for any replacement that may have been required based on the initial inspection required in paragraphs (g)(1), (h)(1), and (i)(1) of this AD if done before the effective date of this AD by following Socata Service Bulletin No. SB 10-081-57, Revision 1, dated August 1996 or Revision 2, dated January 2017. After the effective date of this AD, you must do any inspections or replacements by following SB 10-081, Revision 3.

    (l) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Quentin Coon, Aerospace Engineer, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4168; fax: (816) 329-4090; email: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must instead be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).

    (m) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA No. 2018-0030, dated January 31, 2018; and Socata Service Bulletin No. SB 10-081-57, Revision 1, dated August 1996, or Revision 2, dated January 2017, for related information. The MCAI can be found in the AD docket on the internet at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FAA-2018-0326-0003.

    (l) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) SOCATA Daher Service Bulletin SB 10-081, Revision 3, December 2017.

    (ii) [Reserved]

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact SOCATA, Direction des services, 65921 Tarbes Cedex 9, France; phone: +33 (0) 5 62 41 73 00; fax: +33 (0) 5 62 41 76 54; email: [email protected]; internet: https://www.mysocata.com/login/accueil.php.

    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Policy and Innovation Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 816-329-4148. In addition, you can access this service information on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0326.

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

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 26, 2018. Melvin J. Johnson, Aircraft Certification Service, Deputy Director, Policy and Innovation Division, AIR-601.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24007 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 91 [Docket No.: FAA-2018-0914] Changes to Surveillance and Broadcast Services AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notification of changes to surveillance and broadcast services.

    SUMMARY:

    This action announces changes to the following surveillance and broadcast services (“surveillance services”) after January 1, 2020: Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast (ADS-B); Traffic Information Service—Broadcast (TIS-B); Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Rebroadcast (ADS-R); and Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Same Link Rebroadcast (ADS-SLR). These service changes will affect aircraft equipped with older ADS-B avionics that do not meet the requirements of 14 CFR 91.225. The service changes will primarily affect aircraft operating in specific airspace areas, though a few service changes will affect aircraft operating throughout the National Airspace System (NAS).

    DATES:

    The FAA will initiate the actions described herein on January 2, 2020.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical questions concerning this action, contact: David E. Gray, Program Manager, Surveillance and Broadcast Services, AJM-232, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20597; telephone: 202-267-3615; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    In 2010, the FAA issued a final rule mandating equipage requirements and performance standards for Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast (ADS-B) Out avionics on aircraft operating in certain airspace after January 1, 2020 (75 FR 30160, May 28, 2010). Use of ADS-B Out will move air traffic control (ATC) from a radar-based system to a satellite-derived aircraft location system and enhance aircraft surveillance by the FAA and Department of Defense air traffic controllers. Equipage with ADS-B avionics also provides aircraft operators with a platform for additional flight applications and services, including TIS-B 1 and ADS-R 1 , which will improve a pilot's situational awareness in aircraft not equipped with a traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS). Under 14 CFR 91.225, after January 1, 2020, to operate in certain airspace, an aircraft must have equipment installed that meets the performance requirements of Technical Standard Order (TSO)-C166b or TSO-C154c (“2020 Equipment”).

    1 TIS-B uses secondary surveillance radars and multilateration systems to provide proximate traffic situational awareness, including position reports from aircraft not equipped with ADS-B Out or providing poor quality ADS-B Out data. TIS-B data does not provide as much information as could be received directly from an aircraft's ADS-B Out broadcast, because of the information available and required data processing. The TIS-B signal is an advisory service that is not designed for aircraft surveillance or separation, and cannot be used for either purpose.

    1 ADS-R collects traffic information from each ADS-B link and rebroadcasts it to ADS-B In-equipped aircraft on the other ADS-B link as needed. Note that ADS-R services are only available when both aircraft are within range of any ADS-B ground radio station, so there are regions of airspace without ADS-R coverage. ADS-B-In avionics with dual link receive capability neither require nor receive ADS-R.

    Between 2010 and 2014, the FAA completed the ADS-B ground infrastructure. To ensure the benefits of the ADS-B surveillance infrastructure were made available as soon as it was deployed, the FAA enabled aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 2 Equipment to receive TIS-B and ADS-R services even though these aircraft would not be considered rule compliant after January 1, 2020. The FAA also provided ATC surveillance services to aircraft that were equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment outside radar coverage in Alaska and offshore Gulf of Mexico airspace.

    2 For purposes of this document, Pre-2020 Equipment refers to aircraft that are in compliance with Technical Standard Order (TSO)-C166a or TSO-C154b. It does not include aircraft that are equipped with avionics compliant with TSO-C166 or TSO-C154a (or earlier). Note that aircraft equipped with ADS-B avionics compliant with TSO-C166 or TSO-C154a (or earlier) have never been provided with FAA TIS-B or ADS-R services or FAA ATC surveillance services using ADS-B.

    Service Changes to Operations in Alaska

    With regard to operations in Alaska, the FAA funded a project to upgrade Pre-2020 Equipment for aircraft operating within Alaska to ensure these aircraft would meet the 2020 Equipment standards in time for the mandate.3 This upgrade project will conclude in early 2019. Aircraft flying to and from Anchorage, Alaska and within Class A airspace over Alaska must also be in compliance with § 91.225 after January 1, 2020.

    3 The aircraft were originally equipped with the Pre-2020 Equipment by the FAA's Alaska Capstone program in the early 2000s.

    Pursuant to this action, on January 2, 2020, the FAA will begin terminating air traffic control surveillance services outside radar coverage for aircraft with Pre-2020 Equipment. In a 30-day period ending in June 2018 the FAA detected less than 30 aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment in the Alaskan airspace where the FAA receives ADS-B signals. Therefore, the FAA anticipates that this service change will only affect a small number of aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment.

    Service Changes to Operations in the Gulf of Mexico

    The provisions of § 91.225 require all aircraft flying in Class E airspace at and above 3,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) over the Gulf of Mexico from the coastline of the United States out to 12 nautical miles to have operational 2020 Equipment (unless otherwise authorized by ATC) after January 1, 2020. As noted, the FAA has been providing surveillance services to approved aircraft with Pre-2020 Equipment operating in this airspace. Pursuant to this action, the FAA will begin terminating these surveillance services after January 1, 2020, to the aircraft with Pre-2020 Equipment. During a 30-day period ending in June 2018, the FAA found less than 10 aircraft with Pre-2020 Equipment were receiving ATC surveillance services in the offshore Gulf of Mexico airspace managed by Houston Center. The FAA has already informally notified these operators that FAA will not provide ATC surveillance services to aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment after January 1, 2020.

    Service Changes at Airports With ADS-B Surface Service Volumes

    To date, aircraft with Pre-2020 Equipment have been receiving ADS-SLR services in ADS-B surface service volumes (all U.S. airports with Airport Surface Detection Equipment Model X (ASDE-X) or Airport Surface Surveillance Capability (ASSC) systems). After January 1, 2020, in order to reach any airport with an ADS-B surface service volume, an aircraft will pass through airspace requiring 2020 Equipment. Accordingly, after January 1, 2020, the FAA will begin terminating provision of ADS-SLR services to aircraft with Pre-2020 Equipment. The only aircraft that will be affected by the ADS-SLR service change are those aircraft that are not equipped with 2020 Equipment as required by § 91.225.

    NAS-Wide Service Changes

    As described above, FAA will no longer use ADS-B data from Pre-2020 Equipment to provide ATC surveillance services after January 1, 2020. As such, the FAA will discontinue TIS-B and ADS-R client services NAS-wide for aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment after January 1, 2020.4

    4 In 2016, the FAA changed how these services were provided. More information is available at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgTSO.nsf/0/45845cd583ad3cd686257d62006b3b3e/$FILE/TIS-B_Service_Change_Summary.pdf.

    Implementation

    The FAA will begin making the above described changes on January 2, 2020. However, each of the changes requires the implementation of software revisions and some require changes at multiple locations NAS-wide. Because of the number of changes required and to ensure safe implementation, the changes will not be complete on January 2, 2020, but sometime soon thereafter.

    Summary

    Starting on January 2, 2020, the FAA will begin to discontinue ATC surveillance services for aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment operating in Alaska and the offshore Gulf of Mexico airspace. The number of affected aircraft is expected to be less than 20. Any affected aircraft will receive ATC surveillance services only within FAA radar coverage over Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico.

    Starting on January 2, 2020, the FAA will begin to discontinue ADS-SLR services for aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment at airports that lie immediately under the airspace defined in § 91.225(d)(1) and/or (d)(2). After January 1, 2020, these specific airspace areas require aircraft to have 2020 Equipment. As such, the only affected aircraft will be those aircraft that have failed to equip to meet the regulatory requirements effective on January 2, 2020.

    Starting on January 2, 2020, in all airspace where TIS-B and ADS-R services are currently provided, the FAA will begin to discontinue TIS-B and ADS-R client services for aircraft equipped with Pre-2020 Equipment. This change will maximize the number of aircraft eligible for ATC surveillance services and support the safe provision of air traffic services. This action also reduces the resources required to provide and maintain TIS-B/ADS-R services.

    Starting on January 2, 2020, the FAA will begin enabling National Accuracy Category for Velocity (NACv) filtering for TIS-B and ADS-R client status throughout the NAS.5 This action will not impact any aircraft with 2020 Equipment meeting the requirements of § 91.227 or any aircraft with ADS-B avionics that meet the minimum requirements in TSO-C199 for a Class B position source.

    5 A complete description of NACv filtering is available at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgTSO.nsf/0/45845cd583ad3cd686257d62006b3b3e/$FILE/TIS-B_Service_Change_Summary.pdf.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 24, 2018. Kristen G. Burnham, Vice President, Program Management Organization, FAA Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24052 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 232 [Release Nos. 33-10566; 34-84325; 39-2522; IC-33261] Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual AGENCY:

    Securities and Exchange Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) is adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual and related rules. The EDGAR system is scheduled to be upgraded on October 1, 2018.

    DATES:

    Effective November 5, 2018. The incorporation by reference of the EDGAR Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 5, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    In the Division of Investment Management, for questions concerning Form N-CEN, contact Heather Fernandez at (202) 551-6708. In the Division of Corporation Finance, for questions concerning the Form 8-K, Form 20-F and Form 12b-25, contact Heather Mackintosh at (202) 551-8111. In the Division of Economic and Risk Analysis, for questions concerning retired taxonomies or structured data requirements, contact Mike Willis, at (202) 551-6627. In the EDGAR Business Office, for questions concerning changes to the availability of the return copy, contact Christian Windsor at (202) 551-3419.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    We are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I and Volume II. The Filer Manual describes the technical formatting requirements for the preparation and submission of electronic filings through the EDGAR system.1 It also describes the requirements for filing using EDGARLink Online and the Online Forms/XML website.

    1 We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993, with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April 1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the Filer Manual on July 10, 2018. See Release No. 33-10518 (July 10, 2018)[83 FR 33119].

    The revisions to the Filer Manual reflect changes within Volume I, entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” (Version 32) (October 2018), and Volume II, entitled EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 48 (October 2018). The updated manual will be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations.

    The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. Filers must comply with the applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic format.2 Filers should consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for electronic submission.

    2See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301).

    The EDGAR System and Filer Manual will be updated in Release 18.3 and will reflect the changes described below.

    EDGAR Release 18.3 will introduce changes that will prevent the system from retrieving and exposing a return copy, if one is requested, of a TEST or LIVE submission. Please refer to Chapter 5 (Maintenance of Company Data), Appendix B (Frequently Asked Questions) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: General Information. Please also refer to Chapter 7 (Preparing and Transmitting EDGARLink Online Submissions), Chapter 8 (Preparing and Transmitting Online Submissions) and Chapter 10 (Determining the Status of Your Filings) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing.

    EDGAR Release 18.3 will update the XBRL validation requirements to identify, and provide warning messages, when the submission header information is inconsistent with the tagged information in the XBRL attachments included in the submission package. EDGAR will also provide warning messages when an XBRL attachment contains: certain US-GAAP and IFRS numeric reporting items that are tagged as incorrectly negative, if a filing uses deprecated tags in a submission, or if a filing contains custom Axis tags for purposes already served by certain existing standard taxonomy Axis tags. Also, EDGAR will provide warnings, but accept the filing, if footnote elements are tagged out of order. Please see Chapter 6 (Interactive Data) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing.

    EDGAR Release 18.3 will update submission form types N-CEN and N-CEN/A to rename the save button for Part E: Additional Questions for Exchange-Traded Funds and Exchange-Traded Managed Funds to “Save & Close This Fund.” Please refer to Chapter 8 (Preparing and Transmitting Online Submissions) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing.

    EDGAR Release 18.3 will revise the submission process for documents submitted through the Filer Web, Online Forms management, EDGARLink Online, or EDGAR Filer Management to provide a submission progress indicator. Please See Chapter 3 (Becoming an EDGAR Filer), Chapter 4 (Generating EDGAR Access Codes) and Chapter 5 (Maintenance of Company Data) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: General Information. Also, see Chapter 7 (Preparing and Transmitting EDGARLink Online Submissions) and Chapter 8 (Preparing and Transmitting Online Submissions) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing.

    EDGAR Release 18.3 will update submission form types 8-K/A, 8-K12B/A, 8-K12G3/A, 8-K15D5/A, 20-F/A and NT 20-F/A to issue a warning, but still accept the filing, if the period tag of the amendment does not match the period tag of the original, accepted filing or prior amendment. Please refer to Appendix A (Messages Reported By EDGAR) of the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing.

    The EDGAR system will be upgraded to remove the IFRS-2016 taxonomy which has been superseded. For further information please refer to the SEC's public website at https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edgartaxonomies.shtml.

    Finally, the Technical Specifications for the Form N-PORT and Form N-CEN schemas will be updated. For more information on the revised Technical Specifications, please refer to the SEC's public website at https://www.sec.gov/oit/Article/info-edgar-tech-specs.html.

    Along with the adoption of the Filer Manual, we are amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of today's revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

    The updated EDGAR Filer Manual will be available for website viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals.htm. You may also obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m.

    Since the Filer Manual and the corresponding rule and form amendments relate solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”).3 It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 4 do not apply.

    3 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).

    4 5 U.S.C. 601-612.

    The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the related rule and form amendments is November 5, 2018. In accordance with the APA,5 we find that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules. The Commission believes that establishing an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated Filer Manual with these system upgrades.

    5 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

    Statutory Basis

    We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under the authority in Sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933,6 Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15B, 23, and 35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,7 Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,8 and Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.9

    6 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, and 77s(a).

    7 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78o-4, 78w, and 78ll.

    8 15 U.S.C. 77sss.

    9 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37.

    List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232

    Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

    Text of the Amendments

    In accordance with the foregoing, title 17, chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

    PART 232—REGULATION S-T—GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS 1. The authority citation for part 232 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 77c, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z-3, 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a-6(c), 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 232.301 is revised to read as follows:
    § 232.301 EDGAR Filer Manual.

    Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets forth the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 31 (October 2018). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 48 (October 2018).

    Additional provisions applicable to Form N-SAR filers are set forth in the EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume III: “N-SAR Supplement,” Version 6 (January 2017). All of these provisions have been incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You must comply with these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and accepted. The EDGAR Filer Manual is available for website viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals.htm. You can obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual at the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. You can also inspect the document at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: October 1, 2018. Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24128 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 101 [Docket No. FDA-2016-D-4414] Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels: Questions and Answers Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels: Questions and Answers Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals; Guidance for Industry.” This guidance is intended for conventional food and dietary supplement manufacturers. The guidance finalizes the draft guidance we issued in January 2017, which provides questions and answers (Q&A) on topics related to compliance with the Nutrition Facts and Supplement Facts label and Serving Size final rules, the labeling of added sugars, declaration of quantitative amounts of vitamins and minerals, and format issues on the Nutrition Facts and Supplement Facts labels.

    DATES:

    The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal Register on November 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit either electronic or written comments on FDA guidances at any time as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2016-D-4414 for “Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels: Questions and Answers Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” We will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in our consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).

    Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to Office of Nutrition and Food Labeling, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Blakeley Fitzpatrick, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-1450.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels: Questions and Answers Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals.” This guidance is intended to help industry determine when manufacturers must comply with the two final rules on Nutrition and Supplement Facts labels and serving size, and how their products will need to comply with these rules. We are issuing this guidance consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

    In the Federal Register of May 27, 2016, FDA issued two final rules entitled “Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels” (81 FR 33742; the “Nutrition Facts label final rule”) and the “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling; Updating, Modifying, and Establishing Certain Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed; Serving Size for Breath Mints; and Technical Amendments (81 FR 34000; the “Serving Size final rule”). The Nutrition Facts label final rule amends the regulations for the nutrition labeling of conventional foods and dietary supplements to provide updated nutrition information and to improve how the nutrition information is presented to consumers. The Nutrition Facts label final rule also revised the Nutrition Facts label to replace “sugars” with “total sugars” and to include the declaration of added sugars. The Serving Size final rule amended the definition of a single-serving container, required dual-column labeling on certain packages, and amended several reference amounts customarily consumed that are used by manufacturers to determine their label serving size. The two final rules provided two compliance dates distinguishing between manufacturers with $10 million or more in annual food sales (July 26, 2018) and manufacturers with less than $10 million in annual food sales (July 26, 2019). As discussed below, FDA extended the compliance dates for these final rules.

    In the Federal Register of January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1347), we made available a draft guidance for industry entitled “Questions and Answers on the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels Related to the Compliance Date, Added Sugars, and Declaration of Quantitative Amounts of Vitamins and Minerals; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability” and gave interested parties an opportunity to submit comments by March 6, 2017, for us to consider before beginning work on the final version of the guidance. We received several comments on the draft guidance primarily related to compliance dates and labeling requirements for added sugars, and have modified the final guidance where appropriate in response to the comments. Changes to the guidance include new Q&A(s) regarding added sugars, which include examples for calculating added sugars in certain products. The guidance notes that, although the Nutrition Facts label and Serving Size final rules became effective on July 26, 2016, their compliance dates (originally scheduled to be July 26, 2018, for manufacturers with $10 million or more in annual food sales and July 26, 2019, for manufacturers with less than $10 million in annual food sales) have not been realized yet. In the Federal Register of October 2, 2017 (82 FR 45753), however, we proposed to extend the compliance date for manufacturers with $10 million or more in annual food sales from July 26, 2018, to January 1, 2020, and the compliance date for manufacturers with less than $10 million in annual food sales from July 26, 2019, to January 1, 2021. We finalized the changes to the compliance date in the Federal Register of May 4, 2018 (83 FR 19619). In addition, we made editorial changes to the draft guidance language to improve clarity. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance dated January 2017.

    II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances or https://www.regulations.gov. Use the FDA website listed in the previous sentence to find the most current version of the guidance.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24125 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G] 25 CFR Part 23 RIN 1076-AF42 Change of Address; Indian Child Welfare Act AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is amending its regulations to reflect a change of addresses for filing copies of Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) notices to the Alaska Regional Director and Midwest Regional Director, and to update the mail stop for BIA's Central Office in Washington, DC for filing ICWA adoption notices. This rule is a technical amendment that corrects the addresses for filing ICWA documents with the Alaska Regional Director, Midwest Regional Director, and Central Office in Washington, DC.

    DATES:

    Effective November 5, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Appel, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action, (202) 273-4680; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    ICWA requires, in any involuntary proceeding, the party seeking foster-care placement of, or termination of parental rights to, an Indian child must notify the parents, Indian custodians, and child's Tribe and send a copy to the appropriate BIA Regional Director. This notice updates the addresses for two of the Regional Director offices. ICWA also requires that any State court entering a final adoption decree or order in any Indian child adoptive placement furnish a copy of the decree or order to BIA Chief of Human Services at BIA's Central Office. This rule also updates the mail stop for Central Office in Washington, DC, because the mail stop has moved.

    Procedural Requirements A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not significant.

    E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The E.O. directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. The Department has developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The rule is administrative in nature and affects only mailing addresses.

    C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. It will not result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year. The rule's requirements will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. Nor will this rule have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

    E. Takings (E.O. 12630)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule does not affect individual property rights protected by the Fifth Amendment nor does it involve a compensable “taking.” A takings implication assessment is therefore not required.

    F. Federalism (E.O. 13132)

    Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule has no 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. This rule corrects BIA mailing addresses.

    G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)

    This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. Specifically, this rule meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation and meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards.

    H. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)

    The Department strives to strengthen its government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes through a commitment to consultation with Indian Tribes and recognition of their right to self-governance and Tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this rule under the Department's consultation policy and under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and have determined there are no potential effects on federally recognized Indian Tribes and Indian trust assets.

    I. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., prohibits a Federal agency from conducting or sponsoring a collection of information that requires OMB approval, unless such approval has been obtained and the collection request displays a currently valid OMB control number. Nor is any person required to respond to an information collection request that has not complied with the PRA. This rule does not contain any information collections requiring approval under the PRA; however, OMB has approved the information collection requirements related to this rule under OMB Control No. 1076-1086.

    J. National Environmental Policy Act

    This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment because it is of an administrative, technical, and procedural nature. See, 43 CFR 46.210(i). No extraordinary circumstances exist that would require greater review under the National Environmental Policy Act.

    K. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)

    This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    L. Determination To Issue Final Rule Without the Opportunity for Public Comment and With Immediate Effective Date

    BIA is taking this action under its authority, at 5 U.S.C. 552, to publish regulations in the Federal Register. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, statutory procedures for agency rulemaking do not apply “when the agency for good cause finds . . . that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). BIA finds that the notice and comment procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, because: (1) These amendments are non-substantive; and (2) the public benefits for timely notification of a change in the official agency address, and further delay is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Similarly because this final rule makes no substantive changes and merely reflects a change of address and updates to titles in the existing regulations, this final rule is not subject to the effective date limitation of 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

    List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 23

    Administrative practice and procedures, Child welfare, Grant programs—Indians, Grant programs—social programs, Indians, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, amends part 23 in title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    PART 23—INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT 1. The authority for part 23 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2, 9, 1901-1952.

    2. In § 23.11, revise paragraphs (b)(2) and (7) to read as follows:
    § 23.11 Notice.

    (b) * * *

    (2) For child-custody proceedings in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, or Wisconsin, notices must be sent to the following address: Minneapolis Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 5600 American Blvd. W, Ste. 500, Bloomington, MN 55437.

    (7) For child-custody proceedings in Alaska (except for notices to the Metlakatla Indian Community, Annette Island Reserve, Alaska), notices must be sent to the following address: Alaska Regional Director—Attn: Human Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 3601 C Street, Suite 1258, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. Notices to the Metlakatla Indian Community, Annette Island Reserve, Alaska, must be sent to the Portland Regional Director at the address listed in paragraph (b)(11) of this section.

    3. In § 23.140, revise paragraph (a) introductory text to read as follows:
    § 23.140 What information must States furnish to the Bureau of Indian Affairs?

    (a) Any State court entering a final adoption decree or order in any voluntary or involuntary Indian-child adoptive placement must furnish a copy of the decree or order within 30 days to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Chief, Division of Human Services, 1849 C Street NW, Mail Stop 3645 MIB, Washington, DC 20240, along with the following information, in an envelope marked “Confidential”:

    Dated: August 16, 2018. Tara Sweeney, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24173 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of Foreign Assets Control 31 CFR Part 560 and Appendix A to Chapter V Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations AGENCY:

    Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is amending the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations (ITSR) to implement further the President's May 8, 2018 decision to cease the United States' participation in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) by making changes to reflect the re-imposition of sanctions pursuant to certain sections of Executive Order 13846 and changes to certain sanctions lists maintained by OFAC. OFAC is also amending an existing general license in the ITSR to authorize U.S. persons to sell personal property in Iran and transfer the proceeds to the United States.

    DATES:

    Effective: November 5, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    OFAC: Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490; or the Department of the Treasury's Office of the Chief Counsel (Foreign Assets Control), Office of the General Counsel, tel.: 202-622-2410.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Availability

    This document and additional information concerning OFAC are available on OFAC's website (www.treasury.gov/ofac).

    Background Implementing the President's May 8, 2018 Decision by Reinstating Certain Authorities in the ITSR and Making Certain Technical and Conforming Changes

    On May 8, 2018, the President issued National Security Presidential Memorandum-11 (NSPM-11), which set forth his decision to cease the United States' participation in the JCPOA. In NSPM-11, the President directed the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury to immediately begin taking steps to reimpose all U.S. sanctions lifted or waived in connection with the JCPOA as expeditiously as possible, and in no case later than 180 days from the date of NSPM-11. In accordance with his decision, on August 6, 2018, the President issued Executive Order 13846 (83 FR 38939, August 7, 2018) (E.O. 13846) to, among other things, re-impose relevant authorities from certain Executive Orders that had been revoked previously. Today, OFAC is amending the ITSR, 31 CFR part 560, and appendix A to 31 CFR chapter V to take additional regulatory steps to implement the President's May 8, 2018 decision.

    Previously revoked authorities. On January 16, 2016, the President issued Executive Order 13716 (81 FR 3693, January 21, 2016) (E.O. 13716), which, among other things, revoked Executive Order 13622 of July 30, 2012 (77 FR 45897, August 2, 2012) (E.O. 13622) in connection with the JCPOA. In light of this revocation, on January 21, 2016, OFAC amended the ITSR to, among other things, remove regulatory provisions that implemented sections 5 and 6 of E.O. 13622. (See 81 FR 3330). In that rule, OFAC also made certain technical and conforming changes to the ITSR and appendix A to 31 CFR chapter V related to (1) the removal of certain individuals and entities from OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List), the Foreign Sanctions Evaders List, and the Non-SDN Iran Sanctions Act List on January 16, 2016, and (2) the concurrent transfer of certain individuals and entities that OFAC had previously identified as blocked pursuant to E.O. 13599 of February 5, 2012, to a “List of Persons Identified as Blocked Solely Pursuant to Executive Order 13599” (E.O. 13599 List), which OFAC made available on its website on January 16, 2016.

    Reinstating certain authorities and removing E.O. 13599 List references. In furtherance of the President's May 8, 2018 decision and in light of the issuance of E.O. 13846, OFAC is now amending the ITSR and appendix A to 31 CFR chapter V by: (1) Reinstating the regulatory provisions implementing the authorities that were previously in sections 5 and 6 of E.O. 13622 and now are in sections 1 and 10 of E.O. 13846 by revising paragraph (c) of § 560.211 of the ITSR; and (2) removing references to the E.O. 13599 List by revising notes in §§ 560.211 and 560.304 of the ITSR, revising note 1 to § 560.324 of the ITSR, and revising a note to appendix A to 31 CFR chapter V.

    Sections 1(a)(i) and 1(a)(ii) of E.O. 13846 authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to block all property and interests in property that are in the United States, that come within the United States, or that are or come within the possession or control of any U.S. person, including any foreign branch, of a person upon determining that: (i) On or after August 7, 2018, the person has materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, the purchase or acquisition of U.S. bank notes or precious metals by the Government of Iran, or (ii) on or after November 5, 2018, the person has materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), the Naftiran Intertrade Company (NICO), or the Central Bank of Iran. Section 16 of E.O. 13846 defines the terms “NIOC” and “NICO” as including any entity owned or controlled by, or operating for or on behalf of, respectively, NIOC or NICO. Section 10 of E.O. 13846 provides that section 1(a) of the order, among other specified provisions, shall not apply to any person for conducting or facilitating a transaction involving a project described in subsection (a) of section 603 of the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 to which the exception under that section applies. Although it is not named in the section, section 10 of E.O. 13846 refers to the Shah Deniz natural gas field in Azerbaijan's sector of the Caspian Sea and related pipeline projects to bring the gas from Azerbaijan to Europe and Turkey.

    By separate action, effective November 5, 2018, OFAC is removing the E.O. 13599 List from its website and relisting on the SDN List, as appropriate, individuals and entities that were previously listed on the E.O. 13599 List.

    Sale of Certain Personal Property and Transfer of Proceeds to the United States

    Separately, OFAC is amending an existing general license in the ITSR to authorize U.S. persons to sell certain personal property in Iran and transfer the proceeds to the United States. Section 560.543 of the ITSR authorizes U.S. persons to engage in transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the sale of real property in Iran, and to transfer the proceeds to the United States, provided that such real property was either acquired before the individual became a U.S. person or inherited from persons in Iran. OFAC routinely receives and approves specific license applications related to the sale of personal property in Iran which, prior to today's rule, were outside the scope of § 560.543. OFAC is therefore amending this general license to authorize U.S. persons to engage in transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the sale of personal property in Iran, and to transfer the proceeds to the United States, provided that such personal property was either (1) acquired before the individual became a U.S. person or (2) inherited from persons in Iran. This authorization will complement § 560.518, which authorizes certain transactions in Iranian-origin household and personal effects, as referenced in a new note OFAC is adding to § 560.518.

    Public Participation

    Because the amendment of the ITSR involves a foreign affairs function, the provisions of Executive Order 12866 and the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, opportunity for public participation, and delay in effective date, as well as the provisions of Executive Order 13771, are inapplicable. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) does not apply.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The collections of information related to the ITSR are contained in 31 CFR part 501 (the “Reporting, Procedures and Penalties Regulations”). Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), those collections of information have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1505-0164. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid control number.

    List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 560

    Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, banking, Iran.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control amends 31 CFR chapter V as follows:

    PART 560—IRANIAN TRANSACTIONS AND SANCTIONS REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 560 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    3 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 2339B, 2332d; 22 U.S.C. 2349aa-9; 22 U.S.C. 7201-7211; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 50 U.S.C. 1601-1651, 1701-1706; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 110-96, 121 Stat. 1011 (50 U.S.C. 1705 note); Pub. L. 111-195, 124 Stat. 1312 (22 U.S.C. 8501-8551); Pub. L. 112-81, 125 Stat. 1298 (22 U.S.C. 8513a); Pub. L. 112-158, 126 Stat. 1214 (22 U.S.C. 8701-8795); E.O. 12613, 52 FR 41940, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 256; E.O. 12957, 60 FR 14615, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 332; E.O. 12959, 60 FR 24757, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 13059, 62 FR 44531, 3 CFR, 1997 Comp., p. 217; E.O. 13599, 77 FR 6659, 3 CFR, 2012 Comp., p. 215; E.O. 13846, 83 FR 38939.

    Subpart B—Prohibitions
    2. Amend § 560.211 by revising paragraph (c), adding a note to paragraph (c)(2), and revising notes 1 and 2 to paragraphs (a) through (c) to read as follows:
    § 560.211 Prohibited transactions involving blocked property.

    (c)(1) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:

    (i) Any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraphs (a) through (c)(1)(i) of this section; or

    (ii) Any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State:

    (A) To have, on or after August 7, 2018, materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, the purchase or acquisition of U.S. bank notes or precious metals by the Government of Iran; or

    (B) To have, on or after November 5, 2018, materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC); the Naftiran Intertrade Company (NICO); any entity owned or controlled by, or operating for or on behalf of, NIOC or NICO; or the Central Bank of Iran.

    (2) Paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this section shall not apply with respect to any person for conducting or facilitating a transaction involving a project—

    (i) For the development of natural gas and the construction and operation of a pipeline to transport natural gas from Azerbaijan to Turkey and Europe;

    (ii) That provides to Turkey and countries in Europe energy security and energy independence from the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of Iran; and

    (iii) That was initiated before August 10, 2012 pursuant to a production-sharing agreement, or an ancillary agreement necessary to further a production-sharing agreement, entered into with, or a license granted by, the government of a country other than Iran before August 10, 2012.

    Note to paragraph (c)(2) of § 560.211:

    The natural gas development and pipeline project referred to in this paragraph is the project to develop the Shah Deniz natural gas field in Azerbaijan's sector of the Caspian Sea and related pipeline projects to bring the gas from Azerbaijan to Europe and Turkey.

    Note 1 to paragraphs (a) through (c) of § 560.211:

    The names of persons that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has designated or identified pursuant to Executive Order 13599 (E.O. 13599) or sections 1(a)(i) or 1(a)(ii) of Executive Order 13846, whose property and interests in property therefore are blocked pursuant to this section, are published in the Federal Register and incorporated into OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) with the identifier “[IRAN].” The SDN List is accessible through the following page on OFAC's website: www.treasury.gov/sdn. Additional information pertaining to the SDN List can be found in appendix A to this chapter. See § 560.425 concerning entities that may not be listed on the SDN List but whose property and interests in property are nevertheless blocked pursuant to this section. E.O. 13599 blocks the property and interests in property of the Government of Iran and Iranian financial institutions, as defined in § 560.304 and § 560.324, respectively. The property and interests in property of persons who meet the definitions of the terms Government of Iran or Iranian financial institution are blocked pursuant to this section regardless of whether the names of such persons are published in the Federal Register or incorporated into the SDN List.

    Note 2 to paragraphs (a) through (c) of § 560.211:

    The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706), in section 203 (50 U.S.C. 1702), authorizes the blocking of property and interests in property of a person during the pendency of an investigation. The names of persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pending investigation pursuant to this section also are published in the Federal Register and incorporated into the SDN List with the identifier “[BPI-IRAN].”

    Subpart C—General Definitions 3. Revise Note 1 to § 560.304 to read as follows:
    § 560.304 Government of Iran. Note 1 to § 560.304:

    The names of persons that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has identified as meeting this definition are published in the Federal Register and incorporated into OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) with the identifier “[IRAN].” The SDN List is accessible through the following page on OFAC's website: www.treasury.gov/sdn. However, the property and interests in property of any persons meeting the definition of the term Government of Iran are blocked pursuant to § 560.211 regardless of whether the names of such persons are published in the Federal Register or incorporated into the SDN List.

    4. Revise Note 1 to § 560.324 to read as follows:
    § 560.324 Iranian financial institution. Note 1 to § 560.324:

    The names of persons that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has identified as meeting this definition are published in the Federal Register and incorporated into OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) with the identifier “[IRAN].” The SDN List is accessible through the following page on OFAC's website: www.treasury.gov/sdn. However, the property and interests in property of any persons meeting the definition of the term Iranian financial institution are blocked pursuant to § 560.211 regardless of whether the names of such persons are published in the Federal Register or incorporated into the SDN List.

    Subpart E—Licenses, Authorizations, and Statements of Licensing Policy 5. Add a Note to § 560.518 to read as follows:
    § 560.518 Transactions in Iranian-origin and Iranian government property. Note to § 560.518:

    See § 560.543 for an authorization to engage in all transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the sale of certain real and personal property located in Iran.

    6. Amend § 560.543 by revising the section heading, paragraph (a), and paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
    § 560.543 Sale of certain real and personal property in Iran and transfer of related funds to the United States.

    (a) Individuals who are U.S. persons are authorized to engage in transactions necessary and ordinarily incident to the sale of real and personal property in Iran and to transfer the proceeds to the United States, provided that such real and personal property was acquired before the individual became a U.S. person or inherited from persons in Iran. Authorized transactions include engaging the services of any persons in Iran necessary for the sale, such as an attorney, funds agent, or broker.

    (b) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (2) The re-investment in Iran of the proceeds from the real or personal property sales authorized in paragraph (a) of this section; or

    Appendix A to Chapter V—[Amended] 7. Revise the authority citation for appendix A to chapter V to read as follows: Authority:

    3 U.S.C. 301; 8 U.S.C. 1182, 1189; 18 U.S.C. 2339B; 21 U.S.C. 1901-1908; 22 U.S.C. 287c; 31 U.S.C. 321(b); 50 U.S.C. App. 1-44; Public Law 110-286, 122 Stat. 2632 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note); Public Law 111-195, 124 Stat. 1312 (22 U.S.C. 8501-8551); Public Law 112-81, 125 Stat. 1298 (22 U.S.C. 8513a); Public Law 112-158, 126 Stat. 1214 (22 U.S.C. 8701-8795); Public Law 112-208, 126 Stat. 1502; Public Law 113-278, 128 Stat. 3011 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note); Public Law 114-102, 129 Stat. 2205; Public Law 114-122, 130 Stat. 93; Public Law 114-194, 130 Stat. 674 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note); Public Law 114-328, 130 Stat. 2000 (22 U.S.C. 2656 note); Public Law 115-44, 131 Stat. 886.

    8. Revise note 8 to appendix A to chapter V to read as follows: Appendix A to Chapter V—Information Pertaining to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List Notes:

    * * *

    8. The SDN List includes the names of persons identified as the Government of Iran or an Iranian financial institution and other persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 560.211 of the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, 31 CFR part 560 (ITSR). The SDN List entries for such persons include the identifier “[IRAN].” U.S. persons are advised to review 31 CFR part 560 prior to engaging in transactions involving the persons included on the SDN List with the identifier “[IRAN].” U.S. persons are further cautioned that persons identified as the Government of Iran or an Iranian financial institution and any other person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to 31 CFR 560.211 also may be designated or blocked pursuant to other sanctions programs administered by OFAC. The SDN List entry for such a person may include—in addition to the identifier “[IRAN]”—identifier(s) for the other sanctions program(s) pursuant to which the person is listed on the SDN List. Moreover, the prohibitions set forth in the ITSR, and the compliance obligations, with respect to persons who meet the definition of the Government of Iran in § 560.304 of the ITSR or the definition of Iranian financial institution in § 560.324 of the ITSR apply regardless of whether such persons are identified on the SDN List.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Andrea Gacki, Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24058 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0539] Special Local Regulation: Fort Lauderdale Grand Prix of the Seas, Fort Lauderdale, FL AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce a special local regulation daily from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. November 17 through November 18, 2018 to provide for the safety and security of navigable waterways during the Fort Lauderdale Grand Prix of the Seas. During the enforcement periods, all non-participant persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative. The operator of any vessel in the regulated area must comply with instructions from the Coast Guard or designated representative.

    DATES:

    The regulation in 33 CFR 100.723 will be enforced daily from 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. November 17 through November 18, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email Petty Officer Mara J. Brown, Sector Miami Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard: Telephone: 305-535-4317, Email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce a special local regulation for the Fort Lauderdale Grand Prix of the Seas in 33 CFR 100.723 daily from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. November 17 through November 18, 2018. This action is being taken to provide for the safety and security of navigable waterways during this two-day event. Our regulation for marine events within the Seventh Coast Guard District, § 100.723, specifies the location of the special local regulation for the Fort Lauderdale Grand Prix of the Seas, which encompasses certain navigable waters of the Atlantic Ocean off South Beach Park in Fort Lauderdale. Only event sponsor designated participants and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the regulated area. Spectators may contact the Coast Guard Patrol Commander or designated representative to request permission to pass through the regulated area. If permission is granted, spectators must pass directly through the regulated area at safe speed and without loitering.

    In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will inform the public through Local Notice to Mariners and marine information broadcasts at least 24 hours in advance of the enforcement of the special local regulation.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. M.M. Dean, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24055 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 164 46 CFR Part 35 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0926] RIN 1625-AC27 Tankers—Automatic Pilot Systems AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will permit tankers with automatic pilot systems that meet certain international standards to operate using those systems in shipping safety fairways and traffic separation schemes specified in 33 CFR parts 166 and 167, respectively. This final rule removes the previous regulatory restriction, updates the technical requirements for automatic pilot systems, and promotes the Coast Guard's maritime safety and stewardship (environmental protection) missions by enhancing maritime safety.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective December 5, 2018. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may view comments and related material identified by docket number USCG-2015-0926 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information about this document or to view material incorporated by reference call or email LCDR Matthew J. Walter, CG-NAV-2, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1565, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents for Preamble I. Abbreviations II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History III. Discussion of the Rule IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes V. Incorporation by Reference VI. Regulatory Analyses A. Regulatory Planning and Review B. Small Entities C. Assistance for Small Entities D. Collection of Information E. Federalism F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act G. Taking of Private Property H. Civil Justice Reform I. Protection of Children J. Tribal Governments K. Energy Effects L. Technical Standards M. Environment I. Abbreviations BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics COTP Captain of the Port ECDIS Electronic Chart Display and Information System FR Federal Register IEC International Electrotechnical Commission IMO International Maritime Organization INS Integrated navigation system LOD Letter of Deviation OMB Office of Management and Budget PWSA Ports and Waterways Safety Act SBA Small Business Administration § Section symbol TSS Traffic separation scheme U.S.C. United States Code II. Basis and Purpose, and Regulatory History

    Sections 2103 and 3703 of Title 46 U.S.C. provide the legal basis for this rulemaking. Section 2103 gives the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating discretionary authority to prescribe regulations to carry out the provisions for tanker carriage of liquid bulk dangerous cargoes. Section 3703 requires the Secretary to prescribe regulations for the operation and equipping of liquid bulk dangerous cargoes and other issues related to these cargoes. Section 4114 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requires the Coast Guard to define the conditions under which a tank vessel may operate in the navigable waters with an autopilot engaged. In Department of Homeland Security Delegation Nos. 0170.1 (II)(70), (92.a), and (92.b) and 5110, Revision 01, the Secretary delegated authority under these statutes to the Commandant of the Coast Guard.

    The purpose of this rule is to permit tankers equipped with automatic pilot systems—also generically known as “autopilots”—that meet certain international standards to operate using those systems in shipping safety fairways or traffic separation schemes (TSS) specified in 33 CFR parts 166 and 167, respectively. In 1993, the Coast Guard promulgated 33 CFR 164.13, permitting the use of autopilots. However, that same year, the Coast Guard suspended the final rule provision allowing tankers to use autopilots in concert with an integrated navigation system (INS) in TSS and shipping safety fairways because there was no performance standard for the accuracy, integrity, or reliability of INS (58 FR 36141, July 6, 1993). The suspension had the effect of prohibiting the use of any autopilot in fairway or TSS waters.

    Since then, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), a voluntary industry consensus standards-setting body, has developed standards for heading and track control systems.1 The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has adopted resolutions endorsing these standards, and has recommended to IMO member states that they adopt performance standards “not inferior to” those the IMO has adopted. The Coast Guard believes that tanker autopilot systems that meet the IEC's standards should be relieved of the regulatory burden that prohibits use of these systems in fairway and TSS waters.

    1 IEC 62065, First Edition, (2002-03), Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems—Track control systems—Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results; and IEC 62065, Edition 2.0, (2014-02). These and all other documents referenced in this rule are available in the docket by following the directions in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

    Prohibiting the use of autopilots creates regulatory burdens for both industry and the Coast Guard, as tanker owners and operators must apply for deviations from the prohibition. The Coast Guard grants the deviations on a case-by-case basis and, since 2013, has issued approximately 35 deviations to allow tankers to operate specific IEC and IMO compliant autopilots in fairway or TSS waters within specific Captain of the Port (COTP) zones. To eliminate these unnecessary burdens on industry and the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking with a request for comments titled “Tankers—Automatic Pilot Systems in Waters” in the Federal Register on July 11, 2016 (81 FR 44817).

    III. Discussion of the Final Rule

    This final rule amends 33 CFR 164.13, which relates to the navigation of tankers underway. Specifically, this rule amends 33 CFR 164.13 to allow tankers equipped with specific IEC-compliant autopilots to use those systems in fairway and TSS waters without having to apply to individual COTPs for deviations, and without the need for COTPs to ensure IEC compliance and issue deviations.

    This action will eliminate the current burdens on industry applying for deviations and the Coast Guard granting those deviations that are no longer necessary because of advances in technology. Moreover, the Coast Guard expects that this rule will enhance maritime safety because the autopilots in question offer greater precision and navigational safety than conventional autopilots, and arguably, even human steering. Lastly, by incorporating industry standards, this rule is consistent with Executive Order 13609 (Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation), which encourages international regulatory cooperation to reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary difference in regulatory requirements.2

    2 (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2013).

    For these reasons, the Coast Guard adopts, as final, 33 CFR 164.13 as proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard also makes additional changes described in Section IV of this preamble. These changes respond to public comment requesting clarity on specific terms used in the proposed regulatory text.

    Finally, the Coast Guard is removing a cross-reference to 33 CFR 164.13 in 46 CFR 35.20-45. This cross-reference was necessary when the two sections had different information regarding the use of autopilots. However, it is no longer necessary with the changes implemented by this rule.

    IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes

    During the public comment period, the Coast Guard received comments from 7 commenters, including mariners, a pilots' association, a state board of commissioners of pilots, a company operating tank vessels, and an association of companies engaged in oceangoing shipping. Below we summarize the comments and provide our responses.

    Three commenters supported permitting tankers to use autopilots with appropriate safeguards. The Coast Guard concurs, and believes § 164.13 provides adequate safeguards because it requires the continued presence of a qualified helmsman; prohibits the use of autopilot in anchorage grounds or within one-half nautical mile of the U.S. shore; and imposes conditions for the use of autopilots in fairway and TSS waters.

    One commenter said that although autopilots have benefited from advances in technology since the initial 1993 rulemaking, maintaining a cross track error of less than 10 meters might not be sufficient in some pilotage waters. For these reasons, and because the notice of proposed rulemaking estimated annual government cost savings of approximately $4,600,3 the commenter recommended the Coast Guard withdraw the proposed rule.

    3 81 FR 44821, footnote 24.

    Regarding a mariner's use of an autopilot, the Coast Guard's position has not changed. As the Coast Guard stated in the 1993 final rule,4 vessel masters and pilots are in the best position to determine if the use of autopilots is safe based on the local conditions in the waters where the rule allows discretion. This rule does not compel a tanker's master or pilot to use an autopilot, and the Coast Guard is not promoting indiscriminate use of an autopilot. This rule is permissive and recognizes that an autopilot is a navigational tool that, when used by a prudent mariner under appropriate circumstances, can assist the mariner in the safe transit of a tanker. Because of the improvement in autopilot technology, the discretion of masters within the operational limits of this rule described above, and the fact that this rule is expected to produce net benefits, the Coast Guard is promulgating this rule.

    4 58 FR 27633, 27631 (May 10, 1993).

    The same commenter suggested that local COTPs should continue to grant case-by-case waivers of autopilot restrictions.

    The Coast Guard disagrees. As addressed in the 1993 final rule,5 it is in the interest of the mariner and Coast Guard to minimize the prospect of a confusing array of rules that may vary from port to port. The Coast Guard finds that a single, national rule will facilitate compliance and not complicate enforcement.

    5 58 FR 27628.

    A different commenter disagreed with removing the ban, stating that despite technological advances, computer malfunctions could still lead to major disasters. While the Coast Guard acknowledges that computer malfunctions and errors can lead to major disasters, these systems are hardwired to steering systems and not intended to be connected to a network. Additionally, the IEC standard that we are incorporating conforms to the IMO performance standards for heading monitoring; position monitoring; override functions; manual change over from track control to manual steering; and sensor information validation and failure alarms. Here, a competent person is still required to be present, thereby being made aware (by the system, visual cues and other independent bridge equipment) of a failure or malfunction and potentially averting major disasters.

    A commenter recommended that the rule be redrafted to include language from 46 CFR 35.20-45, which is applicable to a much broader spectrum of ship types. The commenter argued that the “extra precautions” of § 35.20-45 should also apply to tank vessels carrying petroleum or chemical products.

    The Coast Guard concurs that requiring a competent person to be ready to change immediately from manual steering to autopilot or vice versa under the supervision of the officer of the watch when operating in areas of high traffic density, restricted visibility, or other hazardous navigational situations is an appropriate restriction for the safe use of autopilots by tank vessels. Currently, when transiting the navigable waters of the United States, tankers are never without officer of the watch supervision, as referenced in 33 CFR 164.13(c), meaning that a competent person who can manually steer the vessel is already on board and ready to take over should the need arise. Accordingly, we reference § 35.20-45 in § 164.13(d)(2) of this rule. The Coast Guard also makes a conforming change to the introductory language of § 35.20-45.

    The same commenter suggested that the use of autopilots should not be allowed when operating in restricted visibility. As indicated above, the Coast Guard agrees that the restrictions in § 35.20-45 are appropriate when operating in restricted visibility. However, the Coast Guard does not agree that the prohibition on autopilot during restricted visibility applies to waters not covered under the restrictions or prohibitions of this rule. In waters where the Coast Guard does not have prohibitions or restrictions in place, autopilot use is best determined by vessel masters and pilots as the prevailing conditions dictate.

    The same commenter suggested that it should be possible to establish immediate manual control of steering at all times an autopilot is in use. The Coast Guard agrees that immediate manual control of steering at all times an autopilot is in use is necessary, and the rule already requires it. In order for a system to meet the referenced equipment standard, it must be able to accept a signal from the override facilities to terminate track control mode. According to the IMO, this should be possible at any rudder angle, under any condition, including any failure of the track control system. Because the rule requires compliance with the IEC standards, including this prescription as a separate provision in 33 CFR 164.13 would be redundant.

    The same commenter also suggested that a person who is competent to steer the vessel manually should be required to be present and ready at all times an autopilot is in use. The Coast Guard agrees, and has modified proposed § 164.13(d)(2) in this rule to clarify that a person should be present and ready “at all times.”

    The same commenter suggested that the Coast Guard should clarify the meaning of the phrase one-half nautical mile offshore. The commenter asked if the Coast Guard meant one-half mile from the demarcation line or the headlands, or if the text should have read one-half mile from land, the riverbank, or from shoal water.

    The Coast Guard agrees with this statement and has updated § 164.13(d)(1) to reference terms defined elsewhere in the CFR.6

    6 This includes the definition of territorial sea baseline in 33 CFR 2.20, definition of anchorages per 33 CFR part 110, and the definition of precautionary areas in 33 CFR 167.5.

    The Coast Guard received comments from the Board of Commissioners of Pilots of the State of New York in opposition to the Coast Guard's preemption determination and the use of autopilots in New York State pilotage waters, citing the peculiarities of local waters where special precautionary measures are required. The American Pilots' Association echoed the Board of Commissioners of Pilots of the State of New York in its concern regarding pilotage waters where traffic converges and special precautionary measures are required.

    As to the preemption determination, the Coast Guard disagrees that this rule alters a State's authority to regulate pilotage requirements under 46 U.S.C. 8501. This rule does not regulate State pilots. This rule regulates vessel equipment and operations—specifically, navigation equipment. In other words, this rule will not prohibit or otherwise interfere with a State's right to establish state pilotage requirements. The Coast Guard has added clarifying language to its federalism statement in this rule.

    As to the use of autopilots within certain waters, the Coast Guard recognizes that precautionary measures are required for areas of special concern. On certain waters, vessel traffic transits along straight corridors as prescribed by charted routing measures (e.g. channels, fairways, lanes, and others). Vessels transiting other charted routing measures (e.g. anchorages, precautionary areas, and others) behave less predictably. At times, vessel convergence areas are in pilotage waters. Therefore, the Coast Guard has added a prohibition on the use of autopilots in precautionary areas, as defined in 33 CFR 167.5, in addition to the prohibition in regulated anchorage areas. We are also adding this prohibition in response to the comment suggesting incorporation of restrictions in 46 CFR 35.20-45, which include limitations when using autopilots in hazardous navigational situations.

    Although, as stated, this prohibition is limited to only waters within one-half nautical mile of shore, regulated anchorages, and precautionary areas, it is not an unfettered endorsement to use track control or heading control systems in all other waters. Vessel operators should always assess the risk of collision, allision, or grounding, and recognize that it may be imprudent to use said systems under certain prevailing circumstances and conditions such as transiting other areas of converging traffic, maneuvering close aboard to other vessels or structures, or other times of maneuvering various courses and speeds.

    A commenter asked if it was the Coast Guard's intent to allow autopilots to take voyage inputs, such as position and track information, from systems other than an Electronic Chart Display and Information System (ECDIS).

    The Coast Guard understands that some autopilots may receive voyage inputs from systems other than an ECDIS. As long as those other systems are addressed in the referenced IEC 65065 standard, autopilots may take voyage inputs from systems other than an ECDIS. The IEC 65065 standard prescribes which sensors must be interfaced with an autopilot. It further requires those sensors meet an applicable IMO performance standard.

    V. Incorporation by Reference

    Material incorporated by reference in 33 CFR 164.13 appears in the amendment to 33 CFR 164.03. The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in § 164.03 for incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552 and 1 CFR part 51. For information about how to view this material, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. Copies of the material are also available from the sources listed in § 164.03. We incorporated the IEC standard IEC 62065, First Edition (2002-03) and Edition 2.0 (2014-02).

    VI. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes or Executive orders.

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) 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 (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs) directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it. Because this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. This rule is considered to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771, Titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (April 5, 2017).

    A combined regulatory analysis and Threshold Regulatory Flexibility Analysis follows and provides an evaluation of the economic impacts associated with this rule. The substantive change affecting this analysis from the proposal to the final rule was that the Coast Guard updated its estimates of wage data from 2013 to 2016 data. We calculate that this rule will result in net cost savings of $76,572 (7-percent discount rate) over a 10-year period, with annualized net savings of $10,902 (7-percent discount rate). This cost saving is achieved through a reduction in labor costs associated with requesting letters of deviation (LOD) to use autopilot under the current regulatory scheme. This rule will also result in cost savings for the Coast Guard by reducing the hourly burden costs to process and approve the LOD. The following table provides a summary of the totals for the rule's costs, cost savings, and benefits.

    Table 1—Summary of the Impacts of the Final Rule Category Summary Potentially Affected Population An estimated 9,457 foreign-flagged vessels that are owned by 2,285 companies and 95 U.S.-flagged vessels that are owned by 40 businesses. Costs (7% discount rate) (costs only accrue in the first year) $13,072. 10-Year Total Quantified Cost Savings (7% discount rate) $89,644. 10-Year Net Cost Savings (7% discount rate) $76,572. Annualized Net Savings (7% discount rate, 10 years) $10,902. Unquantified Benefits * Improve effectiveness without compromising safety.
  • * Prevent inappropriate use of autopilot and misunderstandings on when to use it.
  • * Improved goodwill between regulated public and Coast Guard.
  • * Enhance maritime safety, because the autopilots in question offer far greater precision and navigational safety than conventional autopilots, and arguably, even human steering.
  • This rule revises the existing regulations regarding navigation on tankers. It updates the regulations to lift the suspension on tanker use of autopilot systems that has been in place since 1993 and which is no longer needed. Also, this rule updates the performance standard for traditional autopilot systems referenced in 33 CFR 164.13(d). This rule removes an unnecessary regulatory restriction and results in an overall cost savings for the regulated public and the Coast Guard.

    Affected Population

    Based on the Coast Guard's MISLE database, we estimate that this rule affects approximately 9,457 foreign-flagged vessels and approximately 95 U.S.-flagged vessels. The vessels are owned by 2,285 foreign companies and 40 U.S. companies. No governmental jurisdictions will be impacted.

    Costs

    The Coast Guard expects this rule to result in one-time costs of $13,072 at a 7-percent discount or an undiscounted cost of $13,987. These costs are derived by regulated entities needing to communicate to their vessel staff information about the change—a regulatory familiarization cost. The Coast Guard estimates that approximately 4 minutes (0.067 hours, rounded) 7 are expended per company to do so; these communications are anticipated to be via electronic bulletin boards or mass distribution email. Labor costs are estimated at $89.79 per hour for an operations manager based on a mean wage rate of $58.70, fully loaded to account for the cost of employee benefits; this estimate is based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Occupational Employment Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wages data, for General and Operations Managers (11-1021, May 2016).8 From there, the Coast Guard determined that the total cost of compensation per hour worked is $27.61. Of the $27.61, $18.05 is wages, resulting in a load factor of 1.5296399 ($27.61 ÷ $18.05) that the Coast Guard applied to determine the actual cost of employment to employers and industry. The Coast Guard rounded this factor to the nearest hundredth to 1.53 for presentation in this document.9 As derived by the summation of the equations, the calculations appear as follows: [0.067 hours × $89.79 marine operations manager wage rate × (2,285 foreign-flagged vessel owners/operators + 40 U.S.-flagged vessel owners/operators)] × 7-percent discount rate. Unrounded numbers were used for the calculation. Table 2 presents the estimated cost of compliance with this rule.

    7 The duration estimate is based on previous Coast Guard rules including the proposed rule for the Revision of Crane regulations (RIN 1625-AB78, USCG 2011-0992), which had an estimate of 3 minutes to complete a record. The Coast Guard also used “49 CFR part 40—Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs” (OMB Control # 2105-0529), which had an estimate of 0.067 hours to write an electronic report. These estimates comport with duration estimates of the proposed and final rules for Vapor Control Systems (RIN 1625-AB37, USCG-1999-5150) for similar tasks. No public comments were received on the estimates during the proposed rule's comment period.

    8 The reader may review the source data at http://www.bls.gov/oes/2016/may/oes111021.htm. Also, please see http://www.bls.gov/oes/2016/may/oes436014.htm for the wage rate for an administrative assistant. After adding the load factor, the wage rate for an administrative assistant ($17.38) is estimated to be $26.59. The wage rate for an operations manager is estimated to be $89.59, which is derived from the product of the unloaded wage rate ($58.70) as found on the BLS website as noted in this footnote and the load factor (1.53 rounded). Unrounded numbers were used in calculations.

    9 This load factor is calculated specifically for production, transportation, and material moving occupations, All Workers, Private Industry (Series ID: CMU2010000520000D, CMU2010000520000P and CMU2020000520000D, CMU2020000520000P), 2016, 1st Quarter. (Source: http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/data.htm as accessed on January 4, 2018 and May 3, 2017).

    Table 2—Total Estimated Cost of Regulatory Familiarization Discounted 7% Discounted 3% Undiscounted Year 1 $13,072 $13,580 $13,987 Year 2 0 0 0 Year 3 0 0 0 Year 4 0 0 0 Year 5 0 0 0 Year 6 0 0 0 Year 7 0 0 0 Year 8 0 0 0 Year 9 0 0 0 Year 10 0 0 0 Total 13,072 13,580 13,987 Annualized 1,861 1,592 1,399

    No public comments were received on the Coast Guard's estimated duration of tasks and on its estimated wage rates during the proposed rule's public comment period.

    The Coast Guard has not estimated a cost to comply with the documents incorporated by reference (IEC's standards IEC 62065, 2014-02; IMO Resolution MSC.74(69), Annex 2.). The Coast Guard has not estimated a cost for these provisions because manufacturers participate in the development of the standards at IEC and are aware of the changes to standards. As a result, they have been producing equipment to meet the standard already. Typically, manufacturers begin to make manufacturing modifications even before such changes are formally adopted. This rule will not require owners and operators to acquire the standards; they will not need the standard in hand to be in compliance. Owners and operators need to only look for evidence from manufacturers that products meet or exceed the standard before purchase. Such evidence may include product documentation such as user guide and warranty information. For these reasons, the Coast Guard has not included a cost for these provisions.

    No equipment is required by this rule. As well, some parts of the affected population will experience no cost increase due to this rule, since some vessels do not use autopilot under the conditions noted in this rule; therefore, they have no costs. No further action is required by these parties. Only 40 U.S.-flagged vessel owners and operators and approximately 2,285 foreign vessel owners and operators are impacted; for these owners and operators, they will incur a cost only if they need to communicate to staff the rule changes on the use of autopilots.

    Cost Savings

    The rule will result in cost savings for the regulated public and the Coast Guard. The rule will prevent unnecessary inquiries such as phone calls and emails to the Coast Guard regarding regulations and the filing and Coast Guard's processing of LODs. With regard to the first cost savings, the Coast Guard estimates that it spends a collective 20 hours annually at 1 hour per call on average fielding calls from the regulated public seeking clarification of the intent of the existing regulations. This rule will eliminate this labor cost for the regulated public and the Coast Guard.10 This time would be better spent on other Coast Guard missions. To estimate these costs, the Coast Guard used publicly available data as found in the Commandant Instruction titled “Reimbursable Standard Rates.” 11 Labor costs are estimated for the Coast Guard at $92 for a Lieutenant Commander.12 This figure represents a wage rate with a fully loaded labor factor of 1.85 for uniformed Coast Guard positions.13 For the regulated public, the wage rate for a lead engineer is estimated to be $105.81 per hour, based on a load factor applied to the BLS wage data as noted earlier. The unloaded wage rate for an engineering manager is $69.17 and the load factor is 1.53 (rounded).14 The total cost savings from the elimination of inquiries to Coast Guard is estimated at $1,840 per year and $2,116 annually for the regulated public.

    10 Collectively, 20 hours annually multiplied by wage rate for lead engineer. The Government's cost is estimated by the equation 20 hours annually multiplied by the wage rate for Coast Guard Lieutenant Commander (O-4).

    11 The Instruction is dated March 29, 2017 and is numbered COMDTINST 7310.1R. Enclosure 2 lists the relevant data. The Instruction may be found on https://www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/NPFC/docs/PDFs/urg/Ch2/2017-CI_7310_1R.pdf?ver=2017-08-15-124924-597. For the proposed rule, a previous version of the Instruction numbered COMDTINST 7310.1P was used.

    12 See https://www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/NPFC/docs/PDFs/urg/Ch2/2017-CI_7310_1R.pdf?ver=2017-08-15-124924-597. See Enclosure 2 for in-government rate of an O-4 officer and a GS-11 employee.

    13 The load factor for uniformed positions was based on the Coast Guard's analysis of compensation and benefits of Coast Guard enlisted and commissioned personnel based on data found in http://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/ActiveDutyTables/2018%20Pay%20Table.pdf?ver=2018-02-02-160202-810 and Commandant Instruction R.

    14 This is the wage rate for 11-9041 Architectural and Engineering Managers as found at http://www.bls.gov/oes/2016/may/oes119041.htm and as accessed on May 1, 2017. As noted earlier, a load factor of 1.53 was applied.

    Coast Guard Cost Savings: $92 Lieutenant Commander × 1 hour × 20 calls per year = $1,840.

    Regulated Public Cost Savings: $105.81 engineering manager × 1 hour × 20 calls per year = $2,116.

    In addition, this rule saves the regulated public and the Coast Guard labor costs associated with the filing and processing of annual LODs. This precludes the need for the regulated public to file an LOD. In doing so, it also precludes the need for the Coast Guard to process the LOD and respond to it. The Coast Guard estimates that each LOD requires a given marine business to expend 1.7 hours of an engineering manager's time and 0.5 hour of an administrative assistant's time to prepare and submit the LOD. These precluded costs will be incurred annually and will be calculated by the sum of the products of the loaded wage rates and labor duration estimates times the number of requests per year (($89.79/hour operations manager's wage rate × 1.7 hours) + ($26.59/hour admin assistant's wage rate × 0.5 hours) × 35 submittals).15

    15 Wage data may be found from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (http://www.bls.gov/oes/2016/may/oes111021.htm and http://www.bls.gov/oes/2016/may/oes436014.htm). The load factor used was 1.53 (rounded). Unrounded numbers were used in the calculation. Please see previous discussion for more information on how the load factor was determined.

    In turn, we estimate that the Coast Guard spends 0.6 hours of a Lieutenant Commander's time; and 0.5 hour of an administrative assistant's time to process, review, and respond to each LOD request.16 The loaded wage rates for these positions are: $92 per hour for a Lieutenant Commander (O-4); $61 per hour for an administrative assistant (GS-11). These wage rates may be found in Commandant Instruction 7310.1R, Reimbursable Standard Rates, (in-government rates found in enclosure 2). The wages for the regulated public were noted earlier in this section.

    16 The duration estimates are based on existing OMB approved information collection entitled Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 CFR Subchapter P (OMB Control number 1625-0043). No public comments were received on these estimates.

    To estimate these cost savings, we requested data from Coast Guard sectors on their experience with processing LODs. Based on that review, we estimated the number of LOD requests to be approximately 35 annually,17 which will be precluded by this rule. Coast Guard also reviewed previous Coast Guard regulatory analyses for the labor costs of the regulated public for filing waiver requests. Our estimated durations for labor for the regulated public and for the Coast Guard are based on Coast Guard experience with LOD requests as well as an existing information collection entitled “Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 CFR Subchapter P” (RIN 1625-0043, 1625-0043); the Coast Guard's proposed rule for cranes (RIN 1625-AB78, USCG-2011-0992); and the proposed and final rules for Vapor Control Systems (RIN 1625-AB37, USCG-1999-5150). We used the existing information collection 1625-0043 to obtain the estimates of existing tasks; we used the information collections for cranes and vapor control systems to estimate tasks that were not in 1625-0043, but were similar to the tasks of these information collections. Table 3 provides the details.

    17 This number comports with an estimate provided by the Chamber of Shipping of America to the docket. Readers should see https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=USCG-2015-0926-0008 as verification.

    Table 3—Source of Paperwork Reduction Act Estimates Task in final rule Source Task Duration Prepare paperwork and file an LOD 1625-0043 Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 Subchapter P Same 1.7 hours. Support by admin staff of preparation of LOD 1625-0043 Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 Subchapter P Same 0.5 hour. Prepare response to LOD request. (USCG) 1625-0043 Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 Subchapter P Same 0.6 hour. Support by admin staff of LOD response. (USCG) 1625-0043 Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 Subchapter P Same 0.5 hour. Write notification of regulatory change 1625-AB37 Vapor Control Systems Complete a record; document training 0.12 hour; 0.03 hour. Write notification of regulatory change 1625-AB78 Cranes Complete a record; record a test 0.03 hour. Write notification of regulatory change 2105-0529 “49 CFR Part 40 Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs”18 Write an electronic report; document testing record; write a release 0.067 hour; 0.13 hour; 0.067 hour. Write notification of regulatory change 1625-AC02 Personal Flotation Devices Labeling and Standards Communicate regulatory change19 0.5 hour. Make inquiries to USCG 1 hour. Respond to public inquiries (USCG) 1 hour.

    The Coast Guard estimates that the regulated public spends approximately 2.2 hours to prepare the paperwork and to file an LOD. This hourly total is calculated as follows:

    18 Title 49 CFR 40.33(b) through (e), 40.25(a), 40.25(f), 40.33(f).

    19 Preparing an email or electronic bulletin board notice.

    35 waivers annually × [1.7 hours × wage rate for engineering manager + 0.5 hour × wage rate for an administrative assistant] = $5,808.

    In addition, we estimate that the Coast Guard spends 1.1 hours in total for each LOD. This hourly total is calculated as follows:

    35 waivers annually × [0.6 hour × wage rate for Lt. Commander + 0.5 hour × wage rate for Coast Guard administrative assistant] = $3,000.

    We received no comments on these estimates during the proposed rule's comment period. The total cost savings from the elimination of the need for an LOD is estimated at $5,808 per year for the regulated public and $3,000 annually for Coast Guard. Adding the costs of preparing and filing an LOD to the costs of inquiries which were noted earlier, the total costs savings per year would be $4,840 for Coast Guard and $7,924 for the regulated public.

    Table 4 presents the estimated cost savings of this final rule.

    Table 4—Total Cost Savings by Year Year Cost savings to the regulated public Annualized 7% Annualized 3% Undiscounted Cost savings to the government Annualized 7% Annualized 3% Undiscounted Total estimated cost savings Annualized 7% Annualized 3% Undiscounted 1 −$7,405 −$7,693 −$7,924 −$4,523 −$4,699 −$4,840 −$11,928 −$12,392 −$12,763 2 −6,921 −7,469 −7,924 −4,227 −4,562 −4,840 −11,148 −12,031 −12,763 3 −6,468 −7,251 −7,924 −3,950 −4,429 −4,840 −10,419 −11,680 −12,763 4 −6,045 −7,040 −7,924 −3,692 −4,300 −4,840 −9,737 −11,340 −12,763 5 −5,650 −6,835 −7,924 −3,450 −4,175 −4,840 −9,100 −11,010 −12,763 6 −5,280 −6,636 −7,924 −3,225 −4,053 −4,840 −8,505 −10,689 −12,763 7 −4,935 −6,443 −7,924 −3,014 −3,935 −4,840 −7,948 −10,378 −12,763 8 −4,612 −6,255 −7,924 −2,817 −3,820 −4,840 −7,428 −10,075 −12,763 9 −4,310 −6,073 −7,924 −2,632 −3,709 −4,840 −6,942 −9,782 −12,763 10 −4,028 −5,896 −7,924 −2,460 −3,601 −4,840 −6,488 −9,497 −12,763 10-Year −55,654 −67,592 −79,238 −33,991 −41,282 −48,395 −89,644 −108,874 −127,633 Annualized −7,924 −7,924 −7,924 −4,840 −4,840 −4,840 −12,763 −12,763 −12,763

    This rule results in a net cost savings of $76,572 (7-percent discount rate for a 10-year period) because the estimated cost savings exceed the costs of the rule. Costs are incurred only in Year 1. The net cost savings of this rule are calculated by subtracting the total cost of the rule ($13,072, 7-percent discount) from the total cost savings ($89,644, 7-percent discount). These cost savings result from precluded labor costs to the regulated public and to Coast Guard as noted earlier. Table 5 presents the net cost savings of this rule.

    Table 5—Estimated Net Cost Savings Discounted 7% Discounted 3% Undiscounted Year 1 $1,144 $1,188 $1,224 Year 2 −11,148 −12,031 −12,763 Year 3 −10,419 −11,680 −12,763 Year 4 −9,737 −11,340 −12,763 Year 5 −9,100 −11,010 −12,763 Year 6 −8,505 −10,689 −12,763 Year 7 −7,948 −10,378 −12,763 Year 8 −7,428 −10,075 −12,763 Year 9 −6,942 −9,782 −12,763 Year 10 −6,488 −9,497 −12,763 Total −76,572 −95,294 −113,646 Annualized −10,902 −11,171 −11,365

    Using a perpetual period of analysis, the total annualized discounted cost savings of this rule if it is implemented in 2019, would be $9,672 in 2016 dollars.

    Benefits

    This rule amends existing regulations to remove the requirements that prohibit tanker use of autopilot systems in waters subject to the shipping safety fairway or traffic separation controls. This rule also updates the performance standard for traditional autopilot systems. The Coast Guard pursued this amendment to existing standards in order to prevent inefficient use of labor and to add clarity to the current system. As noted in the cost savings discussion earlier, this rule prevents inefficient use of labor and adds clarity to the regulated public as to the need for safety precautions. The changes improve regulatory intent and keep regulations in step with existing technology without compromising the existing level of safety. This rule also promotes maritime safety by eliminating confusion associated with outdated regulations that have not kept pace with technology. Lastly, this rule enhances maritime safety, because the autopilots in question offer far greater precision and navigational safety than conventional autopilots or human steering.

    Regulatory Alternatives Considered

    In developing this rule, the Coast Guard considered the following alternatives:

    (1) Take no action.

    (2) Develop a different timetable for small entities.

    (3) Provide an exemption for small entities (from this rule or any part thereof).

    The first alternative is not preferred because it does not offer solutions to issues identified earlier in the preamble. It would perpetuate an inefficient use of labor on the part of the regulated public and the Coast Guard. The second alternative prevents small entities from benefiting from the efficiencies made possible by this regulation as soon as the larger companies; a delayed effective date for small entities would delay both costs and cost savings. The third alternative would prevent small entities from benefiting from improved efficiency altogether. Because this regulation reduces an unnecessary regulatory restriction, the Coast Guard does not want to restrict its applicability to small entities in any way.

    Most entities are expected to experience no additional cost. For those who will incur a cost, the Coast Guard estimates costs to be approximately $6 per entity—as noted earlier, the cost to communicate information is calculated by the equation $89.79 wage rate × 0.067 hour. Cost savings accrue only to those covered by this rule and those who have not already applied for a waiver or who are not in compliance with the existing regulations. An exemption would preclude cost savings to those under the exemption; the Coast Guard estimates that cost savings will be less than $170 per affected entity annually. Labor to make an inquiry is estimated by the following equation:

    1.7 hours × $89.79 wage rate for operations manager + 0.5 hour × $26.59 wage rate for an administrative assistant.

    For the reasons discussed earlier, we rejected these alternatives in favor of the preferred alternative. The preferred alternative—this rule—amends existing regulations to remove the requirements that prohibit tanker use of autopilot systems in waters subject to the shipping safety fairway or traffic separation controls. The preferred alternative also updates the performance standard for traditional autopilot systems.

    B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, we considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 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 fewer than 50,000 people.

    The Coast Guard expects this rule will not have a significant economic impact on small entities. As described in the “Regulatory Planning and Review” section, the Coast Guard expects this rule to result in net cost savings to regulated entities. An estimated 67 percent of the regulated entities (a total of 27 businesses) are considered small by the Small Business Administration (SBA) industry size standards. For any company for which we were not able to find SBA size data, we assumed it was a small entity. The compliance costs for this rule, which are only regulatory familiarization costs, will amount to less than 1 percent of revenue for all small entities ($6 per entity) and, therefore, do not represent a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Costs will be incurred only in the first year of this rule's promulgation. No additional costs for labor or equipment will be incurred in future years. Because the purpose of this rule is to remove an unnecessary regulatory restriction, it is expected to reduce labor costs. These cost savings are estimated to be less than 1 percent of revenue for all small entities. An estimated $170 per year is saved by a given entity that formerly had to perform the now deregulated tasks of the rule. No small governmental jurisdictions are impacted by this rule.

    Therefore, 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. The Coast Guard received no public comments on the proposed rule's impact on small entities.

    C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we offer to assist small entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If this rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please consult LCDR Matthew J. Walter (see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble). 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.

    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).

    D. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520; the rule does not add requirements for recording and recordkeeping to the existing collection titled, Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 CFR Subchapter P (OMB control number 1625-0043). However, this rule will revise this collection, reducing the burden of recordkeeping and submission for those 35 tankers granted an LOD. As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), “collection of information” comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other similar actions. The rule does not require additional tasks by the regulated public but eliminates the need for the regulated public to file an LOD under conditions as specified by the rule. The Coast Guard estimates that there will be 35 fewer LODs filed annually because of the rule's changes.

    The existing collection of information requires LODs to be submitted to the Coast Guard for various reasons; one of which is for tankers to use autopilot under conditions noted in this rule. Under this rule, Coast Guard no longer requires an LOD for tankers. The rule precludes the need for 35 or fewer LODs annually to be submitted to the Coast Guard for approval. It also precludes the need for the Coast Guard to process and approve those LODs. The collection of information aids the regulated public in assuring safe practices; however, the Coast Guard has concluded that this particular use of LODs is no longer warranted.

    The title and description of the information collections, a description of those who must collect the information, and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers the time for gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection.

    Title: Ports and Waterways Safety—Title 33 CFR Subchapter P.

    OMB Control Number: 1625-0043.

    Summary of the Collection of Information: Certain vessels are subject to a variety of requirements in subchapter P of title 33 of the CFR. Under the existing OMB collection, such tasks includes the District 8 Hurricane Operations Plan and letters of deviation. The regulation allows any person directly affected by these regulations to request a deviation from any of the requirements by an LOD as long as the level of safety is not reduced. Under this rule, the Coast Guard no longer requires an LOD to be submitted under specific conditions as noted in the rule; LODs continue to be required for other existing reasons. The collection of information aids the regulated public in assuring safe practices.

    Need for Information: The Coast Guard needs this information to determine whether an entity meets the regulatory requirements.

    Use of Information: The Coast Guard uses this information to determine whether an entity request for deviation is justified.

    Description of the Respondents: The respondents are owners and operators of vessels which travel in the regulated waterways as noted in the regulatory text.

    Number of Respondents: The burden of this rule for this collection of information includes submittal of LODs. This collection of information applies to owners and operators of vessels that travel in the regulated waterways. We estimate the maximum number of respondents for the collection of information to be 876, but there would be 35 fewer LODs per year.

    Frequency of Responses: LOD under the conditions noted in this rule are filed once per year. This eliminates the need for this particular use of the LOD. The Coast Guard estimates that 35 fewer LODs will be filed annually because of this rule.

    Burden of Response: The burden of response for each LOD is an estimated 2.2 hours.

    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: This rule decreases burden hours by 77 hours from the previously approved burden estimate of 2,110 hours.

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), we will submit a copy of this rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information.

    We invited public comment on the collection of information during the proposed rule's comment period. We received no input to advise us on how useful the information is; whether it can help us perform our functions better; whether it is readily available elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is; how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can minimize the burden of collection.

    You are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the Coast Guard could enforce the collection of information requirements in this rule, OMB would need to approve the Coast Guard's request to collect this information.

    E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13132 and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. Our analysis follows.

    It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also well settled, now, that all of the categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 7101, and 8101 (design, construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, operation, equipping, personnel qualification, and manning of vessels), as well as the reporting of casualties and any other category in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a vessel's obligations, are within the field foreclosed from regulation by the States. (See the decision of the Supreme Court in the consolidated cases of United States v. Locke and Intertanko v. Locke, 529 U.S. 89, 120 S.Ct. 1135 (March 6, 2000)). This rule is promulgated under Title II of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act 20 (PWSA) (46 U.S.C. 3703) and amends existing regulations for tank vessels regarding certain vessel equipment technical standards and operation. Under the principles discussed in Locke, States are foreclosed from regulating within this field. The Coast Guard acknowledges a State's right to set State pilotage requirements in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 8501, and we do not intend this rule to affect a State's ability to regulate State pilotage requirements. However, the Coast Guard does not believe that 46 U.S.C. 8501 can be used to avoid the application of the fundamental federalism principles explained in Locke by characterizing a vessel's navigation requirements as “pilotage requirements.” A State regulation covering a field—vessel navigation—that the Coast Guard would regulate under PWSA Title I is subject to a Locke conflict analysis. To be clear, the Coast Guard views a State prohibition of vessel automatic pilot system use in certain State waters, based on the peculiarities of those waters, to be akin to a regulated navigation area that the Coast Guard would regulate under PWSA Title I. This rule establishes vessel equipment requirements but does not intend to affect a State's ability to regulate vessel navigation requirements in particular State waters. Regardless of this rule, States may not establish navigation equipment standards or their general operational requirements.21 Thus, this rule is consistent with the principles of federalism and preemption requirements in Executive Order 13132.

    20 Public Law 92-340, 86 Stat. 424, as amended; codified at 33 U.S.C. 1221 et seq. 1232.

    21Locke, 529 U.S. at 110—114 (confirming the validity of Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co. and invalidating three State rules that were field preempted).

    F. 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 million (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Although this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    G. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630 (Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights).

    H. Civil Justice Reform

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

    I. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks). This rule is not an economically significant rule and will not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children.

    J. Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Tribal governments.

    K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use). We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under Executive Order 13211 because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

    L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, codified as a note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule uses the following voluntary consensus standards to track control and integrated navigation systems used in vessel automatic pilot systems:

    (1) IEC 62065, First Edition, 2002-03, Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems—Track control systems—Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results; and,

    (2) IEC 62065, Edition 2.0, 2014-02, Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems—Track control systems—Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results.

    These standards provide parameters within which these systems must operate to ensure proper navigational control given the vessel's position, heading, speed, and other factors. The standards were developed by the IEC, an international voluntary consensus standards-setting organization, and the IMO. The sections that reference these standards and the locations where these standards are available are listed in § 164.03 of this rule below. Changes made in the 2014 edition of IEC 62065, while technical in nature, did not render systems conforming to the previous edition unsafe or obsolete. Since, there is no domestic or international requirement to carry this equipment, vessels may still be outfitted with serviceable equipment meeting the 2002 standard. Thus, the Coast Guard saw value in allowing equipment that met either the current or previous edition of IEC 62065.

    The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in § 164.03 for incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552 and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the material are available from the sources listed in § 164.03.

    Consistent with 1 CFR part 51 incorporation by reference provisions, this material is reasonably available. Interested persons have access to it through their normal course of business, may purchase it from the organization identified in 46 CFR 136.112, or may view a copy by means we have identified in that section.

    M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Revision 1 (DHS Instruction Manual 023-01) and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD (COMDTINST 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 concluded that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. This rule involves regulations concerning tank vessel equipment approval and operation. Thus, this rule is categorically excluded under paragraphs L52, L57, L58 and L62 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01.

    List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 164

    Marine, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways, Incorporation by reference.

    46 CFR Part 35

    Cargo vessels, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 164 and 46 CFR part 35 as follows:

    Title 33—Navigation and Navigable Waters PART 164—NAVIGATION SAFETY REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 164 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1223, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 3703; and E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277. Sec. 164.13 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 8502. Sec. 164.46 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 70114 and Sec. 102 of Pub. L. 107-295. Sec. 164.61 also issued under 46 U.S.C. 6101. The Secretary's authority under these sections is delegated to the Coast Guard by Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, para. II (70), (92.a), (92.b), (92.d), (92.f), and (97.j).

    2. Amend § 164.03 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), after the text “Washington, DC 20593-7418,”, add the text “telephone 202-372-1565,”. b. Add paragraph (h) to read as follows:
    § 164.03 Incorporation by reference.

    (h) International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 3, rue de Varembe, Geneva, Switzerland, +41 22 919 02 11, http://www.iec.ch/. Email: [email protected]

    (1) IEC 62065 (IEC 62065 2002-03), Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems—Track control systems—Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results, First Edition, dated 2002, IBR approved for § 164.13(d).

    (2) IEC 62065 (IEC 62065 2014-02), Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems—Track control systems—Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results, Edition 2.0, dated 2014, IBR approved for § 164.13(d).

    3. Amend § 164.13 by removing paragraph (e) and revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 164.13 Navigation underway: Tankers.

    (d) This paragraph (d) has preemptive effect over State or local regulation within the same field. A tanker may navigate using a heading or track control system only if:

    (1) The tanker is at least one-half nautical mile (1,012 yards) beyond the territorial sea baseline, as defined in 33 CFR 2.20;

    (i) Not within waters specified in 33 CFR part 110 (anchorages), or;

    (ii) Not within waters specified as precautionary areas in 33 CFR part 167, and;

    (2) There is a person, competent to steer the vessel, present to assume manual control of the steering station at all times including, but not limited to, the conditions listed in 46 CFR 35.20-45(a) through (c); and

    (3) The system meets the heading or track control specifications of either IEC 62065 (2002-03) or IEC 62065 (2014-02) (incorporated by reference, see § 164.03).

    Title 46—Shipping PART 35—OPERATIONS 4. The authority citation for part 35 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231; 1321(j); 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3703, 6101; 49 U.S.C. 5103, 5106; and E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 277; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    5. Amend § 35.20-45 by revising the introductory text to read as follows:
    § 35.20-40 Use of Auto Pilot—T/ALL.

    When the automatic pilot is used in:

    Dated: October 30, 2018. J.P. Nadeau, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24127 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-1007] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zone; Senior Government Official's Visit to Cleveland, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone for navigable waters on Lake Erie for a senior government official's visit to Cleveland, OH. The security zone is necessary to protect the official party, the public and surrounding waterways from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature. Entry of vessels or persons into the zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 8:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. on November 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2018-1007 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 LTJG Sean Dolan, 716-843-9322, 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

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest due to sensitive security issues related to a Senior Government Official's visit to Cleveland, OH. Providing a public notice and comment period would be contrary to the security zone's intended objective of protecting the official party and the public.

    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. Any delay encountered in this temporary rule's effective date would be contrary to the public interest given the need to ensure the safety and security during a Senior Government Official's visit on November 5, 2018.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Buffalo has determined that potential security hazards are associated with this event in this area. These hazards include potential security threats, violent or disruptive public disorder, delivery of a weapon of mass destruction, launch of a stand-off attack weapon, or delivery of an armed assault force. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the security zone throughout the duration of the event.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    On November 5, 2018, a Senior Government Official is expected to visit Cleveland, Ohio. The venue will include locations near downtown Cleveland. The security zone will cover all navigable waters within portions of Lake Erie: 41°31′45″ N, 081°39′20″ W (just East of Forest City Yacht Club and West of Quay 55); then extending approximately 4,000 feet northwest to position 41°32′23″ N, 081°39′46″ W (about 900 feet past the east break wall); then extending approximately 13,000 feet to position 41°31′02″ N, 081°42′10″ W; then extending southwest to the shoreline at position 41°30′38″ N, 081°41′53″ W (near the northwest edge of Voinovich Park); then following the shoreline back to the point of origin, in the vicinity of the Burke Lakefront Airport.

    The security zone is necessary to protect the official party, personnel, vessels, the public and surrounding waterways from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the security zone without obtaining permission from the Captain of the Port (COTP) or a designated representative.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the fact that we anticipate that it will have a minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The security zone created by this rule will be relatively small and is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters. Furthermore, the security zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit around it. Thus, restriction on vessel movement within that particular area are expected to be minimal.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule establishes a security zone. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T09-1007 to read as follows:
    § 165.T09-1007 Security Zone; Senior Government Official's Visit to Cleveland, Lake Erie, Cleveland, OH.

    (a) Location. The security zone will encompass all waters of Cleveland Harbor (near the Burke Lakefront Airport) starting shoreline at position 41°31′ 45″ N, 081°39′ 20″ W (just East of Forest City Yacht Club and West of Quay 55); then extending approximately 4,000 feet northwest to position 41°32′ 23″ N, 081°39′ 46″ W (about 900 feet past the east break wall); then extending approximately 13,000 feet to position 41°31′ 02″ N, 081°42′ 10″ W; then extending southwest to the shoreline at position 41°30′ 38″ N, 081°41′ 53″ W (near the northwest edge of Voinovich Park); then following the shoreline back to the point of origin.

    (b) Enforcement Period. This rule is effective from 8:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. on November 5, 2018.

    (c) Regulations.

    (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.

    (2) This security zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.

    (3) The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his behalf.

    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the security zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Joseph S. Dufresne, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24059 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0815] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Miles 179 to 180, St. Louis, MO AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the Upper Mississippi River from mile marker (MM) 179 to MM 180. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of persons, vessels, and the marine environment on these navigable waters near St. Louis, MO, during a fireworks display. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 8 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. on November 8, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2018-0815 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Commander Christian Barger, Sector Upper Mississippi River Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 314-269-2560, email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations COTP Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River 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

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. It is impracticable because we must establish this safety zone by November 8, 2018 and lack sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments before issuing this rule. The NPRM process would delay the establishment of the safety zone until after the scheduled date of the fireworks and compromise public safety.

    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 this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action is necessary to respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the fireworks display.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with a fireworks display on the evening of November 8, 2018, will be a safety concern for persons and vessels on a one-mile stretch of the Upper Mississippi River. Hazards associated with firework displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. This rule is necessary to ensure the safety of persons, vessels, and the marine environment on these navigable waters before, during, and after the fireworks display.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 8 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. on November 8, 2018. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the Upper Mississippi River from mile 179 to mile 180, in St. Louis, Mo. The duration of the zone is intended to protect persons, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters during the fireworks display.

    No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River. To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River at 314-269-2332. Persons and vessels permitted to enter the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions issued by the COTP or designated representative. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public of the effective period for the safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs), as appropriate.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the temporary safety zone. The safety zone impacts a one-mile stretch of the Upper Mississippi river for three and one half hours on one evening. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a BNM via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a temporary safety zone prohibiting entry on a one-mile stretch of the Upper Mississippi River for three hours on one evening. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T08-0815 to read as follows:
    § 165.T08-0815 Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Miles 179 to 180, St. Louis, MO.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of the Upper Mississippi River from mile marker (MM) 179 to MM180, from surface to bottom, Saint Louis, MO.

    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 8 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. on November 8, 2018.

    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general safety zone regulations in 165.23, entry of persons or vessels into this safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP) or a designated representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River.

    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River at 314-269-2332. Persons and vessels permitted to enter the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions issued by the COTP or designated representative.

    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative will inform the public of the effective period for the safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs) as appropriate.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. S.A. Stoermer, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24120 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 282 [EPA-R08-UST-2018-0169; FRL-9982-18-Region 8] Utah: Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions, Codification and Incorporation by Reference AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA or Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the State of Utah's Underground Storage Tank (UST) program submitted by the State. The EPA has determined that these revisions satisfy all requirements needed for program approval. This action also codifies the EPA's approval of Utah's state program and incorporates by reference those provisions of the State's regulations that we have determined meet the requirements for approval. The State's federally-authorized and codified UST program, as revised pursuant to this action, will remain subject to the EPA's inspection and enforcement authorities under sections 9005 and 9006 of RCRA subtitle I and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective January 4, 2019, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by December 5, 2018. If EPA receives adverse comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register, as of January 4, 2019, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments by one of the following methods:

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

    2. Email: [email protected]

    3. Mail: Matthew Langenfeld, Region 8, Project Officer, UST, Solid Waste and PCB Unit, Resource Conservation and Recovery Program, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance (8P-R), EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.

    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Matthew Langenfeld, Region 8, Project Officer, UST, Solid Waste and PCB Unit, Resource Conservation and Recovery Program, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance (8P-R), EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-UST-2018-0169. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov, or email. The federal http://www.regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties, and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    You can view and copy the documents that form the basis for this action and associated publicly available materials from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday at the following location: EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, phone number (303) 312-6284. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 2 days in advance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Matthew Langenfeld, (303) 312-6284, [email protected] To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Matthew Langenfeld at (303) 312-6284.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Approval of Revisions to Utah's Underground Storage Tank Program A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?

    States which have received final approval from the EPA under RCRA section 9004(b) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c(b), must maintain an underground storage tank program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the federal underground storage tank program. When the EPA makes revisions to the regulations that govern the UST program, states must revise their programs to comply with the updated regulations and submit these revisions to the EPA for approval. Most commonly, states must change their programs because of changes to the EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 280. States can also initiate changes on their own to their underground storage tank program and these changes must then be approved by the EPA.

    B. What decisions has the EPA made in this rule?

    On February 28, 2018, in accordance with 40 CFR 281.51(a), Utah submitted a complete program revision application seeking the EPA approval for its UST program revisions (State Application). Utah's revisions correspond to the EPA final rule published on July 15, 2015 (80 FR 41566), which revised the 1988 UST regulations and the 1988 state program approval (SPA) regulations (2015 Federal Revisions). As required by 40 CFR 281.20, the State Application contains the following: A transmittal letter from the Governor requesting approval, a description of the program and operating procedures, a demonstration of the State's procedures to ensure adequate enforcement, a Memorandum of Agreement outlining the roles and responsibilities of the EPA and the implementing agency, a statement of certification from the Attorney General, and copies of all relevant state statutes and regulations. We have reviewed the State Application and determined that the revisions to Utah's UST program are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the corresponding federal requirements in subpart C of 40 CFR part 281, and that the Utah program provides for adequate enforcement of compliance (40 CFR 281.11(b)). Therefore, the EPA grants Utah final approval to operate its UST program with the changes described in the program revision application, and as outlined below in Section I.G of this document.

    C. What is the effect of this action on the regulated community?

    This action does not impose additional requirements on the regulated community because the regulations being approved by this rule are already in effect in the State of Utah, and are not changed by this action. This action merely approves the existing state regulations as meeting the federal requirements and renders them federally enforceable.

    D. Why is EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this direct final rule without a prior proposed rule because we view this as a noncontroversial action and we anticipate no adverse comment. Utah did not receive any comments during its comment period when the rules and regulations being considered today were proposed at the state level.

    E. What happens if the EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    Along with this direct final rule, the EPA is publishing a separate document in the “Proposed Rules” section of this Federal Register that serves as the proposal to approve the State's UST program revisions, and provides an opportunity for public comment. If EPA receives comments that oppose this approval, the EPA will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a document in the Federal Register before it becomes effective. The EPA will base any further decision on approval of the State Application after considering all comments received during the comment period. The EPA will then address all public comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this approval, you must do so at this time.

    F. For what has Utah previously been approved?

    On April 7, 1995, the EPA finalized a rule approving the UST program that Utah proposed to administer in lieu of the federal UST program. On December 5, 1995, the EPA codified the provisions of the approved Utah program that are part of the underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, and therefore are subject to the EPA's inspection and enforcement authorities under RCRA sections 9005 and 9006, 42 U.S.C. 6991d and 6991e, and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.

    G. What changes are we approving with this action and what standards do we use for review?

    In order to be approved, each state program application must meet the general requirements in 40 CFR 281.11, and specific requirements in 40 CFR Subpart B (Components of a Program Application); Subpart C (Criteria for No Less Stringent); and Subpart D (Adequate Enforcement of Compliance). This also is true for proposed revisions to approved state programs.

    As more fully described below, the State has made the changes to its approved UST program to reflect the 2015 Federal Revisions. The EPA is approving the State's changes because they are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the federal UST program and because the EPA has confirmed that the Utah UST program will continue to provide for adequate enforcement of compliance as described in 40 CFR 281.11(b) and part 281, Subpart D after this approval.

    The Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Division of Environmental Response and Remediation (DERR) is the lead implementing agency for the UST program in Utah, except in Indian country.

    The DERR continues to have broad statutory authority to regulate the installation, operation, maintenance, and closure of USTs, as well as UST releases under Utah Statutes (2018), Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4—Underground Storage Tank Act, Sections 401-429. The Utah UST Program gets its enforcement authority from the powers and duties of the DERR Director (Director) found in Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4, Sections 404(f), 404(j) and 425(2). Under Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4, Section 404(k) the Director is authorized to require an owner to furnish records, conduct monitoring or testing, and provide access to tanks. The Director is authorized to issue a Notice of Intent to Revoke and Order to Revoke Certificates of Compliance under Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4, Section 414. Certificates of Compliance lapse automatically if annual registration fees are not paid under Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4, Section 408(5)(c). Penalties for non-compliance with Utah's UST Act may be assessed under Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4, Section 425(1). A delivery prohibition tag may be placed on a tank for failure to have a certificate of compliance, spill and overfill prevention, and required tank and/or piping leak detection or corrosion protection.

    Specific authorities to regulate the installation, operation, maintenance, and closure of USTs, as well as UST releases are found under Utah Administrative Code (UAC), as amended effective January 1, 2017, R311-200 through R311-212, Underground Storage Tanks; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements are found under UAC R311-202-280.34; Environmental Quality Administrative Rules are found under UAC, as amended February 1, 2018, R305-1 through R305-9; and maintenance and management of records for individual sites and projects is required under Utah Statutes (2008), Title 63G, Chapter 2, Part 1 through Part 9. The aforementioned statutory sections and regulations satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 281.40 and 281.41.

    Through a Memorandum of Agreement between the State of Utah and the EPA, effective June 27, 2017, the State maintains procedures for receiving and ensuring proper consideration of information about violations submitted by the public. The State agrees to comply with public participation provisions contained in 40 CFR 281.42 including the provision that the State will not oppose intervention under Rule 24(a)(2) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds that the applicant's interest is adequately represented by the State. Utah has met the public participation requirements found in 40 CFR 281.42.

    To qualify for final approval, revisions to a state's program must be “equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent” than the 2015 Federal Revisions. In the 2015 Federal Revisions the EPA addressed UST systems deferred in the 1988 UST regulations, and added, among other things, new operation and maintenance requirements; secondary containment requirements for new and replaced tanks and piping; operator training requirements; and a requirement to ensure UST system compatibility before storing certain biofuel blends. In addition, the EPA removed past deferrals for emergency generator tanks, field constructed tanks, and airport hydrant systems. The EPA analyzes revisions to approved state programs pursuant to the criteria found in 40 CFR 281.30 through 281.39.

    The DERR has revised its regulations to help ensure that the State's UST program revisions are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the 2015 Federal Revisions. In particular, the DERR has amended Utah Administrative Code R311-202-1 to incorporate by reference (into the Utah regulations) the requirements of 40 CFR part 280, including the requirements added by the 2015 Federal Revisions, except for 40 CFR Subpart J (Operator Training) and the definitions of Class A, B and C operators. (We note that R311-206-2(a)(2) also incorporates by reference the necessary requirements for financial responsibility for UST systems.) The State, therefore, has ensured that the criteria found in 40 CFR 281.30 through 281.38 are met.

    Title 40 CFR 281.39 describes the state operator training requirements that must be met in order to be considered equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than federal requirements. Utah did not incorporate by reference federal requirements for operator training, and has promulgated and is implementing its own operator training provisions under Utah Administrative Code R311-201-12. After a thorough review, the EPA has determined that Utah's operator training requirements are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than federal requirements.

    As part of the State Application the Utah Attorney General certified that the State revisions meet the requirements “equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent” criteria in 40 CFR 281.30 through 281.39. The EPA is relying on this certification in addition to the analysis submitted by the State in making our determination.

    For further information on the EPA's analysis of the State's application, see the chart in the Technical Support Document (TSD) contained in the docket for this rulemaking.

    H. Where are the revised rules different from the Federal rules? Broader in Scope Provisions

    Where an approved state program has a greater scope of coverage than required by federal law, the additional coverage is not part of the federally-approved program and are not federally enforceable. (40 CFR 281.12(a)(3)(ii)) The following statutory and regulatory requirements are considered broader in coverage than the federal program as these state-only regulations are not required by federal regulation and are implemented by the State in addition to the federally approved program:

    Utah Administrative Code R311-206-2(a)(1) and (b) allows owners and operators, meeting requirements for participation, to use the State-only Environmental Assurance Program to demonstrate financial assurance.

    Under Utah Statutes, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4—Underground Storage Tank Act, Section 412(6), certificates of compliance are required to operate regulated UST systems and are issued by the State for facilities that are registered, have financial assurance, comply with federal and state rules, and meet tank testing requirements. Under Utah Statutes, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 4—Underground Storage Tank Act, Section 411(7), the DERR Director shall issue certificates of compliance and the Waste Management and Radiation Control Board shall make rules for identifying USTs that do not qualify for a certificate of compliance.

    Under Utah Administrative Code R311-201-2, Utah requires that UST consultants, inspectors, testers, installers, removers, and groundwater and soil samplers be certified by the State. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-201-2, Utah allows individuals to apply for certification, and under Utah Administrative Code R311-201-4, Utah lists eligibility requirements for certification of UST consultants, inspectors, testers, and installers. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-203-3, Utah requires certified installers to pay a permit fee for installation at facilities that do not qualify for a certificate of compliance and to notify the DERR Director of the completion of installation. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-201-5 through 10, Utah allows for renewal of certificates, provides standards of performance, gives the DERR Director the ability to deny certification, and allows for appeal, inactivation, revocation, and reciprocity.

    Under Utah Administrative Code R311-203-3, Utah requires installers to provide notification to the State 10 days prior to installation of UST systems and components, and requires an UST installation permit fee. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-203-4, Utah requires UST registration fees.

    More Stringent Provisions

    Where an approved state program includes requirements that are considered more stringent than required by federal law, the more stringent requirements become part of the federally approved program. (40 CFR 281.12(a)(3)(ii))

    The following statutory and regulatory requirements are considered more stringent than the federal program, and on approval, they become part of the federally approved program and are federally enforceable:

    Under Utah Administrative Code R311-201-12(f), Utah requires third-party Class B operators to be certified as UST testers, installers, or meet the requirements of certified UST inspectors. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-203-5, Utah requires that UST testers report test results. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-203-7(a), Utah requires that walkthrough inspections conducted under 40 CFR 280.36 be conducted by or under the direction of a Class B Operator. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-203-7(c), Utah requires UST facilites with temporarily closed tanks to conduct annual operator inspections. Under Utah Administrative Code R311-211-12(h)(2) and (3), Utah requires Class A and B operators to submit a registration application to the DERR Director, documenting proper training with its renewal registration application prior to expiration of their existing certification.

    I. How does this action affect Indian country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Utah?

    The EPA's approval of Utah's Program does not extend to Indian country as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Indian country generally includes lands within the exterior boundaries of the following Indian reservations located within Utah: The Washakie Reservation (Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation), reservation lands of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah (Cedar Band of Paiutes, Kanosh Band of Paiutes, Koosharem Band of Paiutes, Indian Peaks Band of Paiutes, and Shivwits Band of Paiutes), the Skull Valley Indian Reservation, the Uintah & Ouray Reservation, the Goshute Reservation, and the Navajo Nation; any land held in trust by the United States for an Indian tribe; and any other areas that are “Indian country” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 1151. Any lands removed from an Indian reservation status by federal court action are not considered reservation lands even if located within the exterior boundaries of an Indian reservation. The EPA will retain responsibilities under RCRA for underground storage tanks in Indian country. Therefore, this action has no effect in Indian country. See 40 CFR 281.12(a)(2).

    II. Codification A. What is codification?

    Codification is the process of placing a state's statutes and regulations that comprise the state's approved UST program into the CFR. Section 9004(b) of RCRA, as amended, allows the EPA to approve State UST programs to operate in lieu of the federal program. The EPA codifies its authorization of state programs in 40 CFR part 282 and incorporates by reference state regulations that the EPA will enforce under sections 9005 and 9006 of RCRA and any other applicable statutory provisions. The incorporation by reference of state authorized programs in the CFR should substantially enhance the public's ability to discern the current status of the approved state program and state requirements that can be federally enforced. This effort provides clear notice to the public of the scope of the approved program in each state.

    B. What is the history of codification of Utah's UST program?

    The EPA incorporated by reference and codified Utah's then-approved UST program in 40 CFR 282.94, effective April 7, 1995 (60 FR 12709; March 8, 1995). Through this action, the EPA is incorporating by reference and codifying Utah's state program in 40 CFR 282.94 to include the approved revisions.

    C. What codification decisions have we made in this rule?

    In this rule, we are finalizing the federal regulatory text that incorporates by reference the federally authorized Utah UST Program. In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Utah rules described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 282 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 8 office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    One purpose of this Federal Register document is to codify Utah's approved UST program. The codification reflects the State program that would be in effect at the time the EPA's approved revisions to the Utah UST program addressed in this direct final rule become final. If, however, the EPA receives substantive comment on the proposed rule then this codification will not take effect, and the State rules that are approved after the EPA considers public comment will be codified instead. By codifying the approved Utah program and by amending the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the public will more easily be able to discern the status of the federally-approved requirements of the Utah program.

    The EPA is incorporating by reference the Utah approved UST program in 40 CFR 282.94. Section 282.94(d)(1)(ii)(B) incorporates by reference for enforcement purposes the State's regulations. Section 282.94 also references the Attorney General's Statement, Demonstration of Adequate Enforcement Procedures, the Program Description, and the Memorandum of Agreement, which are approved as part of the UST program under subtitle I of RCRA.

    D. What is the effect of EPA's codification of the federally authorized State UST Program on enforcement?

    The EPA retains the authority under sections 9003(h), 9005 and 9006 of subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991b(h), 6991d and 6991e, and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions to undertake corrective action, inspections, and enforcement actions, and to issue orders in approved States. If the EPA determines it will take such actions in Utah, the EPA will rely on federal sanctions, federal inspection authorities, and other federal procedures rather than the state analogs. Therefore, though the EPA has approved the State procedures listed in 40 CFR 282.94(d)(1)(ii), the EPA is not incorporating by reference Utah's procedural and enforcement authorities.

    E. What State provisions are not part of the codification?

    The public also needs to be aware that some provisions of the State's UST program are not part of the federally approved State program. Such provisions are not part of the RCRA Subtitle I program because they are “broader in coverage” than Subtitle I of RCRA. Title 40 CFR 281.12(a)(3)(ii) states that where an approved state program has provisions that are broader in coverage than the federal program, those provisions are not a part of the federally approved program. As a result, State provisions which are “broader in coverage” than the federal program are not incorporated by reference for purposes of enforcement in part 282. Title 40 CFR 282.94(d)(1)(iii) lists for reference and clarity the Utah statutory and regulatory provisions which are “broader in coverage” than the federal program and which are not, therefore, part of the approved program being codified today. Provisions that are “broader in coverage” cannot be enforced by EPA; the State, however, will continue to implement and enforce such provisions under State law.

    III. Statutory and Executive Order (E.O.) Reviews

    This action only applies to Utah's UST Program requirements pursuant to RCRA Section 9004 and imposes no requirements other than those imposed by State law. It complies with applicable EOs and statutory provisions as follows:

    A. Executive Order 12866 Regulatory Planning and Review, Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Jan. 21, 2011). This action approves and codifies state requirements for the purpose of RCRA section 9004 and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Therefore, this action is not subject to review by OMB.

    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because actions such as this final approval of Utah's revised underground storage tank program under RCRA are exempted under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

    C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Because this action approves and codifies pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538). For the same reason, this action also does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

    D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), because it merely approves and codifies state requirements as part of the State RCRA Underground Storage Tank Program without altering the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established by RCRA.

    E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

    This action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant and it does not make decisions based on environmental health or safety risks.

    F. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a “significant regulatory action” as defined under Executive Order 12866.

    G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under RCRA section 9004(b), the EPA grants a state's application for approval as long as the state meets the criteria required by RCRA. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for the EPA, when it reviews a state approval application, to require the use of any particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

    H. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform

    As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, the EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct.

    I. Executive Order 12630: Governmental Actions and Interference With Constitutionally Protected Property Rights

    The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, Mar. 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order.

    J. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). “Burden” is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. Because this rule approves pre-existing state rules which are at least equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than existing federal requirements, and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law, and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.

    L. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801-808, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this document 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 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). However, this action will be effective January 4, 2019 because it is a direct final rule.

    Authority:

    This rule is issued under the authority of Sections 2002(a), 7004(b), and 9004, 9005 and 9006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6974(b), and 6991c, 6991d, and 6991e.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 282

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by reference, State program approval, and Underground storage tanks.

    Dated: October 26, 2018. Douglas Benevento, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR part 282 as follows:

    PART 282—APPROVED UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK PROGRAMS 1. The authority citation for part 282 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 6912, 6991c, 6991d, and 6991e.

    2. Revise § 282.94 to read as follows:
    § 282.94 Utah State-Administered Program.

    (a) History of the approval of Utah's Program. The State of Utah is approved to administer and enforce an underground storage tank program in lieu of the federal program under subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq. The State's program, as administered by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Division of Environmental Response and Remediation (DERR), was approved by EPA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6991c and Part 281 of this Chapter. EPA published the notice of final determination approving the Utah underground storage tank base program effective on April 7, 1995. A subsequent program revision application was approved by EPA and became effective on January 4, 2019.

    (b) Enforcement authority. Utah has primary responsibility for administering and enforcing its federally approved underground storage tank program. However, EPA retains the authority to exercise its corrective action, inspection, and enforcement authorities under sections 9003(h), 9005, and 9006 of subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991b(h),6991d and 6991e, as well as under any other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.

    (c) To retain program approval, Utah must revise its approved program to adopt new changes to the federal subtitle I program which make it more stringent, in accordance with section 9004 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c, and 40 CFR part 281, subpart E. If Utah obtains approval for the revised requirements pursuant to section 9004 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c, the newly approved statutory and regulatory provisions will be added to this subpart and notice of any change will be published in the Federal Register.

    (d) Utah has final approval for the following elements of its program application originally submitted to EPA and approved effective April 7, 1995, and the program revision application approved by EPA effective on January 4, 2019:

    (1) State statutes and regulations—(i) Incorporation by reference. The Utah provisions cited in this paragraph, and listed in Appendix A to part 282, are incorporated by reference as part of the underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain copies of the Utah regulations that are incorporated by reference in this paragraph from Utah's Office of Administrative Rules, Office Coordinator, P.O. Box 141007, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-1007; Phone number: 801-538-3003; website: https://rules.utah.gov/publications/utah-adm-code/. You may inspect all approved material at the EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202 (Phone number (303) 312-6284 or the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of the material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    (A) Utah Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the Underground Storage Tank Program, October 2018.

    (B) [Reserved]

    (ii) Legal basis. EPA evaluated the following statutes and regulations which provide the legal basis for the State's implementation of the underground storage tank program, but they are not being incorporated by reference and do not replace Federal authorities:

    (A) The statutory provisions include: Utah Code (May 8, 2018), Title 19, “Environmental Quality Code,” Chapter 6, “Hazardous Substances,” Part 4 “Underground Storage Tank Act”: Sections 19-6-402 (14); 19-6-404(2)(f), (j), and (m); 19-6-407(2); 19-6-414; 19-6-416; 19-6-418; 19-6-420(2), (4)(a), (5)(b), (8), and (9)(b); 19-6-424.5; 19-6-425; 19-6-426(5) and (6); 19-6-427, and 19-5-429(1).

    (B) The regulatory provisions include:

    (1) Utah Administrative Code (January 1, 2017), Title 311: “Environmental Quality, Environmental Response and Remediation”: Sections R311-206-7(a) and (f); R311-208-1 through R311-208-5.

    (2) Utah Administrative Code (January 1, 2017), Title 305: “Environmental Quality, Administrative Procedures”: Sections R305-7-101 through R305-7-113; R305-7-200 through R305-7-217; R305-7-301 through R305-7-320; R305-7-401 through R305-7-403; R305-7-501 through R305-7-503; and R305-7-601 through R305-7-623.

    (iii) Provisions not incorporated by reference. The following specifically identified sections and rules applicable to the Utah underground storage tank program that are broader in coverage than the federal program, are not part of the approved program, and are not incorporated by reference herein for enforcement purposes:

    (A) Utah Code (May 8, 2018), Title 19: “Environmental Quality Code,” Chapter 6, “Hazardous Substances,” Part 4 “Underground Storage Tank Act”: Sections 19-6-412(6); and 19-6-411(7).

    (B) Utah Administrative Code (January 1, 2017), Title 311: “Environmental Quality, Environmental Response and Remediation”: Sections R311-201-2; R311-201-4; R311-201-5 through 10; R311-203-3(b), (c) and (g); R311-203-4; R311-206-2(a)(1), (b) and (c); and R311-206-8(a)(1)—(4) and (f)(1)(A).

    (2) Statement of legal authority. The Attorney General's Statements, signed by the Assistant Attorney General and Director of the Environment and Health Division of the Utah Attorney General's Office of the State of Utah on October 2, 2017, though not incorporated by reference, are referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

    (3) Demonstration of procedures for adequate enforcement. The “Demonstration of Procedures for Adequate Enforcement” submitted as part of the original application on February 28, 2018, though not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

    (4) Program description. The program description and any other material submitted as part of the original application on February 28, 2018, though not incorporated by reference, are referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

    (5) Memorandum of Agreement. The Memorandum of Agreement between EPA Region 8 and the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator on July 27, 2017, though not incorporated by reference, is referenced as part of the approved underground storage tank program under subtitle I of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991 et seq.

    3. Appendix A to part 282 is amended by revising the entry for Utah to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 282—State Requirements Incorporated by Reference in Part 282 of the Code of Federal Regulations Utah

    (a) The statutory provisions include: Utah Code, Title 19: “Environmental Quality Code,” Chapter 1, “General Provisions, Part 2, Powers,” (May 8, 1991) and Chapter 6, “Hazardous Substances, Part 4, Underground Storage Tank Act” (May 8, 2018):

    Section 19-1-203, Representatives of department authorized to enter regulated premises.

    Section 19-6-402, Definitions, except (3), (4), (8), (9), (11), (14), (15), (20), (23) and (26).

    Section 19-6-402.5, Retroactive effect.

    Section 19-6-403, Powers and duties of board, except (1)(a)(i), (1)(a)(vi) and (1)(a)(vii).

    Section 19-6-404, Powers and duties of director, except 2(c), 2(f), 2(j) and 2(m).

    Section 19-6-407, Underground storage tank registration—Change of ownership or operation—civil penalty, except (2) and (3).

    Section 19-6-413, Tank tightness test—Action required after testing.

    Section 19-6-420 Abatement actions—Corrective actions, except (1) through (3)(b), (4)(a), (5)(b) and (c), (6), and 9(b).

    (b) Administrative Rules of the State of Utah, Title 311 Environmental Quality, Environmental Response and Remediation, Utah Administrative Code (April 1, 2018):

    (1) Section R311-200-1, Underground Storage Tanks: Definitions, except (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(10), (b)(11), (b)(12), (b)(13), (b)(20), (b)(22), (b)(28), (b)(34), (b)(38), (b)(44), (b)(45), (b)(49), (b)(51), (b)(55), (b)(56), (b)(58), and (b)(59).

    Section R311-201-1, Underground Storage Tanks: Definitions, except those definitions listed as excepted under R311-200-1.

    Section R311-201-12, Underground Storage Tanks: Certification Programs and UST Operator Training, UST Operator Training and Registration, except (d)(2) and (f).

    Section R311-202-1, Federal Underground Storage Tank Regulations, Incorporation by reference, except (a), (b), (c), and (d).

    Section R311-203-1, Underground Storage Tanks: Technical Standards, Definitions, except those definitions listed as excepted under R311-200-1.

    Section R311-203-2, Notification.

    Section R311-203-3, New installations, permits, except (b), (c), and (g).

    Section R311-203-5, UST testing requirements.

    Section R311-203-6, Secondary containment and under-dispenser containment.

    Section R311-203-7, Operator inspections.

    Section R311-203-8, Unattended facilities.

    Section R311-204-1, Underground Storage Tanks: Closure and Remediation, Definitions, except those definitions listed as excepted under R311-200-1.

    Section R311-204-2, Underground Storage Tank Closure Plan.

    Section R311-204-3, Disposal.

    Section R311-204-4, Closure notice.

    Section R311-205-1, Underground Storage Tanks: Site Assessment Protocol, Definitions, except those definitions listed as excepted under R311-200-1.

    Section R311-205-2, Site assessment protocol.

    Section R311-206-1, Underground Storage Tanks: Certificate of Compliance and Financial Assurance Mechanisms, Definitions, except those definitions listed as excepted under R311-200-1.

    Section R311-206-2, Declaration of financial assurance mechanisms, except (a)(1), (b), and (c).

    Section R311-206-3, Requirements for issuance of certificates of compliance, except (7) and (8).

    Section R311-206-5, Requirements for owners and operators demonstrating financial assurance by other methods, except (b) and (b)(2).

    Section R311-206-8, Delivery prohibition, except (a)(1)—(4) and (f)(1)(A).

    (c) Copies of the Utah regulations that are incorporated by reference are available from the Utah's Office of Administrative Rules, Office Coordinator, P.O. Box 141007, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-1007; Phone number: 801-538-3003; website: https://rules.utah.gov/publications/utah-adm-code/.

    [FR Doc. 2018-24062 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 1710319998630-02] RIN 0648-XG594 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2018 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Red Snapper AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS implements accountability measures for commercial red snapper in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic. NMFS projects commercial landings for red snapper will reach the commercial annual catch limit (ACL) for the 2018 fishing year. Therefore, NMFS is closing the commercial sector for red snapper in the South Atlantic EEZ on November 7, 2018. This closure is necessary to protect the red snapper resource.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective 12:01 a.m., local time, November 7, through December 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The snapper-grouper fishery of the South Atlantic includes red snapper and is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and is implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.

    The 2018 commercial ACL for red snapper in the South Atlantic is 124,815 lb (56,615 kg), round weight, as specified in 50 CFR 622.193(y)(1).

    Under 50 CFR 622.193(y)(1), NMFS is required to close the commercial sector for red snapper when the commercial ACL is reached, or is projected to be reached, by filing a notification to that effect with the Office of the Federal Register. NMFS has determined that the commercial ACL for South Atlantic red snapper will be reached by November 7, 2018. Accordingly, the commercial sector for South Atlantic red snapper is closed effective 12:01 a.m., local time, November 7, 2018. For the 2019 fishing year, NMFS will announce the commercial season opening date in the Federal Register. Unless otherwise specified, the 2019 commercial season will begin on the second Monday in July (50 CFR 622.183(b)(5)(i)). NMFS notes that the red snapper recreational sector closed for the 2018 fishing year at 12:01 a.m., local time, August 20, 2018 (83 FR 35428; July 26, 2018). Therefore, as of the commercial closure effective date, all harvest and possession red snapper in the South Atlantic EEZ will be prohibited.

    The operator of a vessel with a valid commercial vessel permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper having red snapper onboard must have landed and bartered, traded, or sold such red snapper prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, November 7, 2018. On and after the effective date of the closure notification, all sale or purchase of red snapper is prohibited. This prohibition on the harvest, possession, sale/purchase apply in the South Atlantic on board a vessel for which a valid Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper has been issued, without regard to where such species were harvested or possessed, i.e., in state or Federal waters (50 CFR 622.193(y)(1) and 622.181(c)(2)).

    Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, has determined this temporary rule is necessary for the conservation and management of red snapper and the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery and is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.

    This action is taken under 50 CFR 622.193(y)(1) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    These measures are exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the temporary rule is issued without opportunity for prior notice and comment.

    This action responds to the best scientific information available. The NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (AA), finds that the need to immediately implement this action to close the commercial sector for red snapper constitutes good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), as such procedures are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Such procedures are unnecessary because the rule implementing FMP Amendment 43, which established the commercial season and ACLs for red snapper, and the accountability measures has already been subject to notice and comment, and all that remains is to notify the public of the closure. Such procedures are contrary to the public interest because of the need to immediately implement this action to protect red snapper since the capacity of the fishing fleet allows for rapid harvest of the commercial ACL. Prior notice and opportunity for public comment would require time and could potentially result in a harvest well in excess of the established commercial ACL.

    For the aforementioned reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: October 31, 2018. Karen H. Abrams, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24182 Filed 11-1-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 141107936-5399-02] RIN 0648-XG592 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 2018 Commercial Accountability Measure and Closure for South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish; July Through December Season AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS implements accountability measures for commercial gray triggerfish in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic. NMFS indicates that commercial landings for gray triggerfish are projected to reach the commercial annual catch limit (ACL)(commercial quota) for the period of July through December and commercial harvest should close to prevent the quota from being exceeded. Therefore, NMFS is closing the commercial sector for gray triggerfish in the South Atlantic EEZ on November 6, 2018. This closure is necessary to protect the gray triggerfish resource.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective 12:01 a.m., local time, November 6, 2018, until January 1, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The snapper-grouper fishery of the South Atlantic includes gray triggerfish and is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and is implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.

    The final rule implementing Amendment 29 to the FMP divided the commercial ACL (commercial quota) for gray triggerfish in the South Atlantic into two 6-month commercial fishing seasons and allocated 50 percent of the total commercial quota of 312,324 lb (141,668 kg), round weight, to each fishing season, January 1 through June 30, and July 1 through December 31 (80 FR 30947; June 1, 2015), as specified in 50 CFR 622.190(a)(8). As a result, the commercial quota is divided into two equal seasonal quotas of 156,162 lb (70,834 kg), round weight.

    Under 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i), NMFS is required to close the commercial sector for gray triggerfish when the commercial quota specified in § 622.190(a)(8)(i) or (ii) is reached, or is projected to be reached, by filing a notification to that effect with the Office of the Federal Register. NMFS has determined that the commercial quota for the July through December 2018 season for South Atlantic gray triggerfish will be reached and commercial harvest should close to prevent the quota from being exceeded. Accordingly, the commercial sector for South Atlantic gray triggerfish is closed effective 12:01 a.m., local time, November 6, 2018, until the start of the next commercial fishing season on January 1, 2019.

    The operator of a vessel with a valid commercial vessel permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper having gray triggerfish onboard must have landed and bartered, traded, or sold such gray triggerfish prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, November 6, 2018. During the closure, the bag limit specified in 50 CFR 622.187(b)(8), and the possession limits specified in 50 CFR 622.187(c), apply to all harvest or possession of gray triggerfish in or from the South Atlantic EEZ. Also, during the closure, the sale or purchase of gray triggerfish taken from the South Atlantic EEZ is prohibited. The prohibition on the sale or purchase does not apply to gray triggerfish that were harvested, landed ashore, and sold prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, November 6, 2018, and were held in cold storage by a dealer or processor.

    For a person onboard a vessel for which a Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery has been issued, the bag and possession limits and sale and purchase prohibitions applicable after the commercial quota closure for gray triggerfish apply regardless of whether the fish are harvested in state or Federal waters, as specified in 50 CFR 622.190(c)(1).

    Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, has determined this temporary rule is necessary for the conservation and management of gray triggerfish and the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery and is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.

    This action is taken under 50 CFR 622.193(q)(1)(i) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    These measures are exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the temporary rule is issued without opportunity for prior notice and comment.

    This action responds to the best scientific information available. The NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (AA), finds that the need to immediately implement this action to close the commercial sector for gray triggerfish constitutes good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), as such procedures are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Such procedures are unnecessary because the rules implementing the split commercial seasons and quotas for gray triggerfish, and the accountability measures have already been subject to notice and comment, and all that remains is to notify the public of the closure. Such procedures are contrary to the public interest because of the need to immediately implement this action to protect gray triggerfish since the capacity of the fishing fleet allows for rapid harvest of the commercial quota. Prior notice and opportunity for public comment would require time and could potentially result in a harvest well in excess of the established commercial.

    For the aforementioned reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: October 31, 2018. Karen H. Abrams, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24180 Filed 11-1-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 214 Monday, November 5, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0906; Product Identifier 2018-NM-122-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus SAS Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that certain skin stringer joints are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require a rototest inspection of the fastener holes in the affected areas and repair if necessary, and modifying the fastener holes. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

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

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0906; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0906; Product Identifier 2018-NM-122-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM 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 NPRM.

    Discussion

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the airplane. This condition is known as WFD. It is associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.

    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.

    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness directives through separate rulemaking actions.

    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.

    We are issuing this AD to address any cracking of the top wing skin stringer joints at rib 19, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the wing.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2018-0174, dated August 14, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    In response to US 14 CFR Part 26 concerning Widespread Fatigue Damage (WFD), Airbus assessed all wing structural items of the Airbus A310 design deemed potentially susceptible to WFD. The top [wing] skin stringer joints at rib 19 at level of the first fastener row were highlighted as an area of uniform stress distribution, indicating that cracks may develop in adjacent stringers at the same time, which is known as Multi Element Damage.

    This condition, if not corrected, could reduce the structural integrity of the wing.

    Prompted by the conclusion of WFD analysis, Airbus issued the [service bulletin] SB to provide modification instructions. The accomplishment of this modification at the specified time will extend the life of the fastener holes in the affected area in order to reach the Limit of Validity.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-time inspection of the [fastener] holes in the affected area, accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s) [contacting the manufacturer], depending on findings, and modification.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0906.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A310-57-2108, dated November 9, 2017. This service information describes procedures for accomplishing a rototest inspection of the fastener holes in the affected areas and repair if necessary, and modifying the fastener holes. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.

    Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance time for the replacement specified in this proposed AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant structure is replaced before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly warrant such an extension.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 14 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs for Required Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • 43 work-hours × $85 per hour = 3,655 $0 $3,655 $51,170

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2018-0906; Product Identifier 2018-NM-122-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 20, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes, certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that top wing skin stringer joints at rib 19 are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to address any cracking of the top wing skin stringer joints, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the wing.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Definitions

    (1) The affected areas are defined as the top wing skin stringers, 9 to 15, at the stringer joints, outboard of rib 19, on both wings.

    (2) The average flight time (AFT) is defined as flight hours divided by flight cycles accumulated by an individual airplane since the airplane's first flight, specified in hours and hundredths of an hour. Refer to the Airbus A310 Maintenance Review Board Report Section D2 for guidance to determine the AFT.

    (h) Inspection

    Within the applicable compliance times specified in figure 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD, accomplish a rototest inspection of the fastener holes in the affected areas in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-57-2108, dated November 9, 2017.

    EP05NO18.002 (i) Corrective Actions

    If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, any discrepancy (i.e., cracking or discrepant hole diameter) or existing repair is detected, before further flight, obtain corrective actions 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); and accomplish the corrective actions within the compliance time specified therein. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (j) Modification

    If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, no existing repair or discrepancy is detected, before further flight, modify the fastener holes in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-57-2108, dated November 9, 2017.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

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

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2018-0174, dated August 14, 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-2018-0906.

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

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 24, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23817 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0905; Product Identifier 2018-NM-115-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Embraer S.A. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of corrosion and chromium layer chipping of the forward and aft pintle pins of the main landing gear (MLG) shock struts. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for discrepancies of affected forward and aft pintle pins of the MLG shock struts, and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Embraer S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170—Putim—12227-901 São Jose dos Campos—SP—Brazil; telephone: +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax: +55 12 3927-7546; email: [email protected]; internet: http://www.flyembraer.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    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-2018-0905; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Krista Greer, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3221.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0905; Product Identifier 2018-NM-115-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM 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 NPRM.

    Discussion

    Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC), which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2018-07-01, effective July 24, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes. The MCAI states:

    This [Brazilian] AD was prompted by reports of corrosion and chromium layer chipping on the rearward and forward Pintle Pin of the Main Landing Gear (MLG) Shock Struts. We are issuing this [Brazilian] AD to detect and correct Pintle Pin[s] having [discrepancies including] corrosion or chromium layer chipping, which could cause the Pintle Pin[s] to shear under normal load and lead to collapse of the MLG during take-off or landing.

    Corrective actions include repair or replacement of affected forward and aft pintle pins of the left- and right-hand MLG shock struts. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0905.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Embraer has issued Service Bulletin 190-32-0065, Revision 02, dated November 1, 2017. This service information describes procedures for repetitive inspections of affected forward and aft pintle pins of the MLG shock struts for discrepancies, and repair or replacement of any discrepant affected pintle pin.

    Embraer has also issued Task 32-11-001-1034, “MLG Shock Strut Pintle Pins—Internal,” of the Embraer 190/195 Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) 1928, Revision 11, dated May 10, 2017. This service information describes procedures for the inspection of pintle pins of the MLG shock struts at areas covered by the MLG shock strut and trunnion.

    This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 96 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Up to 22 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up to $1,870 $0 Up to $1,870 per inspection cycle Up to $179,520 per inspection cycle.

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

    Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 per MLG (replacement) $1,750 per MLG $2,260 per MLG. 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 per MLG (repair) $0 $510 per MLG. Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Embraer S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2018-0905; Product Identifier 2018-NM-115-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 20, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, and -100 IGW airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes; certificated in any category; all serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of corrosion and chromium layer chipping of the forward and aft pintle pins of the main landing gear (MLG) shock struts. We are issuing this AD to address discrepancies of affected forward and aft pintle pins of the MLG shock struts, which could result in the pintle pin shearing under normal load and consequent collapse of the MLG during takeoff or landing.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Repetitive Inspections

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for discrepancies of affected forward and aft pintle pins of the left- and right-hand MLG shock struts, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 190-32-0065, Revision 02, dated November 1, 2017. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 72 months.

    (1) For airplanes on which any MLG pintle pin having part number (P/N) 2821-0067 or 2821-0025 has accumulated fewer than 17,000 total flight cycles since new: Before the accumulation of 17,750 total flight cycles.

    (2) For airplanes on which any MLG pintle pin having P/N 2821-0067 or 2821-0025 has accumulated 17,000 or more total flight cycles since new: Within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.

    (h) Corrective Actions

    If any discrepancy of any pintle pin is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair the affected pintle pin or replace it with a new pintle pin, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 190-32-0065, Revision 02, dated November 1, 2017.

    (i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the initial inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if that inspection was performed before the effective date of this AD using the applicable service information identified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(5) of this AD.

    (1) Embraer 190/195 Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) 1928, Task 57-50-007-1247, Revision 11, dated May 10, 2017.

    (2) Embraer 190/195 MRBR 1928, Task 32-11-00-001, Revision 11, dated May 10, 2017.

    (3) Embraer Service Bulletin 190-32-0002, Revision 01, dated November 8, 2012.

    (4) Embraer Service Bulletin 190-32-0065, dated August 31, 2016.

    (5) Embraer Service Bulletin 190-32-0065, Revision 01, dated October 24, 2017.

    (j) Equivalent Inspection

    Performing a detailed inspection for discrepancies of affected forward and aft pintle pins of the left- and right-hand MLG shock struts, in accordance with Task 32-11-001-1034, “MLG Shock Strut Pintle Pins—Internal,” of the Embraer 190/195 MRBR 1928, Revision 11, dated May 10, 2017, at intervals not to exceed 72 months, is equivalent to an inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC); or ANAC's authorized Designee. If approved by the ANAC Designee, the approval must include the Designee's authorized signature.

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

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2018-07-01, effective July 24, 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-2018-0905.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Krista Greer, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3221.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Embraer S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170—Putim—12227-901 São Jose dos Campos—SP—Brazil; telephone: +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax: +55 12 3927-7546; email: [email protected]; internet: http://www.flyembraer.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 22, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23691 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0903; Product Identifier 2018-NM-113-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-19-14, which applies to certain Airbus SAS Model A318 and A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2016-19-14 requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the 10VU rack fitting lugs, and repair of any cracking. Since we issued AD 2016-19-14, we have determined that the unsafe condition may exist on additional airplanes. This proposed AD continues to require repetitive inspections for cracking of the 10VU rack fitting lugs, and repair of any cracking. This proposed AD would also add airplanes to the applicability. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact 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.

    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-2018-0903; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone 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 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0903; Product Identifier 2018-NM-113-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

    Discussion

    We issued AD 2016-19-14, Amendment 39-18663 (81 FR 71602, October 18, 2016) (“AD 2016-19-14”), for certain Airbus SAS Model A318 and A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2016-19-14 requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the 10VU rack fitting lugs, and repair of any cracking. AD 2016-19-14 resulted from a report of cracks found during maintenance inspections on certain 10VU rack fitting lugs. We issued AD 2016-19-14 to address reading difficulties of flight-critical information displayed to the flightcrew during a critical phase of flight, such as an approach or takeoff, which could result in loss of airplane control at an altitude insufficient for recovery.

    Actions Since AD 2016-19-14 Was Issued

    AD 2016-19-14 applies to the identified airplane models on which Airbus Modification 35869 has not been embodied in production. Since we issued AD 2016-19-14, we have determined that the unsafe condition may also exist on airplanes in a post-Airbus Modification 35869 configuration.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0131, dated June 19, 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 and A319 series airplanes; A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During an unscheduled maintenance operation on an A330 aeroplane, the 10VU rack was removed for access and cracks were discovered on 10VU rack side fittings on lugs 1, 3 and 4. As a similar design is installed on A320 family aeroplanes, a sampling review was done to determine the possible fleet impact. The result showed that several aeroplanes had cracked or broken 10VU rack side fittings.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to a high vibration level on the primary flight and navigation displays during critical flight phases (take-off and landing), possibly creating reading difficulties for the crew.

    Prompted by these findings, Airbus developed mod 35869 to reinforce the affected rack fitting lugs. For in-service aeroplanes, Airbus published SB [service bulletin] A320-92-1087 to provide detailed inspection (DET) and repair instructions. Consequently, EASA AD 2015-0170 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2016-19-14] was issued to require, for all pre mod 35869 aeroplanes, repetitive DET of the affected 10VU rack fitting lugs and, depending on findings, accomplishment of a repair.

    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, analysis confirmed the need to extend the inspection to post mod 35869 aeroplanes. Airbus issued SB A320-92-1119 providing instructions for DET and repair of those aeroplanes accordingly. Airbus developed mod 157335 to further reinforce and adjust the affected rack fitting lugs. Analysis is still ongoing to confirm mod 157335 as terminating action for the requirements of this [EASA] AD, and further AD action may follow.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2015-0170, which is superseded, expanding the Applicability to include post mod 35869 aeroplanes, and requiring, for all aeroplanes, repetitive DET of the affected 10VU rack fitting lugs and, depending on findings, accomplishment of a repair [and reporting positive and negative findings to Airbus].

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0903.

    Model A320-216 Airplanes

    The Airbus SAS Model A320-216 was type certificated on December 19, 2016. Before that date, any EASA ADs that affected Model A320-216 airplanes were included on the Required Airworthiness Actions List (RAAL). One or more Model A320-216 airplanes have subsequently been placed on the U.S. Register, and will now be included in FAA AD actions. For Model A320-216 airplanes, the requirements that correspond to AD 2014-20-04 were mandated by the MCAI via the RAAL. Although that RAAL requirement is still in effect, for continuity and clarity we have identified Model A320-216 airplanes in paragraph (c) of this AD; the requirements of paragraphs (g) through (i) in this proposed AD would therefore apply to those airplanes.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A320-92-1087, Revision 03, dated July 31, 2017; and A320-92-1119, dated July 28, 2017. This service information describes procedures for repetitive inspections for cracking of the 10VU rack fitting lugs, and repair of any cracking. These documents are distinct since they apply to airplanes in different configurations. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain all of the requirements of AD 2016-19-14 and expand the applicability to include additional airplanes. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously except as discussed under “Differences Between this Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information.” This proposed AD also would require sending the inspection results to Airbus SAS.

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    This proposed AD would not permit further flight if cracks are detected in any 10VU rack fitting lug, but the MCAI permits flight for a limited time if cracking is detected in a single 10VU rack fitting lug. We have determined that, because of the safety implications and consequences associated with that cracking, any cracked 10VU rack fitting lug must be repaired before further flight. This difference has been coordinated with the EASA.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 461 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 $0 $170 $78,370

    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the reporting requirement in this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be $85 per product.

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

    Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • 83 work-hours × $85 per hour = $7,055 $9,140 $16,195
    Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-19-14, Amendment 39-18663 (81 FR 71602, October 18, 2016), and adding the following new AD: Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2018-0903; Product Identifier 2018-NM-113-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 20, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2016-19-14, Amendment 39-18663 (81 FR 71602, October 18, 2016) (“AD 2016-19-14”).

    (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, and -233 airplanes.

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

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 92, Electric and Electronic Common Installation.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracks found during maintenance inspections on certain 10VU rack fitting lugs. We are issuing this AD to address reading difficulties of flight-critical information displayed to the flightcrew during a critical phase of flight, such as an approach or takeoff, which could result in loss of airplane control at an altitude insufficient for recovery.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Definitions

    For the purpose of this AD, Group 1 airplanes are in a pre-Airbus Modification 35869 configuration, and Group 2 airplanes are in a post-Airbus Modification 35869 configuration.

    (h) Repetitive Inspections

    (1) For Group 1 airplanes: At the later of the times specified in table 1 to paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 20,000 flight cycles or 40,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, do a detailed inspection for cracking of the 10VU rack fitting lugs, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1087, Revision 03, dated July 31, 2017.

    Table 1 to Paragraph (h)(1) of This AD—Initial Inspection Compliance Time for Group 1 Airplanes Compliance time (whichever occurs later, A or B) A Prior to exceeding 30,000 total flight cycles or 60,000 total flight hours. B Within 24 months after November 22, 2016 (the effective date of AD 2016-19-14).

    (2) For Group 2 airplanes: At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and (h)(2)(ii) of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 20,000 flight cycles or 40,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, do a detailed inspection for cracking of the 10VU rack fitting lugs, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1119, dated July 28, 2017.

    (i) Prior to exceeding 30,000 total flight cycles or 60,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.

    (ii) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.

    (i) Repair

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD: Before further flight, do a repair in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1087, Revision 03, dated July 31, 2017 (for Group 1 airplanes); or Service Bulletin A320-92-1119, dated July 28, 2017 (for Group 2 airplanes); as applicable. Repair of a 10VU rack fitting lug does not terminate the repetitive inspections required by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD.

    (j) Reporting

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD: Submit a report of findings (positive and negative) of each inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD to Airbus Service Bulletin Reporting Online Application on Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com/), or submit the results to Airbus in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1087, Revision 03, dated July 31, 2017 (for Group 1 airplanes); or Service Bulletin A320-92-1119, dated July 28, 2017 (for Group 2 airplanes); as applicable. Where Figure A-FAAAA, Sheet 02, of Appendix 01, “Inspection Report,” of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1087, Revision 03, dated July 31, 2017; and Figure A-FAAAA, Sheet 02, of Appendix 01, “Inspection Report,” of Service Bulletin A320-92-1119, dated July 28, 2017; specifies sending removed lugs to Airbus for investigation, this AD does not include that requirement.

    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.

    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.

    (k) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraphs (h)(1) and (i) of this AD if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1087, Revision 02, dated November 25, 2014.

    (l) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    (m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (n)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

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

    (n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2018-0131, dated June 19, 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-2018-0903.

    (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 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, 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 service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 22, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23689 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0904; Product Identifier 2018-NM-108-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus SAS Model A330-200 Freighter series, Model A330-200 series, Model A330-300 series, Model A340-200 series, Model A340-300 series, Model A340-500 series, and Model A340-600 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that certain sensor struts, in the case of down drive element disconnection, would be unable to provide failure detection information. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of certain drive station elements and sensor struts; an inspection of certain other drive station elements if necessary; and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; phone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 45 80; email: [email protected]; internet: http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    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-2018-0904; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0904; Product Identifier 2018-NM-108-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM 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 NPRM.

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0151, dated July 16, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A330-200 Freighter series, Model A330-200 series, Model A330-300 series, Model A340-200 series, Model A340-300 series, Model A340-500 series, and Model A340-600 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Design features of the track station 4 sensor struts, respectively installed on the right hand (RH) and left hand (LH) wings of an aeroplane, ensure detection of any abnormal flap movement in case of a mechanical DSE [drive station element] disconnection at the level of the flap track station 4 or flap track station 5. Evidence was collected revealing that the track station 4 sensor strut, in case of a down drive element disconnection, would be unable to provide failure detection information.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, in the case of an additional failure on the remaining flap drive station, could lead to a complete flap disconnection, possibly resulting in loss of control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus published the applicable SB [Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018; as applicable] to provide inspection instructions of the track station 4 and track station 5 DSE and sensor struts of the LH and RH wings.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive [detailed] inspections of the LH and RH track station 4 [DSE, repetitive general visual inspections of the LH and RH track station 4 sensor struts,] and [for certain airplanes, a one-time detailed inspection of the LH or RH, as applicable] track station 5 DSE * * * and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0904.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus SAS has issued the following service information.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018.

    • Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018.

    The service information describes procedures for repetitive detailed inspections of the LH and RH track station 4 drive station elements; repetitive general visual inspections of the LH and RH track station 4 sensor struts; a detailed inspection of the track station 5 drive station elements if any discrepancy is found during a general visual inspection; and corrective actions (i.e., replacement of affected parts). These documents are distinct since they apply to different models. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously. This proposed AD also would require sending the inspection results to Airbus SAS.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 105 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs for Required Actions * Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • 7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595 $0 $595 $62,475 * Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.

    We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be $8,925, or $85 per product.

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all known costs in our cost estimate.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this NPRM is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this NPRM has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this NPRM is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2018-0904; Product Identifier 2018-NM-108-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 20, 2018.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

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

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

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

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

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

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

    (6) Model A340-541 airplanes.

    (7) Model A340-642 airplanes.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight controls.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that the right-hand (RH) and left-hand (LH) track station 4 sensor struts, in the case of down drive element disconnection, would be unable to provide failure detection information. We are issuing this AD to address abnormal flap movement due to mechanical drive station element disconnection at flap track station 4 or station 5 which could lead to undetected down drive shaft disconnection. Such a condition could result in complete flap disconnection in the case of additional failure on the remaining flap drive station, and could ultimately result in loss of control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Definitions

    For the purpose of this AD, the drive station elements are defined as the down drive, down drive shaft, geared rotary actuator (gearbox), geared rotary actuator (output lever and fork end), and drive strut.

    (h) Detailed and General Visual Inspections

    (1) At the applicable times specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD, and thereafter not to exceed the applicable intervals specified in table 1 to paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, do a detailed inspection of the LH and RH track station 4 drive station elements for corrosion or ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts and nuts that are loose, broken, or missing) and a general visual inspection of the LH and RH track station 4 sensor struts for corrosion or ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts that are loose, broken, or missing), in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018; as applicable.

    EP05NO18.001

    (i) For airplanes that, as of the effective date of this AD, have accumulated less than 1,000 flight cycles since first flight: Before exceeding 24 months since first flight or within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, but without exceeding 2,300 flight cycles since first flight.

    (ii) For airplanes that, as of the effective date of this AD, have accumulated 1,000 or more flight cycles since first flight: Within 1,000 flight cycles or 12 months, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) If, during any general visual inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, any corrosion is detected or any ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts that are loose, broken, or missing) are detected, before further flight, accomplish a detailed inspection of the applicable LH or RH track station 5 drive station elements for corrosion or ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts and nuts that are loose, broken, or missing) in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018; as applicable.

    (i) Corrective Actions

    (1) If, during any detailed inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, any corrosion is detected or any ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts and nuts that are loose, broken, or missing) are detected, before further flight, replace each affected part with a serviceable part in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018; as applicable, or 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.

    (2) If, during any general visual inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, any corrosion is detected or any ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts that are loose, broken, or missing) are detected, before further flight, replace each affected part with a serviceable part in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018; as applicable, or using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (3) If, during any detailed inspection required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, any corrosion is detected or any ruptured, loose, or missing components (including any attached bolts and nuts that are loose, broken, or missing) are detected, before further flight, replace each affected part with a serviceable part in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018; as applicable, or using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (j) Reporting

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD: Report the results (positive or negative) of each inspection required by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD to Airbus Service Bulletin Reporting Online Application on Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com/), or submit the results to Airbus in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3226, dated April 5, 2018; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-4206, dated April 3, 2018; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-27-5071, dated April 3, 2018.

    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.

    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

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

    (4) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0151, dated July 16, 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-2018-0904.

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

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; phone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 45 80; email: [email protected]; internet: http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 19, 2018. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23692 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0917; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-14] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Revocation of Class E Airspace; Beeville-Chase Field, TX AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to remove Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Chase Field Industrial Airport, Beeville-Chase Field, TX. The FAA is proposing this action due to the cancellation of the standard instrument approach procedures at the airport making the airspace no longer necessary.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-9826, or (800) 647-5527. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0917; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-14, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit 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 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 http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would remove Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Chase Field Industrial Airport, Beeville-Chase Field, TX, that is no longer required.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in 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 and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2018-0917/Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-14.” 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 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 the 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 during normal business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    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 proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by removing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Chase Field Industrial Airport, Beeville-Chase Field, TX.

    The FAA is proposing this action due to the cancellation of the standard instrument approach procedures at the airport making the airspace no longer necessary.

    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace 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, is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, would 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.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, 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 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASW TX E5 Beeville-Chase Field, TX [Removed] Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 25, 2018. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23893 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0713; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWP-10] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Amendment of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes; Western United States AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to amend two jet routes (J-65 and J-110), and three domestic VOR Federal airways (V-23, V-165, and V-230) in the western United States. These modifications are necessary due to the planned decommissioning of the Clovis, CA, VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) portion of the VOR/tactical air navigation (VORTAC) navigation aid (NAVAID), which provides navigation guidance for portions of the affected air traffic service (ATS) routes. The Clovis, CA, VOR is being decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1(800) 647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0713; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWP-10 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    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:

    Kenneth Ready, Airspace Policy Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

    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 the 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 support the route structure as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System.

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in 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 (FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0713; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWP-10) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Commenters 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-2018-0713; Airspace Docket No. 18-AWP-10.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    All communications received on or before the specified comment closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of 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.

    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 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 during normal business hours at the office of the Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198.

    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.

    Background

    The FAA is planning decommissioning activities for the Clovis, CA, VOR in 2019 as one of the candidate VORs identified for discontinuance by the FAA's VOR MON program and listed in the final policy statement notice, “Provision of Navigation Services for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Transition to Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) (Plan for Establishing a VOR Minimum Operational Network),” published in the Federal Register of July 26, 2016 (81 FR 48694), Docket No. FAA-2011-1082. Although the VOR portion of the Clovis, CA, VORTAC NAVAID is planned for decommissioning, the tactical air navigation (TACAN) portion is being retained. The ATS routes effected by the Clovis VOR decommissioning are VOR Federal airways V-23, V-165, V-230 and jet routes J-65 and J-110.

    With the planned decommissioning of the Clovis VOR, the remaining ground-based NAVAID coverage in the area is insufficient to enable the continuity of the affected airways. As such, proposed modifications to V-23, J-65, and J-110 would result in gaps in the route structures.

    To overcome the gap in V-23, instrument flight rules (IFR) traffic could use adjacent VOR Federal airways V-113 and V-107 between the Modesto VOR/DME through Panoche VORTAC down to Avenal VOR/DME to the west and V-459 between Linden VOR/DME and Shafter VORTAC further east.

    To overcome the gap in J-65, IFR traffic could use VOR Federal airways J-189 between the Linden VOR/DME and Avenal VOR/DME.

    To overcome the loss of a portion of J-110, IFR traffic could file point to point from Oakland and then use Q-160 and Q-158 between the Clovis, VORTAC, decommissioned area and the Boulder City VORTAC area. Additionally, IFR traffic could file point to point through the affected area using fixes that will remain in place, or receive air traffic control (ATC) radar vectors through the area. Visual flight rules pilots who elect to navigate via the airways through the affected area could also take advantage of the adjacent VOR Federal airways or ATC services previously listed.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying jet routes (J-65 and J-110) and domestic VOR Federal airways (V-23, V-165 and V-230). The proposed route changes are outlined below.

    J-65: J-65 currently extends between the San Antonio TX, VORTAC to the Seattle WA, VORTAC. The FAA would remove the segments between the Shafter, CA, VORTAC and the Sacramento, CA, VORTAC causing a gap in the route. The new route would stop at the Shafter, CA, VORTAC and resume at the Sacramento, CA, VORTAC. The unaffected portion of the existing route would remain as charted.

    J-110: J-110 currently extends between the Oakland, CA, VOR/DME to the Coyle, NJ, VORTAC. The FAA would remove the segments between the Oakland, CA, VOR/DME and the Boulder City, NV, VORTAC. The route would now begin at the Boulder City, NV, VORTAC. The unaffected portion of the existing route would remain as charted.

    V-23: V-23 currently extends between the Mission Bay CA, VORTAC and the Whatcom WA, VORTAC, and then to the Canadian border (approximately 7 miles northwest of the Whatcom WA, VORTAC). The FAA would amend the segment between the Shafter, CA, VORTAC and the Linden, CA, VOR/DME. The new route would stop at the FRAME intersection (INT Shafter 338°(T) 324°(M) and Panoche 096°(T) 080°(M) radials) and resume at the EBTUW intersection (INT Panoche 035°(T) 019°(M) and Linden 141°(T) 124°(M) radials) causing a gap in the route. The unaffected portion of the existing route would remain as charted.

    V-165: V-165 currently extends between the Mission Bay, CA, VORTAC and the Whatcom WA, VORTAC. The FAA would amend the segment between the Tule, CA, VOR/DME and the Mustang, NV, VORTAC. The new route follows V-459 from the Tule, CA, VOR/DME to the Friant VORTAC and then to the DARBY intersection (INT Linden, CA 077°(T) 060°(M) and Mustang, NV, 183°(T) 167°(M) radials) which rejoins the original V-165 enroute to Mustang, NV, VORTAC. The unaffected portion of the existing route would remain as charted.

    V-230: V-230 currently extends between the intersection of the Big Sur, CA, VORTAC 325° and the Salinas, CA, VORTAC 281° radials to the Mina, NV, VORTAC. The FAA will amend the segment between the Panoche, CA, VORTAC and the Friant, CA, VORTAC. The new route proceeds from the Panoche CA, VORTAC to the BLEAR intersection (Panoche 077°(T) 061°(M) and Friant 239°(T) 222°(M) radials) to the Friant VORTAC. The unaffected portion of the existing route would remain as charted.

    Jet routes are published in paragraph 2004 and domestic VOR Federal airways in paragraph 6010 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 jet routes and Domestic VOR Federal airways listed in this document will be subsequently published 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 Department of Transportation (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.

    List 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 FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018 and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes J-65 [Amended]

    From San Antonio, TX, INT San Antonio 323°(T) 315°(M) and Abilene, TX, 180°(T) 170°(M) radials; Abilene; Chisum, NM; Truth or Consequences, NM; Phoenix, AZ; INT Phoenix 272°(T) 259°(M) and Blythe, CA, 096°(T) 082°(M) radials; Blythe; Palmdale, CA; INT Palmdale 310°(T) 295°(M) and Shafter, CA, 140°(T) 126°(M) radials; to Shafter, CA. From Sacramento, CA; Red Bluff, CA; Klamath Falls, OR; to Seattle, WA.

    J-110 [Amended]

    From Boulder City, NV; Rattlesnake, NM; Alamosa, CO; Garden City, KS; Butler, MO; St. Louis, MO; Brickyard, IN; Bellaire, OH; to Coyle, NJ.

    Paragraph 6010 Domestic VOR Federal Airways V-23 [Amended]

    From Mission Bay, CA; Oceanside, CA; 24 miles, 6 miles wide, Seal Beach, CA; 6 miles wide, INT Seal Beach 287°(T) 272°(M) and Los Angeles, 138°(T) 123 °(M) radials; Los Angeles; Gorman, CA; Shafter, CA; to INT Shafter 338°(T) 324°(M) and Panoche 096°(T) 080°(M) radials. From INT Panoche 035°(T) 019°(M) and Linden 141°(T) 124°(M) radials; Linden, CA; Sacramento, CA; INT Sacramento 346°(T) 329°(M) and Red Bluff, CA, 158°(T) 140°(M) radials; Red Bluff; 58 miles, 95 MSL, Fort Jones, CA; Rogue Valley, OR; Eugene, OR; Battle Ground, WA; INT Battle Ground 350°(T) 329°(M) and Seattle, WA, 197°(T) 178°(M) radials; 21 miles, 45 MSL, Seattle; Paine, WA; Whatcom, WA; via INT Whatcom 290°(T) 270°(M) radial to the United States/Canadian border.

    V-165 [Amended]

    From Mission Bay, CA; INT Mission Bay 270°(T) 255°(M) and Oceanside, CA, 177°(T) 162°(M) radials; Oceanside; 24 miles, 6 miles wide, Seal Beach, CA; 6 miles wide, INT Seal Beach 287°(T) 272°(M) ° and Los Angeles, CA, 138°(T) 123 (°M) radials; Los Angeles; INT Los Angeles 357°(T) 342°(M), and Lake Hughes, CA, 154°(T) 139°(M) radials; Lake Hughes; INT Lake Hughes 344°(T) 329°(M) and Shafter, CA, 137°(T) 123°(M) radials; Shafter; Tule, CA; Friant, CA; INT Linden, CA, 077°(T) 060°(M) and Mustang, NV, 183°(T) 167°(M) radials ; 72 miles, 50 miles, 131 MSL, Mustang, NV; 40 miles, 7 miles, 115 MSL, 54 miles, 135 MSL, 81 miles, Lakeview, OR; 5 miles, 72 miles, 90 MSL, Deschutes, OR; 16 miles, 19 miles, 95 MSL, 24 miles, 75 MSL, 12 miles, 65 MSL, Newberg, OR; 32 miles, 45 MSL, INT Newberg 355°(T) 334°(M) and Olympia, WA, 195°(T) 176°(M) radials; Olympia; Penn Cove, WA; to Whatcom, WA.

    V-230 [Amended]

    From INT Big Sur, CA, 325°(T) 309°(M) and Salinas, CA, 281°(T) 264°(M) radials; Salinas; Panoche, CA; INT Panoche 077°(T) 061°(M) and Friant 239°(T) 222°(M) radials; Friant, CA; to Mina, NV. The portion outside the United States has no upper limit.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2018. Rodger A. Dean Jr., Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23891 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0250; Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-3] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Williston, ND 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 Williston Basin International Airport, Williston, ND. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new standard instrument approach procedures developed at Williston Basin International Airport, for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 20, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-9826, or (800) 647-5527. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0250; Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-3, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit 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 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:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

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

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in 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 and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2018-0250; Airspace Docket No. 17-AGL-3.” 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 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 the 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 during normal business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    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 proposing an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 6.7-mile radius of Williston Basin International Airport, Williston, ND, to accommodate new standard instrument approach procedures. This action would enhance safety and the management of IFR operations at the 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 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, is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would 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.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, 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 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AGL ND E5 Williston, ND [New] Williston Basin International Airport, ND (Lat. 48°15′35″ N, long. 103°45′02″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of the Williston Basin International Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 25, 2018. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23900 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration 20 CFR Part 620 RIN 1205-AB81 Federal-State Unemployment Compensation Program; Establishing Appropriate Occupations for Drug Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants Under the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 AGENCY:

    Employment and Training Administration, Labor.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) sets forth the Department of Labor's proposal to permit States to drug test unemployment compensation (UC) applicants, including a proposed list of occupations which the Department of Labor (“Department” or “DOL”) has determined regularly conduct drug testing.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted, in writing, on or before January 4, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 1205-AB81, by one of the following methods:

    Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the website instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail and hand delivery/courier: Written comments, disk, and CD-ROM submissions may be mailed to Adele Gagliardi, Administrator, Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room N-5641, Washington, DC 20210.

    Instructions: Label all submissions with “RIN 1205-AB81.”

    Please submit your comments by only one method. Please be advised that the Department will post all comments received that relate to this NPRM on http://www.regulations.gov without making any change to the comments or redacting any information. The http://www.regulations.gov website is the Federal e-rulemaking portal, and all comments posted there are available and accessible to the public. Therefore, the Department recommends that commenters remove personal information such as Social Security Numbers, personal addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses included in their comments, as such information may become easily available to the public via the http://www.regulations.gov website. It is the responsibility of the commenter to safeguard personal information.

    Also, please note that, due to security concerns, postal mail delivery in Washington, DC may be delayed. Therefore, the Department encourages the public to submit comments on http://www.regulations.gov.

    Docket: All comments on this proposed Rule will be available on the http://www.regulations.gov website, and can be found using RIN 1205-AB81. The Department also will make all the comments it receives available for public inspection by appointment during normal business hours at the above address. If you need assistance to review the comments, the Department will provide appropriate aids, such as readers or print magnifiers. The Department will make copies of this proposed Rule available, upon request, in large print and electronic file on computer disk. To schedule an appointment to review the comments and/or obtain the proposed Rule in an alternative format, contact the Office of Policy Development and Research at (202) 693-3700 (this is not a toll-free number). You may also contact this office at the address listed below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Adele Gagliardi, Administrator, Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room N-5641, Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-3700 (this is not a toll-free number).

    Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone number above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    President Obama signed the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (the Act), Public Law 112-96, on February 22, 2012. Title II of the Act amended 42 U.S.C. 503, to add a new subsection (l) permitting States to enact legislation to require drug testing of UC applicants as a condition of UC eligibility under two specific circumstances. The first circumstance is if the applicant was terminated from employment with the applicant's most recent employer because of the unlawful use of a controlled substance. See 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(i). The second circumstance is if the only available suitable work (as defined in the law of the State providing the UC) for an individual is “in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing (as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary).” See 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(ii). States are not required to drug test in either circumstance; the law merely makes it permissible for States to enact legislation to do so when one of the two circumstances is present. A State may deny UC to an applicant who tests positive for drug use under either of these circumstances. See 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(B).

    On October 9, 2014, the Department published an NPRM determining occupations that regularly conduct drug testing for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(2). See 79 FR 61013 (Oct. 9, 2014). After reviewing the comments received, the Rule, as proposed in the NPRM, was modified, and on August 1, 2016, the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) published a regulation determining each occupation “that regularly conducts drug testing” in the Federal Register as 20 CFR part 620. It became effective on September 30, 2016.

    The 2016 Rule included several components. It identified seven specific occupations that regularly conduct drug testing: An occupation that requires the employee to carry a firearm, along with six specific occupational categories identified in Federal regulations in which the employee must be tested. The Rule also included within its determination any occupation specifically identified in a State or Federal law as requiring an employee to be tested for controlled substances. Finally, the Rule defined key terms as used in the Act. At the same time the Department published its previous NPRM, it issued guidance to States in Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 01-15 to address other issues related to the implementation of drug testing under 42 U.S.C. 503(l). On March 31, 2017, President Trump signed a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) as Public Law 115-17. The joint resolution was enacted under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 801(b), enacted by the CRA, Public Law 104-121. Section 801(b) provides that a disapproved rule can not take effect, and that such a rule cannot be reissued in substantially the same form unless authorized by Congress. Consistent with this law, the Department published the notice of revocation of the regulation in the Federal Register at 82 FR 21916 (May 11, 2017).

    Because the statute was not repealed or amended following the resolution of disapproval, the statute continues to require the Secretary to issue regulations to enable the determination of occupations in which drug testing regularly occurs. But the CRA prohibits the Department from reissuing the rule “in substantially the same form” or issuing “a new rule that is substantially the same” as the old rule. 5 U.S.C. 801(b). To comply with both the mandate to issue regulations to enable the determination of occupations in which drug testing regularly occurs, and the CRA prohibition on reissuing the rule “in substantially the same form,” the Department has carefully considered the Act, the 2016 Rule, and the congressional notice of disapproval.

    In this NPRM, the Department now proposes a substantially different and more flexible approach to the statutory requirements than the 2016 Rule, enabling States to enact legislation to require drug testing for a far larger group of UC applicants than the previous Rule permitted. This flexibility is intended to respect the diversity of States' economies and the different roles played by employment drug testing in those economies. The Department recognizes that imposing a nationally uniform list—like the one-size-fits-all approach that the Department attempted in the disapproved 2016 rule—may not fully effectuate Congress' intent, as expressed in 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(ii), that States be permitted to drug test when the only suitable work for an applicant is in an occupation that regularly conducts such tests. Employers exercise a variety of approaches and practices in conducting drug testing of employees. Some States have laws that impose very minimal restrictions on employer drug testing of employees while other States have very detailed and proscriptive requirements about what actions the employer can take. That diversity of State treatment also renders an exhaustive list of such occupations impractical. The proposed Rule therefore lays out a flexible standard that States can individually meet under the facts of their specific economies and practices. In the Departments' view, the Rule's substantially different scope and fundamentally different approach satisfies the requirements of the CRA, at least where, as here, the Department is under a continuing statutory obligation to propose regulations in this space.

    This proposed Rule is not expected to be subject to the requirements of Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 because this proposed rule is expected to result in no more than de minimis costs.

    When developing the previous proposed Rule published in 2014, the Department consulted with a number of Federal agencies with expertise in drug testing to inform the proposed regulation. Specifically, the Department consulted with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT); the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD); the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS); DOL's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS); and DOL's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The Department consulted these agencies because they have experience with required drug testing. DOD and DHS deferred to SAMHSA for interpretation of the drug testing requirements, and the Department gave due consideration to the SAMHSA guidance when developing the 2014 proposed Rule.

    In revisiting these regulations, the Department determined that these consultations with Federal agencies are sufficient, although it took steps to ensure that the information provided remains current.

    Review of State Drug Testing Laws

    As it did in developing the previous Rule, the Department has canvassed State laws to develop an understanding of what occupations require regular drug testing at the State level. In particular, the Department reviewed all current State legislation implementing 42 U.S.C. 503(l), as part of developing this proposal.

    Reflecting their diverse needs and workforces, States vary widely in their drug testing requirements. Some State laws identify specific classes of positions for which drug testing of applicants and/or employees is required. For example, State laws commonly require employers to drug test employees in occupations where public safety is involved. States may require private employers to conduct at least some drug testing of employees and/or job applicants who work as drivers of school transportation vehicles and commercial motor vehicles (similar to federal law requirements), or who work for nursing homes and home health agencies, residential childcare facilities, public works projects contractors, corrections facilities, and nuclear and radioactive storage and transfer facilities.

    Other States have enacted laws that permit and encourage, but do not require, employers to conduct drug testing of applicants and/or employees. Some State laws identify types of positions for which employers may conduct drug testing, such as individuals employed in safety-sensitive positions or in an occupation which has been designated as a high-risk or safety-sensitive occupation. At least one State permits testing of individuals who “participate in activities upon which pari-mutuel wagering is authorized.” 1 Most States allow a private employer to decide whether and when to drug test job applicants and employees, often in accordance with a written policy created by the employer according to State law. In some instances, State law specifies that the employer may test job applicants and current employees for any job-related purpose consistent with business necessity and the terms of the employer's written policy.

    1 Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-51y(c).

    When States provide restrictions on workplace drug testing, they commonly provide more protection to current employees than to job applicants. For example, a State's law may permit employers to require all job applicants with conditional offers of employment to take drug tests, but permit an employer to require an employee to submit to a drug test only if the employer has reasonable suspicion that use of drugs is impairing the employee's job performance, or has probable cause to believe that the employee, while on the job, is using or is under the influence of drugs.

    At least six States also provide various discounts and credits to employers that adopt drug-free workplace programs. Some States' programs require drug testing of applicants and/or employees as part of these programs, while others do not. Some States that require participating employers to test job applicants nevertheless allow the employers to limit such testing based on reasonable classifications of job positions. Employer sponsorship of a drug-free workplace program is usually voluntary, but may be required for State contractors.

    DOL's research of Federal and State laws related to drug testing found that these laws often refer to classes of positions with similar functions and duties that are required to be drug tested (e.g., positions requiring an employee to carry a firearm, or positions involving the operation of motor vehicles carrying members of the public).

    Since 42 U.S.C. 503 was amended to add subsection 503(l) in 2012, three States, Mississippi, Texas, and Wisconsin, have enacted laws specifically addressing drug testing of unemployment compensation applicants that directly refer to drug testing under 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(ii).2

    2 The State enactments in each of these States refer to the Federal law and note that the occupations that regularly conduct drug testing are those designated under regulations developed by the Secretary of Labor, which are the regulations proposed in this NPRM. See Miss. Code Ann. § 71-5-513(A)(3)(c), Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 207.021(b-1), and Wis. Stat. § 108.133(1)(c)(ii).

    Summary of the Proposed Rule

    The proposed Rule implements the statutory requirement that the Secretary issue regulations determining how to identify “an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing” for the purposes of requiring an applicant for UC benefits, for whom the only suitable work is in an occupation that regularly drug tests, to pass a drug test to be eligible for UC benefits.

    The proposed new Rule takes a fundamentally different approach to identifying these occupations than did the Department's earlier rule. The 2016 Rule limited the list of occupations that “regularly” conduct drug testing to certain specifically listed occupations and those in which drug testing is required by Federal or State law. The Department has reconsidered that list in light of the congressional disapproval of the 2016 Rule. The Department now acknowledges that the list did not adequately account for the significant variation in State practices with respect to drug testing. An occupation that is regularly drug tested in one State may not be regularly tested in another, making a national one-size-fits-all list inappropriate. This variation also makes developing a nationally applicable and exhaustive list of occupations that “regularly” conduct drug testing wholly impractical. Therefore, the Secretary has determined in this proposed Rule to include in the list of occupations that regularly conduct drug testing those occupations for which a State has a factual basis for finding that employers in that State conduct drug testing as a standard eligibility requirement for employing or retaining employees. This new addition provides substantially more flexibility to States and recognizes the reality that, in some States, drug testing is regularly conducted in many more occupations than were initially listed in the 2016 Rule.

    This proposed regulation also provides definitions of key terms. It identifies positions or classes of positions with similar functions or duties as “occupations,” for the purposes of determining “occupations” that regularly test for drugs in this proposed Rule. While the Department considered adopting a specific taxonomy of occupations, such as the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) System, the proposed Rule does not do so, in order to provide flexibility to States to choose a system that matches its workforce best. Due to the wide variation in State economies and practices, a one-size-fits-all taxonomy imposed by the Federal government could not be tailored to each State's situation and would thus be impracticable. States may utilize the SOC system, the O*NET system developed under a grant by the Department by the North Carolina State Department of Commerce, or another system of the State's choosing.

    The Department, in proposing this new Rule, adopts the finding in the 2016 Rule that any occupation for which Federal or State law requires drug testing is among those that are drug tested “regularly.” The Department recognizes that Federal and State laws may evolve in identifying which positions or occupations are required to drug test. Thus, the new proposed Rule allows for occupations identified in future Federal or State laws as requiring drug testing to be occupations that States will be able to consider for drug testing of UC applicants.

    Finally, the proposed Rule includes a section on conformity and substantial compliance.

    The Department seeks comments on the entirety of the proposed Rule, and, in the section-by-section description of the proposed Rule, highlights areas where comments would be particularly helpful.

    II. Section-by-Section Review What is the purpose of the proposed regulation? (§ 620.1)

    Proposed § 620.1 explains that the purpose of the NPRM is to implement 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(A)(ii), permitting drug testing of UC applicants for the use of controlled substances, where suitable work (as defined under the State's UC law) is only available in an occupation for which drug testing is regularly conducted (as determined under this part 620).

    What definitions apply to this part? (§ 620.2)

    “Applicant” means an individual who files an initial claim for UC under State law. “Applicant” excludes an individual already found initially eligible and filing a continued claim. The Department came to this conclusion based on how the word “applicant” is used elsewhere in 42 U.S.C. 503 and the Social Security Act. Specifically, in enacting 42 U.S.C. 503(l), Congress also enacted 42 U.S.C. 503(a)(11), which describes in different language those seeking continued eligibility. Paragraph (a)(11) provides that a State unemployment law must include “[a] requirement that, as a condition of eligibility for regular compensation for any week, a claimant must be able to work, available to work, and actually seeking work.” Thus, Congress distinguished “applicants” and “claimants” in the Act. This distinction appears elsewhere in Section 503. Paragraphs (d)(2)(A) and (e)(2)(A) both refer to “new applicants” in the context of individuals whose UC eligibility has yet to be determined. In contrast, paragraph (j)(1) refers to “new claimants” in the context of individuals who have been found eligible for UC. Likewise, 42 U.S.C. 503(h)(3)(B) and (i)(1)(A)(ii), which require UC information disclosures to HHS and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, both refer to an individual who “is receiving, has received, or has made application for” UC. There as well, the Act, distinguishes an individual making “application for” UC benefits from one who “is receiving” or “has received” UC. This distinction between applicants and recipients is similar to that found elsewhere in the Social Security Act. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. 1396w(b)(1)(A) (“applicant for, or recipient of, medical assistance”); id. § 1320b-6(j)(1)(A) (“applicant for, or recipient of, benefits”); § 1396a(a)(4) (“services to applicants and recipients”).

    “Controlled substance,” as defined by 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(2)(B), has the same meaning given such term in Sec. 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (Pub. L. 91-513, 21 U.S.C. 802). “Controlled substance” means a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of part B of 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq. The term does not include distilled spirits, wine, malt beverages, or tobacco, as those terms are defined or used in subtitle E of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

    “Occupation” means a position or class of positions with similar functions and duties. As discussed above, Federal and State drug testing laws do not generally specify or refer to “occupations” requiring drug testing, but rather identify classes or categories of positions, in descriptive terms—such as, for example, positions requiring the carrying of a firearm, or positions that use motor vehicles to carry members of the public. These types of position descriptions identify a crucial aspect, function, or duty of these positions (e.g., driving a motor vehicle, or carrying a firearm) that is the basis for the drug testing requirement. This definition gives States flexibility to identify occupations based on their own systems for classifying occupations. The Department considered and rejected mandating the use of the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system. While the SOC system provides a methodology for classifying workers into occupational categories for the purpose of data collection and statistical analysis, it may not provide the best mechanism to support states in identifying the occupations in which employers regularly drug test. To assist states in identifying additional occupations that regularly drug test, the definition of “occupation,” for purposes of this rule, clarifies that the positions or classes of positions identified as occupations must have similar functions and duties, a change from the 2016 Final Rule. As noted previously, employer drug testing, whether mandated by law or not, tends to focus on positions where employees are carrying out specific functions and duties such as jobs in which the worker carries a firearm, transports the public, or handles financial transactions. States remain free to choose to use the SOC system, but are not required to use it.

    “Suitable Work” means suitable work as defined under the UC law of the State against which the claim is filed. This is the same definition of “suitable work” under that State's law as the State otherwise uses for determining UC eligibility based on seeking work or refusing work.

    “Unemployment Compensation” is defined in Sec. 303(l)(2)(A) of the Social Security Act (SSA), to have the same meaning given to the term in 42 U.S.C. 503(d)(2)(A), which states the term unemployment compensation means any unemployment compensation payable under State law (including amounts payable pursuant to an agreement under a Federal unemployment compensation law.)

    Section 3306(h) of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (26 U.S.C. 3306(h)) defines compensation to mean cash benefits payable to individuals with respect to their unemployment.

    What are the occupations for which drug testing is regularly conducted for purposes of this Part 620? (§ 620.3)

    In this proposed Rule, the Department recognizes both the historic Federal-State partnership that is a key hallmark of the UC program as well as the wide variation among States' economies and practices. The proposed rule thus recognizes the need for States' participation in identifying which, and whether additional, occupations regularly conduct drug testing in each State. Proposed § 620.3 describes a number of different occupations that the Department has determined regularly drug test. States may use this list, in addition to the broader criterion, in identifying occupations for which drug testing is regularly conducted based on the criteria set by the Secretary under these regulations.

    Proposed subsection 620.3(a) includes the class of positions that requires the employee to carry a firearm as an “occupation” that regularly drug tests.

    Proposed subsections 620.3(b)-(g) include various specific occupations that were listed in the previous Rule as ones that regularly drug test, since various Federal laws require drug testing of employees in each of these occupations. The proposed Rule identifies in subsections 620.3(b)-(g) six specific sections of regulations issued by several agencies of DOT and the Coast Guard that identify the classes of positions that are subject to drug testing. Any position with a Federal legal requirement for drug testing unquestionably constitutes an occupation that regularly drug tests.

    Proposed subsections 620.3(h) and (i) include in the list of occupations that regularly drug test any occupation that is required to be drug tested under any future Federal law or under the law of the State seeking to drug test UC applicants in that occupation. As with the previous six sections, any position with a legal requirement for drug testing unquestionably constitutes an occupation that regularly drug tests.

    Proposed subsection 620.3(j) adds to the list of occupations that regularly drug test a significant provision not contained in the previous Final Rule that fundamentally transforms the regulatory approach and scope of the proposed regulation, and thus satisfies the requirements of the CRA, at least where, as here, the Department is under a continuing statutory obligation to propose regulations in this space. Proposed subsection 620.3(j) provides that a State may identify additional occupations in that State where employers require pre-hire or post-hire drug testing as a standard eligibility requirement and consider those occupations as regularly conducting drug testing. This provision reflects the Secretary's determination that, because there is wide variation among State economies and employment practices, it is not practicable to exhaustively list all occupations that “regularly conduct[ ] drug testing.” Instead, the Department sets out a Federal standard by which it is possible to assess—under Federal, not State, law—whether a State has a sufficient basis to require drug testing of a particular class of UC applicants. That proposed Federal standard is as follows: When identifying an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing, the State must identify a factual basis for its finding that employers conduct pre-employment or post-hire drug testing as a standard eligibility requirement for obtaining or maintaining employment in the identified occupation. Factual bases may include, but are not limited to: Labor market surveys; reports of trade and professional organizations; and academic, government, or other studies. This proposed standard effectuates the plain meaning of the Act's authorization of drug testing where suitable work “is only available in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing.” Section 303(l)(1)(A)(ii) (emphasis added). If this rule were enacted as proposed, the Department would review States' factual bases through reports authorized under 42 U.S.C. 503(a)(6) and 20 CFR 601.3; these reports are currently made through States' submissions of Form MA-8-7.

    DOL seeks comments on whether it should instead impose a heightened standard of evidence to demonstrate that an occupation is one that regularly conducts drug tests and therefore can be considered an occupation for which drug testing is a standard eligibility requirement. If so, what heightened level of evidence of drug testing would be appropriate?

    DOL also seeks comments on any suggested additions, deletions, or edits to the list and descriptions of occupations that regularly conduct drug testing, or on the scope of the latitude accorded to States in the approach proposed here. DOL likewise seeks comments on its determination that it is impracticable to develop a nationally uniform list of occupations that regularly drug test, given the wide variations in regional economies and in State law.

    Finally, DOL seeks comments on its planned approach of using submissions through Form MA-8-7 as the method for reviewing States' factual bases for finding that employers conduct pre-employment or post-hire drug testing as a standard eligibility requirement for obtaining or maintaining employment in the identified occupation.

    What are the parameters for the testing of applicants for the unlawful use of a controlled substance? (§ 620.4)

    Proposed § 620.4, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 503(l), provides that a State may require applicants to take and pass a test for the illegal use of controlled substances as a condition of initial eligibility for UC under specified conditions, and that applicants may be denied UC based on the results of these tests. States are not required to drug test as a condition of UC eligibility based on any of the occupations set out under this proposed Rule. States may choose to do so based on some or all of the identified occupations, however, States may not, except as permitted by 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(i) (governing drug testing of individuals terminated for the unlawful use of a controlled substance), drug test based on any occupation that does not meet the definition in § 620.3 for purposes of determining UC eligibility.

    Proposed subsection 620.4(a) provides that an applicant, as defined in proposed § 620.2, may be tested for the unlawful use of one or more controlled substances, also as defined in proposed § 620.2, as an eligibility condition for UC, if the individual is one for whom suitable work, as defined by that State's UC law, is only available in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing, as determined under proposed § 620.3. As discussed in the Summary of the proposed Rule, the term “applicant” means that only an individual who is filing an initial UC claim, not a claimant filing a continued claim, may be subject to drug testing.

    Proposed subsection 620.4(b) provides that a State choosing to require drug testing as a condition of UC eligibility may apply drug testing based on one or more of the occupations under § 620.3. This flexibility is consistent with the statute, which permits, but does not require, drug testing, and the partnership nature of the Federal-State UC system.

    Proposed subsection 620.4(c) provides that no State would be required to drug test UC applicants under this part 620. This provision was not in the 2016 Final Rule, but again reflects the partnership nature of the Federal-State UC system and the Department's understanding that the Act permitted, but did not require, States to drug test UC applicants under the identified circumstances.

    While 42 U.S.C. 503(l) requires the Secretary to issue regulations determining the occupations that regularly conduct drug testing, the Secretary may address other issues relating to 42 U.S.C. 503(l) in guidance, such as program letters and other issuances, and may issue additional guidance as needed.

    What are the consequences of implementing a drug testing program that is not in accordance with these regulations? (§ 620.5)

    Proposed subsection 620.5(a) explains that implementation of drug testing of UC applicants as authorized under State laws must be in conformity with these regulations for States to be certified as eligible to receive Federal grants for the administration of its UC program under 42 U.S.C. 502. The procedures for resolving issues of conformity or compliance with the requirements of the proposed Rule, and the remedies for failure to conform or comply, are found in 20 CFR 601.5.

    III. Administrative Information Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives, and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. For a “significant regulatory action,” E.O. 12866 asks agencies to describe the need for the regulatory action and explain how the regulatory action will meet that need, as well as assess the costs and benefits of the regulation.3 This regulation is necessary because of the statutory requirement contained in 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(ii), which requires the Secretary to determine the occupations that regularly conduct drug testing for the purpose of determining which applicants may be drug tested when applying for State unemployment compensation. The Department considers this proposed Rule to be a “significant regulatory action,” as defined in Sec. 3(f) of E.O. 12866, because it raises novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates. Before the amendment of Federal law to add the new 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1), drug testing of applicants for UC as a condition of eligibility was prohibited.

    3 Exec. Order No. 12866, § 6(a)(3)(B).

    The proposed Rule is entirely voluntary on the part of the States, and the Department does not yet have sufficient data to predict how many States will establish a drug testing program. Before the enactment of the Federal law in 2012, States were not permitted to condition eligibility for UC on drug testing. The unsettled federal regulatory landscape since that time may have chilled States' interest in pursuing drug testing, and it is uncertain to what extent States' costs in administering drug testing would be offset by savings in their UC programs. Whatever the reason, to date, only three States have enacted State laws to pursue drug testing of UC applicants under this statutory provision.

    There are limited data on which to base estimates of the cost associated with establishing a testing program, or the offsetting savings that a testing program could realize. Only one of the three States that have enacted conforming drug testing laws issued a fiscal estimate. That State, Texas, estimated that the 5-year cost of administering the program would be $1,175,954, taking into account both one-time technology personnel services to program the system and ongoing administrative costs for personnel. The Texas analysis estimated a potential savings to the Unemployment Trust Fund of $13,700,580 over the 5-year period, resulting in a net savings of approximately $12.5 million. The Department believes it would be inappropriate to extrapolate the Texas analysis to all States, in part because of differences in the Texas law and the requirements in this proposed Rule. The Department has included this information about Texas for illustrative purposes only and emphasizes that by doing so, it is not commenting on or endorsing the methodology or assumptions in the Texas analysis.

    The Department requests comments from interested stakeholders on the costs of establishing and administering a State-wide testing program; the number of applicants for unemployment compensation that fit the criteria established in the law; estimates of the number of individuals who would subsequently be denied unemployment compensation due to a failed drug test; and the offsetting savings that could result.

    In the absence of such data, the Department is unable to quantify the administrative costs States will incur if they choose to implement drug testing pursuant to this proposed Rule. No additional funding has been appropriated for this purpose, and current Federal funding for the administration of State unemployment compensation programs may be insufficient to support the additional costs of establishing and administering a drug testing program, which would include the cost of the drug tests, staff for administration of the drug testing function, and technology to track drug testing outcomes. States would also incur ramp up costs to implement the processes necessary for determining whether an applicant is one for whom drug testing is legally permissible; referring and tracking applicants referred for drug testing; and conducting and processing the drug tests. States would also have to factor in increased costs of adjudication and appeals of both the determination that an individual is subject to drug testing and resulting determinations of benefit eligibility based on the test results.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Department has determined that this proposed Rule does not contain a “collection of information,” as the term is defined. See 5 CFR 1320.3(c). DOL expressly seeks comments on this determination.

    Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Section 6 of E.O. 13132 requires Federal agencies to consult with State entities when a regulation or policy may have a substantial direct effect on the States, the relationship between the National Government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, within the meaning of the E.O. Section 3(b) of the E.O. further provides that Federal agencies must implement regulations that have a substantial direct effect only if statutory authority permits the regulation and it is of national significance.

    This proposed Rule does not have a substantial direct effect on the States, the relationship between the National Government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of Government, within the meaning of the E.O. This is because drug testing authorized by the regulation is voluntary on the part of the State—it is not required.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This regulatory action has been reviewed in accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Reform Act). Under the Reform Act, a Federal agency must determine whether a regulation proposes a Federal mandate that would result in the increased expenditures by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any single year. The Department has determined that, since States have the option to drug test UC applicants and can elect not to do so, this proposed Rule does not include any Federal mandate that could result in increased expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments. Drug testing under this proposed Rule is purely voluntary, so any increased cost to the States is not the result of a mandate. Accordingly, it is unnecessary for the Department to prepare a budgetary impact statement.

    Plain Language

    The Department drafted this proposed Rule in plain language.

    Effect on Family Life

    The Department certifies that this proposed Rule has been assessed according to Sec. 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, enacted as part of the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681) for its effect on family well-being. The Department certifies that this proposed Rule does not adversely impact family well-being as discussed under Sec. 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act/Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), at 5 U.S.C. 603(a), requires agencies to prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis, which describes the impact of the proposed Rule on small entities. Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to certify a Rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the proposed rulemaking is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed Rule does not affect small entities as defined in the RFA. Therefore, the proposed Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of these small entities. The Department has certified this to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Business Administration, pursuant to the RFA.

    List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 620

    Unemployment compensation.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department proposes to amend 20 CFR chapter V by adding part 620 to read as follows: PART 620—DRUG TESTING FOR STATE UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION PURPOSES Sec. 620.1 Purpose. 620.2 Definitions. 620.3 Occupations that Regularly Conduct Drug Testing For Purposes of Determining Which Applicants May Be Drug Tested When Applying for State Unemployment Compensation. 620.4 Testing of Unemployment Compensation Applicants for the Unlawful Use of a Controlled Substance. 620.5 Conformity and substantial compliance. Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 1302(a); 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(ii)

    § 620.1 Purpose.

    The regulations in this part implement 42 U.S.C. 503(l). 42 U.S.C. 503(l) permits States to enact legislation to provide for State-conducted testing of an unemployment compensation applicant for the unlawful use of controlled substances, as a condition of unemployment compensation eligibility, if the applicant was discharged for unlawful use of controlled substances by his or her most recent employer, or if suitable work (as defined under the State unemployment compensation law) is only available in an occupation for which drug testing is regularly conducted (as determined under this part 620). 42 U.S.C. 503(l)(1)(A)(ii) provides that the occupations that regularly conduct drug testing will be determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.

    § 620.2 Definitions.

    As used in this part—

    Applicant means an individual who files an initial claim for unemployment compensation under State law. Applicant excludes an individual already found initially eligible and filing a continued claim.

    Controlled substance means a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of part B of 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as defined in Sec. 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802). The term does not include distilled spirits, wine, malt beverages, or tobacco, as those terms are defined or used in subtitle E of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

    Occupation means a position or class of positions with similar functions and duties. Federal and State laws governing drug testing refer to classes of positions that are required to be drug tested. Other taxonomies of occupations, such as those in the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system, may be used by States in determining the boundaries of a position or class of positions with similar functions and duties under § 620.3. Use of the SOC codes, however, is not required, and States may use other taxonomies to identify a position or class of positions with similar functions and duties.

    Suitable Work means suitable work as defined by the unemployment compensation law of a State against which the claim is filed. It must be the same definition the State law otherwise uses for determining the type of work an individual must seek, given the individual's education, experience, and previous level of remuneration.

    Unemployment Compensation means any cash benefits payable to an individual with respect to the individual's unemployment under the State law (including amounts payable under an agreement under a Federal unemployment compensation law).

    § 620.3 Occupations that regularly conduct drug testing for purposes of determining which applicants may be drug tested when applying for State unemployment compensation.

    In electing to test applicants for unemployment compensation under this part, States may require drug testing for applicants for whom the only suitable work is in one or more of the following occupations that regularly conduct drug testing, for purposes of § 620.4:

    (a) An occupation that requires the employee to carry a firearm;

    (b) An occupation identified in 14 CFR 120.105 by the Federal Aviation Administration, in which the employee must be tested (Aviation flight crew members and air traffic controllers);

    (c) An occupation identified in 49 CFR 382.103 by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, in which the employee must be tested (Commercial drivers);

    (d) An occupation identified in 49 CFR 219.3 by the Federal Railroad Administration, in which the employee must be tested (Railroad operating crew members);

    (e) An occupation identified in 49 CFR 655.3 by the Federal Transit Administration, in which the employee must be tested (Public transportation operators);

    (f) An occupation identified in 49 CFR 199.2 by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, in which the employee must be tested (Pipeline operation and maintenance crew members);

    (g) An occupation identified in 46 CFR 16.201 by the United States Coast Guard, in which the employee must be tested (Crewmembers and maritime credential holders on a commercial vessel);

    (h) An occupation specifically identified in Federal law as requiring an employee to be tested for controlled substances;

    (i) An occupation specifically identified in the State law of that State as requiring an employee to be tested for controlled substances; and

    (j) An occupation where the State has a factual basis for finding that employers hiring employees in that occupation conduct pre- or post-hire drug testing as a standard eligibility requirement for obtaining or maintaining employment in the occupation.

    § 620.4 Testing of unemployment compensation applicants for the unlawful use of a controlled substance.

    (a) States may require drug testing for unemployment compensation applicants, as defined in § 620.2, for the unlawful use of one or more controlled substances, as defined in § 620.2, as a condition of eligibility for unemployment compensation, if the individual is one for whom suitable work, as defined in State law, as defined in § 620.2 of, is only available in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing as identified under § 620.3.

    (b) A State conducting drug testing as a condition of unemployment compensation eligibility, as provided in paragraph (a) of this section, may only elect to require drug testing of applicants for whom the only suitable work is available in one or more of the occupations listed under § 620.3. States are not required to apply drug testing to any applicants for whom the only suitable work is available in any or all of the occupations listed.

    (c) No State is required to drug test UC applicants under this part 620.

    § 620.5 Conformity and substantial compliance.

    (a) In general. A State law implementing the drug testing of applicants for unemployment compensation must conform with—and the law's administration must substantially comply with—the requirements of this part 620 for purposes of certification under 42 U.S.C. 502(a), governing State eligibility to receive Federal grants for the administration of its UC program.

    (b) Resolving Issues of Conformity and Substantial Compliance. For the purposes of resolving issues of conformity and substantial compliance with the requirements of this part 620, the provisions of 20 CFR 601.5 apply.

    Molly E. Conway, Acting Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Labor .
    [FR Doc. 2018-23952 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FW-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 15 [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3952] Eliminating Youth Electronic Cigarette and Other Tobacco Product Use: The Role for Drug Therapies; Public Hearing; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of public hearing; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is announcing a public hearing to discuss its efforts to eliminate youth electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use as well as other tobacco product use, with a focus on the potential role of drug therapies to support youth e-cigarette cessation and the issues impacting the development of such therapies.

    DATES:

    The public hearing will be held on December 5, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The public hearing may be extended or may end early depending on the level of public participation. Persons seeking to present at the public hearing must register by Friday, November 23, 2018. Persons seeking to attend, but not present at, the public hearing must register by Monday, December 3, 2018. Section II provides attendance and registration information. Electronic or written comments will be accepted after the public hearing until Wednesday, January 2, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public hearing will be held at the FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building 31 Conference Center, the Great Room A, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Entrance for public hearing participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1, where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

    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 Wednesday, January 2, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of Wednesday, January 2, 2019. 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. You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked, and identified as confidential if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3952 for “Eliminating Youth Electronic Cigarette and Other Tobacco Product Use: The Role for Drug Therapies; Public Hearing; Request for Comments.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the received electronic and written/paper comments, 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:

    Theresa Wells, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 1202, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 703-380-3900, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Nearly all tobacco product use begins during youth and young adulthood (Ref. 1). While the current use of any tobacco product among U.S. middle and high school students has decreased from 2011-2017, there has been an alarming increase in e-cigarette use over this time. In fact, since 2014, e-cigarettes 1 have been the most commonly used tobacco products among youth, used by 1.73 million (11.7 percent) high school students and 390,000 (3.3 percent) middle school students in 2017 (Ref. 2). Youth e-cigarette use raises a number of health concerns including risk of addiction to nicotine early on in life, potential harm to the developing adolescent brain, and exposure to chemicals including carbonyl compounds and volatile organic compounds known to have adverse health effects; the full range of possible health effects is not yet completely understood (Ref. 3).

    1 An e-cigarette is one type of electronic nicotine delivery system, which also includes e-cigars, e-hookah, vape pens, personal vaporizers, and electronic pipes. See https://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/ProductsIngredientsComponents/ucm456610.htm and Ref. 2.

    On April 24, 2018, FDA announced its Youth Tobacco Prevention Plan. This plan focuses on three key strategies: Prevention of youth access to tobacco products, curbing the marketing of tobacco products aimed at youth, and educating teens about the dangers of using any tobacco products.2 FDA recently launched an expansion of its “The Real Cost” campaign to educate youth on the dangers of e-cigarette use 3 and increased enforcement actions to address this critically important public health concern.4

    2https://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/PublicHealthEducation/ProtectingKidsfromTobacco/ucm608433.htm.

    3https://www.fda.gov/tobaccoproducts/publichealtheducation/publiceducationcampaigns/therealcostcampaign/default.htm.

    4https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm620788.htm.

    In addition to the prevention of initiation, which will be the cornerstone of any successful effort to curb youth e-cigarette use, FDA is also exploring additional approaches to address youth e-cigarette use. One such approach may be the development of drug therapies, as part of multimodal treatment strategies, including behavioral interventions, to support tobacco product cessation. To date, research on youth tobacco product cessation has been limited and focused on smoking (i.e., combustible products) cessation. One recent review found a paucity of data on either behavioral or drug therapies for smoking cessation in young people (age less than 20 years) and concluded that “there continues to be a need for well-designed, adequately powered, randomized controlled trials of interventions for this population of smokers” (Ref. 4). FDA is not aware of any research examining either drug or behavioral interventions for the cessation of youth or adult e-cigarette use. In contrast, there is a large body of research on adult smoking cessation, and multiple drugs for smoking cessation are approved for the adult population, including a variety of prescription and over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products, as well as the prescription drugs varenicline and bupropion hydrochloride sustained release (see Appendix A).

    II. Purpose and Scope of the Public Hearing

    FDA is holding a public hearing to obtain the public's perspectives on the potential role drug therapies may play in the broader effort to eliminate youth e-cigarette and other tobacco product use, as well as the appropriate methods and study designs for evaluating youth e-cigarette cessation therapies and the safety and efficacy of such therapies. The Agency has determined that a public hearing is the most appropriate way to ensure public engagement on this issue, which is of great importance to the public health. FDA believes it is critical to obtain input across the medical and research fields, the pharmaceutical and tobacco industries, and among public health stakeholders (including adolescents) regarding approaches to eliminate youth e-cigarette and other tobacco product use, including exploring whether there is a need for drug therapies to support youth e-cigarette cessation, and if so, how FDA can support the development of such therapies.

    Questions for Commenters To Address

    Considering the broad range of activities focused on this public health issue, FDA is interested in the public's view on approaches to eliminating e-cigarette and other tobacco product use among youth. Although FDA welcomes all feedback on any public health, scientific, regulatory or legal considerations relating to this topic, we particularly encourage commenters to consider the following questions as they prepare their comments or statements. Responses to questions should include supporting scientific justification.

    1. FDA notes that the factors driving e-cigarette use among youth likely differ from those in the adult population. How might such differences impact the need for, or use of, drug therapies for e-cigarette cessation among youth?

    2. FDA is interested in whether there is a population of youth e-cigarette users who would be likely to benefit from the use of drug therapies for e-cigarette cessation. What age groups (older adolescent vs. younger adolescent), patterns in tobacco use (duration and frequency of use), and clinical features (level of addiction, presence/absence of comorbidities including psychiatric disease) might characterize this population? What types of products (NRT vs. non-NRT; prescription vs. over-the-counter) might be useful?

    3. Describe the scientific, clinical, and societal factors that could either encourage or impede the conduct of clinical trials designed to evaluate drugs intended for youth e-cigarette cessation. What approaches could be used to encourage research and overcome barriers to research?

    4. What methods and study designs are appropriate for assessing drug therapies for youth e-cigarette cessation? What are the appropriate control groups? What are the most informative endpoints and the best assessment tools to evaluate these endpoints?

    5. Acknowledging that to date research has been limited, are there data available from the adult experience with smoking cessation that could potentially be leveraged in the effort to develop drug therapies for youth e-cigarette cessation? Have any drug therapies demonstrated potential to help adults discontinue e-cigarette use? Are there differences between adolescents and adults that impact the ability to extrapolate efficacy findings from the adult population to the adolescent population? Could existing NRT products be useful for youth e-cigarette cessation?

    6. While this hearing is focused on the topic of e-cigarette use among youth, as e-cigarettes are currently the most commonly used form of tobacco in this population, FDA also welcomes comments regarding the potential need for drug therapies to support cessation of other tobacco products, including combustible products (i.e., cigarettes or cigars) and smokeless tobacco products, among youth and the issues impacting the development of such therapies.

    Registration and Requests for Oral Presentations: The FDA Conference Center at the White Oak location is a Federal facility with security procedures and limited seating. Attendance will be free and on a first-come, first-served basis. For those interested in presenting at the meeting, either with a formal oral presentation or as a speaker in the open public hearing session, please register by Friday, November 23, 2018, at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/fda-pediatric-tobacco-cessation-part-15-public-hearing-tickets-50167147288. If you wish to attend either in person or by Webcast (see Streaming Webcast of the Public Hearing), please register for the hearing by Monday December 3, 2018, at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/fda-pediatric-tobacco-cessation-part-15-public-hearing-tickets-50167147288. Those without internet or email access can register and/or request to participate as an open public hearing speaker or a formal presenter by contacting Theresa Wells by the above dates (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    FDA will try to accommodate all persons who wish to make a presentation. Formal oral presenters may use an accompanying slide deck, while those participating in the Open Public Hearing will have less allotted time than formal oral presenters and will deliver oral testimony only (no accompanying slide deck). Individuals wishing to present should identify the number of the specific question, or questions, they wish to address. This will help FDA organize the presentations. Individuals and organizations with common interests should consolidate or coordinate their presentations and request time for a joint presentation. Individual organizations are limited to a single presentation slot. FDA will notify registered presenters of their scheduled presentation times. The time allotted for each presentation will depend on the number of individuals who wish to speak. Registered presenters making a formal oral presentation are encouraged to submit an electronic copy of their presentation (PowerPoint or PDF) to [email protected] with the subject line “Eliminating Youth Electronic Cigarette and Other Tobacco Product Use: The Role for Drug Therapies” on or before Wednesday, November 28, 2018. Persons registered to present are encouraged to arrive at the hearing room early and check in at the onsite registration table to confirm their designated presentation time. Actual presentation times, however, may vary based on how the meeting progresses in real-time. An agenda for the hearing and any other background materials will be made available 5 days before the hearing at https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/MeetingsConferencesWorkshops/ucm620744.htm.

    If you need special accommodations because of a disability, please contact Theresa Wells (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days before the hearing.

    Streaming Webcast of the Public Hearing: For those unable to attend in person, FDA will provide a live Webcast of the hearing. To join the hearing via the Webcast, please go to https://collaboration.fda.gov/ptc120518.

    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Dockets Management Staff (see Comments). A transcript will also be available in either hard copy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. The Freedom of Information office address is available on the Agency's website at https://www.fda.gov.

    III. Notice of Hearing Under 21 CFR Part 15

    The Commissioner of Food and Drugs is announcing that the public hearing will be held in accordance with 21 CFR part 15. The hearing will be conducted by a presiding officer, who will be accompanied by FDA senior management from the Office of the Commissioner, the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and the Center for Tobacco Products. Under § 15.30(f), the hearing is informal and the rules of evidence do not apply. No participant may interrupt the presentation of another participant. Only the presiding officer and panel members can pose questions; they can question any person during or at the conclusion of each presentation. Public hearings under part 15 are subject to FDA's policy and procedures for electronic media coverage of FDA's public administrative proceedings (21 CFR part 10, subpart C). Under § 10.205, representatives of the media may be permitted, subject to certain limitations, to videotape, film, or otherwise record FDA's public administrative proceedings, including presentations by participants. The hearing will be transcribed as stipulated in § 15.30(b) (see Transcripts). To the extent that the conditions for the hearing, as described in this notice, conflict with any provisions set out in part 15, this notice acts as a waiver of those provisions as specified in § 15.30(h).

    IV. References

    The following references marked with an asterisk (*) are on display at the Dockets Management Staff and are available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; they also are available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. References without asterisks are not on public display at https://www.regulations.gov because they have copyright restriction. Some may be available at the website address, if listed. References without asterisks are available for viewing only at the Dockets Management Staff. FDA has verified the website addresses, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but websites are subject to change over time.

    1.* U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2014). “The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General.” Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health available at: https://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/50-years-of-progress/index.html. 2.* Wang T.W., A. Gentzke, S. Sharapova, et al. (2018). “Tobacco Product Use Among Middle and High School Students—United States, 2011-2017.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 67:629-633, available at https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6722a3.htm). 3.* U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2016). “E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General.” Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health available at: https://e-cigarettes.surgeongeneral.gov/documents/2016_sgr_full_report_non-508.pdf. 4. Fanshawe T.R., W. Halliwell, N. Lindson, et al. (2017). “Tobacco Cessation Interventions for Young People.” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Rev.11:CD003289, available at https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD003289.pub6/epdf/full. BILLING CODE 4164-01-P EP05NO18.010 EP05NO18.011 Dated: October 30, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24126 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-C
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 101 [Docket No. FDA-2018-D-1459] Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed at One Eating Occasion, Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed, Serving Size-Related Issues, Dual-Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous Topics; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion, Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed, Serving Size-Related Issues, Dual-Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous Topics.” The draft guidance, when finalized, will provide questions and answers on topics related primarily to implementing two final rules, one entitled “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling; Updating, Modifying, and Establishing Certain Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed; Serving Size for Breath Mints; and Technical Amendments,” and the other entitled “Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels.” This draft guidance also discusses formatting issues for dual-column labeling, products that have limited space for nutrition labeling, and additional issues dealing with compliance.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by January 4, 2019 to ensure that we consider your comment on the draft guidance before we begin work on the final version of the guidance.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2018-D-1459 for “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion, Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed, Serving Size-Related Issues, Dual-Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous Topics; Draft Guidance for Industry.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” We will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in our consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).

    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Office of Nutrition and Food Labeling, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jillonne Kevala, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-1450.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion, Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed, Serving Size-Related Issues, Dual-Column Labeling, and Miscellaneous Topics.” We are issuing the draft guidance consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternate approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

    The draft guidance, when finalized, will provide questions and answers on topics related primarily to implementing two final rules: (1) “Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods That Can Reasonably Be Consumed At One Eating Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling; Updating, Modifying, and Establishing Certain Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed; Serving Size for Breath Mints; and Technical Amendments” (81 FR 34000 (May 27, 2016)) and (2) “Food Labeling: Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels” (81 FR 33742 (May 27, 2016)). This draft guidance also discusses formatting issues for dual-column labeling, products that have limited space for nutrition labeling, and additional issues dealing with compliance.

    II. The Paperwork Reduction Act

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 101 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0381.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances or https://www.regulations.gov. Use the FDA website listed in the previous sentence to find the most current version of the guidance.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24124 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-114540-18] RIN 1545-BO88 Amount Determined Under Section 956 for Corporate United States Shareholders AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    This document contains proposed regulations that reduce the amount determined under section 956 of the Internal Revenue Code with respect to certain domestic corporations. The proposed regulations affect certain domestic corporations that own (or are treated as owning) stock in foreign corporations.

    DATES:

    Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-114540-18), Internal Revenue Service, Room 5203, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-114540-18), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-114540-18).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Concerning the proposed regulations, Rose E. Jenkins, (202) 317-6934; concerning submissions of comments or requests for a public hearing, Regina Johnson, (202) 317-6901 (not toll-free numbers).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background I. Section 956

    The Revenue Act of 1962 (the “1962 Act”), Pub. L. 87-834, sec. 12, 76 Stat. at 1006, enacted sections 951 and 956 as part of subpart F of part III, subchapter N, chapter 1 of the 1954 Internal Revenue Code (“subpart F”), as amended. Subpart F was enacted in order to limit the use of low-tax jurisdictions for the purposes of obtaining indefinite deferral of U.S. tax on certain earnings that would otherwise be subject to U.S. federal income tax. H.R. Rep. No. 1447 at 57 (1962). Congress enacted subpart F in part to address taxpayers who had “taken advantage of the multiplicity of foreign tax systems to avoid taxation by the United States on what could ordinarily be expected to be U.S. source income.” Id. at 58.

    Before the 1962 Act, United States shareholders (as defined in section 951(b)) (“U.S. shareholders”) of controlled foreign corporations (as defined in section 957) (“CFCs”) were not subject to U.S. tax on earnings of the foreign corporations unless and until earnings of the foreign corporations were distributed to the shareholders as a dividend. S. Rep. No. 1881 at 78 (1962). The subpart F regime eliminated deferral for certain—generally passive or highly mobile—earnings of CFCs by subjecting those earnings to immediate U.S. taxation regardless of whether there was an actual distribution. Id. at 80. Earnings that were not subject to immediate U.S. taxation under the subpart F regime were generally taxable only upon repatriation, as those earnings did not present the same concerns regarding indefinite tax deferral compared to earnings subject to subpart F.

    Section 956 was enacted alongside the subpart F regime in the 1962 Act to ensure that a CFC's earnings not subject to immediate tax when earned (under the subpart F regime) would be taxed when repatriated, either through a dividend or an effective repatriation. Recognizing that repatriation of foreign earnings was possible through means other than a taxable distribution, Congress enacted section 956 “to prevent the repatriation of income to the United States in a manner which does not subject it to U.S. taxation.” H.R. Rep. No. 1447 at 58. Congress determined that the investment by a CFC of its earnings in United States property, including obligations of a U.S. person, “is substantially the equivalent of a dividend.” See S. Rep. No. 1881 at 88 (1962). See also S. Rep. No. 94-938 at 226 (1976) (“[S]ince the investment . . . in the stock or debt obligations of a related U.S. person or its domestic affiliates makes funds available for use by the U.S. shareholders, it constitutes an effective repatriation of earnings which should be taxed.”). Accordingly, Congress enacted section 956 as an anti-abuse measure to tax a CFC's investment of earnings in United States property in the same manner as if it had distributed those earnings to the United States. See JCS-10-87 at 1081-82 (1987) (“In general, two kinds of transactions are repatriations that end deferral and trigger tax. First, an actual dividend payment ends deferral. . . . Second, in the case of a controlled foreign corporation, an investment in U.S. property, such as a loan to the lender's U.S. parent or the purchase of U.S. real estate, is also a repatriation that ends deferral (Code sec. 956).”). Failure to tax CFC investments in United States property would have allowed taxpayers to circumvent the U.S. system of deferral by effectively repatriating earnings without paying U.S. tax on the substantial equivalent of a taxable dividend. Section 956 was thus designed to ensure symmetry between the tax treatment of repatriations through dividends and effective repatriations. See generally Notice 2014-52, 2014-42 I.R.B. 712 (“In the absence of section 956, a U.S. shareholder of a CFC could access the CFC's funds (untaxed earnings and profits) in a variety of ways other than by the payment of an actual taxable dividend, such that there would be no reason for the U.S. shareholder to incur the dividend tax. Section 956 eliminates this disincentive to pay a dividend by ensuring parity of treatment for different ways that CFC earnings can be made available for use in the United States or for use by the U.S. shareholder.”).

    Section 951(a)(1)(B) requires a U.S. shareholder of a CFC to include in gross income the amount determined under section 956 (the “section 956 amount”) with respect to the CFC to the extent not excluded from gross income under section 959(a)(2) (the inclusion, a “section 956 inclusion”). See sections 951(a)(1)(B), 959(a)(2), and 959(f)(1). Section 951(b) defines a U.S. shareholder as a United States person that owns within the meaning of section 958(a), or is considered as owning by reason of the constructive ownership rules of section 958(b), 10 percent or more of the voting power or value of a foreign corporation. A U.S. shareholder's section 956 amount with respect to a CFC for a taxable year is the lesser of (1) the excess (if any) of such shareholder's pro rata share of the average of the amounts of United States property held (directly or indirectly) by the CFC as of the close of each quarter of such taxable year, over the amount of earnings and profits described in section 959(c)(1)(A) with respect to such shareholder, or (2) such shareholder's pro rata share of the applicable earnings of the CFC. See section 956(a). Applicable earnings are defined as the sum of accumulated earnings and profits (not including deficits) described in section 316(a)(1) and current earnings and profits described in section 316(a)(2), reduced by distributions made during the year and earnings and profits described in section 959(c)(1). See section 956(b)(1). Under section 956(c), United States property includes tangible property located in the United States, stock of a domestic corporation, an obligation of a United States person, and any right to use in the United States certain intangible property. Enacted as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub. L. 103-66, sec. 13232(b), 107 Stat. 312, section 956(e) grants the Secretary of the Department of Treasury (the “Secretary”) the authority to prescribe “such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations to prevent the avoidance of the provisions of this section through reorganizations or otherwise.”

    This regulatory authority is not limited to the adoption of anti-avoidance rules, but rather permits the Secretary to ensure that the application of section 956 is consistent with the “purposes of this section”—chief among them, to ensure symmetry between the treatment of actual dividends and payments which are “substantially the equivalent of a dividend.” S. Rep. No. 1881 at 88 (1962). Consistent with this understanding, the Department of Treasury (the “Treasury Department”) and the IRS have exercised this regulatory authority to tailor the application of section 956 to the abuse that motivated its adoption, ensuring that the provision applies to the transactions Congress sought to tax, but does not extend to transactions the taxation of which would be inconsistent with the purpose of section 956.1 For example, in 1964, shortly after section 956 was first enacted, the Treasury Department and the IRS issued regulations containing Treas. Reg. section 1.956-2(d)(2)(ii), providing that any debt collected within one year from the time incurred did not constitute an obligation that could be United States property. See T.D. 6704, 29 FR 2599, 2603. This short-term loan exception was removed when the Treasury Department and the IRS issued regulations in 1988 regarding the treatment of factoring receivables as United States property. See T.D. 8209, 53 FR 22163, 22169. A one-year debt exception would have been inconsistent with Congress's expansion of section 956 in 1984 to reach factoring receivables, which are often outstanding for less than one year.

    1 In addition to authorizing regulations by the Treasury Department and the IRS, Congress has acted on occasion to both expand and contract the scope of section 956 based on an evolving understanding of the potential means by which taxpayers could achieve the abusive results that gave rise to its enactment (that is, the tax-free effective repatriation of earnings through transactions that are economically equivalent to a taxable dividend). Thus, for example, Congress contracted the scope of section 956 in 1976, exempting investments in the stock of unrelated (tested using a 25 percent ownership threshold) U.S. corporations from the definition of United States property. See Pub. L. 94-455, sec. 1021, 90 Stat. 1520. Conversely, Congress expanded the scope of section 956 in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984, Pub. L. 98-369, sec. 123(b), 98 Stat. 494, by adding certain factoring receivables as a type of United States property because it recognized that certain “corporations based in the United States are using foreign subsidiaries to factor receivables as a device for repatriating foreign earnings tax-free.” H.R. Rep. No. 98-432 at 1305 (1984).

    Alongside the removal of the 1964 short-term loan exception in the 1988 regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS issued Notice 88-108, 1988-2 C.B. 466, which indicated that regulations would be issued providing a narrower exception from the definition of obligation for purposes of section 956 for obligations collected within 30 days from the time incurred (the “30-day rule”). However, the notice provided that the exception would not apply to a CFC that holds for 60 or more calendar days during the taxable year obligations which, without regard to the 30-day rule, would constitute United States property. The 30-day rule was expanded to 60 days in order to facilitate the flow of funds from foreign subsidiaries during a financial crisis beginning in 2008, which expansion was also extended to 2009 and 2010. See Notice 2008-91, 2008-43 I.R.B. 1001; Notice 2009-10, 2009-5 I.R.B. 419; Notice 2010-12, 2010-4 I.R.B. 326. The 30 day rule was ultimately adopted in final regulations issued on July 12, 2018, as Treas. Reg. section 1.956-2(d)(2)(iv). See T.D. 9834, 83 FR 32524, 32537-38.

    Since 1964, Congress has modified section 956 several times without addressing Treasury's short-term debt exception; indeed, since then Congress adopted section 956(e) as a positive grant of regulatory authority in 1993, and explicitly validated the short-term debt exception in its legislative history. See H.R. Rep. 103-111 at 701 (1993) (“The bill is not intended to change the measurement of U.S. property that may apply, for example, in the case of certain short-term obligations, as provided in IRS Notice 88-108 (1988-2 C.B. 445), interpreting present law.”).

    Conversely, the Treasury Department and the IRS have at times expanded the scope of section 956 by regulation to ensure that the provision reaches the type of transactions intended by Congress. See, e.g., T.D. 9402, 73 FR 35580, 35582 (adding rules modifying the basis of property transferred to a CFC in certain non-recognition transactions solely for the purposes of section 956 and providing that “[t]he purpose of this [rule] is to prevent the effective repatriation of earnings and profits of a controlled foreign corporation that acquires United States property in connection with an exchange to which this [rule] applies without a corresponding income inclusion under section 951(a)(1)(B) by claiming a basis in the United States property less than the amount of earnings and profits effectively repatriated”). See also T.D. 9834, 83 FR 32524.

    II. Adoption of Participation Exemption System

    On December 22, 2017, Congress enacted the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Public Law 115-97 (the “Act”), which established a participation exemption system for the taxation of certain foreign income. Under section 245A(a), in the case of any dividend received from a specified 10-percent owned foreign corporation by a domestic corporation which is a U.S. shareholder with respect to such foreign corporation, there is allowed as a deduction an amount equal to the foreign-source portion of such dividend. A specified 10-percent owned foreign corporation is defined in section 245A(b) as any foreign corporation (other than certain passive foreign investment companies) with respect to which a domestic corporation is a U.S. shareholder. Section 245A(g) grants the Secretary authority to prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of section 245A, including regulations for the treatment of U.S. shareholders owning stock of a specified 10-percent owned foreign corporation through a partnership.

    Under section 246(c)(1) and (5), a domestic corporation that is a U.S. shareholder is not permitted a section 245A deduction in respect of any dividend on any share of stock of a specified 10-percent owned foreign corporation that the domestic corporation holds for 365 days or less during the 731-day period beginning on the date that is 365 days before the date on which the share becomes ex-dividend with respect to the dividend. Under section 246(c)(1)(B), a section 245A deduction is also not allowed to the extent the domestic corporation is under an obligation to make related payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property.

    Explanation of Provisions

    The Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that as a result of the enactment of the participation exemption system, the current broad application of section 956 to corporate U.S. shareholders would be inconsistent with the purposes of section 956 and the scope of transactions it is intended to address. Congress determined that certain investments by a CFC of its earnings in United States property are “substantially the equivalent of a dividend” and enacted section 956 to provide similar treatment for dividends and certain investments in United States property constituting effective repatriations. S. Rep. No. 1881 at 88. Before the Act, section 956 applied appropriately to domestic corporations because both dividends from, and investments in United States property by, CFCs were included in income by such domestic corporations. As noted, the purpose of section 956 is generally to create symmetry between the taxation of actual repatriations and the taxation of effective repatriations, by subjecting effective repatriations to tax in the same manner as actual repatriations. Under the participation exemption system, however, earnings of a CFC that are repatriated to a corporate U.S. shareholder as a dividend are typically effectively exempt from tax because the shareholder is generally afforded an equal and offsetting dividends received deduction under section 245A. A section 956 inclusion of a corporate U.S. shareholder, on the other hand, is not eligible for the dividends received deduction under section 245A (because it is not a dividend). As a result, the application of section 956 after the Act to corporate U.S. shareholders of CFCs that would qualify for section 245A deductions would result in disparate treatment of actual dividends and amounts “substantially the equivalent of a dividend”—a result directly at odds with the manifest purpose of section 956.

    Accordingly, the proposed regulations continue the Treasury Department and the IRS's longstanding practice of conforming the application of section 956 to its purpose. The proposed regulations exclude corporate U.S. shareholders from the application of section 956 to the extent necessary to maintain symmetry between the taxation of actual repatriations and the taxation of effective repatriations. In general, under section 245A and the proposed regulations, respectively, neither an actual dividend to a corporate U.S. shareholder, nor such a shareholder's amount determined under section 956, will result in additional U.S. tax.

    To achieve this result, the proposed regulations provide that the amount otherwise determined under section 956 with respect to a U.S. shareholder for a taxable year of a CFC is reduced to the extent that the U.S. shareholder would be allowed a deduction under section 245A if the U.S. shareholder had received a distribution from the CFC in an amount equal to the amount otherwise determined under section 956. The proposed regulations provide special rules with respect to indirect ownership. Due to the broad applicability of section 245A, in many cases a corporate U.S. shareholder will not have a section 956 inclusion as a result of a CFC holding U.S. property under the proposed regulations.

    Section 956 will continue to apply without modification to U.S. shareholders other than corporate U.S. shareholders, such as individuals, to ensure that, consistent with the purposes of section 956, amounts that are substantially the equivalent of a dividend will be treated similarly to actual dividends. This treatment will apply to individuals regardless of whether they make an election under section 962. Because individuals are not eligible for a dividends received deduction under section 245A even if they make an election under section 962, the current application of section 956 to individuals is still necessary to ensure substantial equivalence between an actual repatriation and a deemed repatriation. Similarly, section 956 will continue to apply without reduction to regulated investment companies and real estate investment trusts because they are not allowed the dividends received deduction under section 245A. See sections 852(b)(2)(C) and 857(b)(2)(A).

    In addition to carrying out the purposes of section 956, the proposed regulations would significantly reduce complexity, costs, and compliance burdens for corporate U.S. shareholders of CFCs. Absent the proposed regulations, corporate U.S. shareholders would need to continue to carefully monitor the application of section 956 to their operations, including provisions related to loans, guarantees, and pledges, to ensure that earnings were repatriated only through actual dividends, and therefore allowed a participation exemption, rather than through a deemed repatriation under section 956 subject to additional U.S. tax. Similarly, in the absence of the proposed regulations, a U.S.-parented group in many cases would need to engage in complex and costly restructuring upon the acquisition of a foreign corporation that owns domestic subsidiaries (since the foreign corporation becomes a CFC and the stock of its domestic subsidiaries represents United States property) solely to avoid a section 956 inclusion. Absent the proposed regulations, section 956 could also serve as a “trap for the unwary” for domestic corporations that fail to recognize that, even though they are entitled to the deduction under section 245A for actual dividends, their section 956 inclusions would continue to be fully subject to U.S. tax.

    The proposed regulations also add, in proposed § 1.956-1(g)(5), the effective date for § 1.956-1(e)(6) that was inadvertently deleted in TD 9792, published in the Federal Register on November 3, 2016 (81 FR 76497, as corrected at 81 FR 95470 and 95471).

    Conforming Amendments

    The Treasury Department and the IRS intend to make conforming amendments to the examples throughout the regulations under section 956 upon finalization of the proposed regulations.

    Applicability Date

    These changes are proposed to apply to taxable years of a CFC beginning on or after the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register (the “finalization date”), and to taxable years of a U.S. shareholder in which or with which such taxable years of the CFC end. With respect to taxable years of a CFC beginning before the finalization date, a taxpayer may rely on the proposed regulations for taxable years of a CFC beginning after December 31, 2017, and for taxable years of a U.S. shareholder in which or with which such taxable years of the CFC end, provided that the taxpayer and United States persons that are related (within the meaning of section 267 or 707) to the taxpayer consistently apply the proposed regulations with respect to all CFCs in which they are U.S. shareholders.

    Special Analyses

    The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and Budget, has waived review of this proposed rule in accordance with section 6(a)(3)(A) of Executive Order 12866. OIRA will subsequently make a significance determination of the final rule, pursuant to section 3(f) of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 and the April 11, 2018, Memorandum of Agreement between the Department of Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), it is hereby certified that this regulation, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, although some small entities that are domestic corporations could be affected by the regulation and comments are requested on the application of the regulation to domestic partnerships. However, even if a substantial number of small entities were to be affected by this regulation, the Treasury Department and the IRS estimate that the economic impact on such small entities would not be significant as the regulation is expected to marginally reduce compliance costs for smaller entities. This is because the Treasury Department and the IRS believe that the cost-saving benefits of the proposed regulations with respect to complex third-party borrowing arrangements, internal financial management structures, and restructurings of worldwide operations will generally be available only to large U.S. multinational corporations with 20 or more CFCs. The Treasury Department and the IRS believe that U.S. multinational corporations with less than 20 CFCs generally will not have the types of arrangements in place that would otherwise need to be structured and monitored to avoid section 956. The proposed regulations, if adopted, generally will not affect small entities that are not domestic corporations. The Treasury Department and the IRS invite comments on the impact of this rule on small entities.

    Pursuant to section 7805(f), this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small businesses.

    Comments and Requests for Public Hearing

    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the ADDRESSES heading. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed rules. In particular, comments are requested as to the appropriate application of the proposed regulations to U.S. shareholders that are domestic partnerships, which may have partners that are a combination of domestic corporations, U.S. individuals, or other persons. For example, one approach could be to reduce the amount otherwise determined under section 956 with respect to a domestic partnership to the extent that a domestic corporate partner would be entitled to a section 245A deduction if the partnership received the amount as a distribution. An alternative could be to determine a domestic partnership's section 956 amount and section 956 inclusion without regard to the status of its partners, but then provide that a corporate U.S. shareholder partner's distributive share of the section 956 inclusion is not taxable. Comments are also requested with respect to the maintenance of previously taxed earnings and profits accounts under section 959 and basis adjustments under section 961. Additionally, comments are requested on the interaction between the proposed regulations and section 245A(e). All comments will be available at http://www.regulations.gov or upon request.

    A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

    Drafting Information

    The principal author of these proposed regulations is Joshua G. Rabon, formerly of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (International). However, other personnel from the Treasury Department and the IRS participated in their development.

    List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES

    Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 is amended by adding an entry to read in part as follows:

    Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Section 1.956-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 245A(g) and 956(e).

    Par. 2. Section 1.956-1 is amended by:

    1. Revising paragraph (a).

    2. In the first sentence of paragraph (g)(1), removing the language “Paragraph (a)” and adding in its place “Paragraph (a)(1)”.

    3. Adding paragraphs (g)(4) and (5).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.956-1 Shareholder's pro rata share of the average of the amounts of United States property held by a controlled foreign corporation.

    (a) Overview and scope—(1) In general. Subject to the provisions of section 951(a) and the regulations thereunder, a United States shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation is required to include in gross income the amount determined under section 956 with respect to the shareholder for the taxable year but only to the extent not excluded from gross income under section 959(a)(2) and the regulations thereunder.

    (2) Reduction for certain United States shareholders—(i) In general. For a taxable year of a controlled foreign corporation, the amount determined under section 956 with respect to each share of stock of the controlled foreign corporation owned (within the meaning of section 958(a)) by a United States shareholder is the amount that would be determined under section 956 with respect to such share for the taxable year, absent the application of this paragraph (a)(2) for the taxable year (such amount, the tentative section 956 amount, and in the aggregate with respect to all shares owned (within the meaning of section 958(a)) by the United States shareholder, the aggregate tentative section 956 amount), reduced by the amount of the deduction under section 245A that the shareholder would be allowed if the shareholder received as a distribution from the controlled foreign corporation an amount equal to the tentative section 956 amount with respect to such share on the last day during the taxable year on which the foreign corporation is a controlled foreign corporation (hypothetical distribution).

    (ii) Determination of the amount of the deduction that would be allowed under section 245A with respect to a hypothetical distribution. For purposes of determining the amount of the deduction under section 245A that a United States shareholder would be allowed with respect to a share of stock of a controlled foreign corporation by reason of a hypothetical distribution, the following rules apply—

    (A) If a United States shareholder owns a share of stock of a controlled foreign corporation indirectly (within the meaning of section 958(a)(2)), then—

    (1) Sections 245A(a) through (d), 246(a), and 959 apply to the hypothetical distribution as if the United States shareholder directly owned (within the meaning of section 958(a)(1)(A)) the share;

    (2) Section 245A(e) applies to the hypothetical distribution as if the distribution were made to the United States shareholder through each entity by reason of which the United States shareholder indirectly owns such share and pro rata with respect to the equity that gives rise to such indirect ownership;

    (3) To the extent that a distribution treated as made to a controlled foreign corporation pursuant to the hypothetical distribution by reason of paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(2) of this section would be subject to section 245A(e)(2), the United States shareholder is treated as not being allowed a deduction under section 245A by reason of the hypothetical distribution; and

    (4) Section 246(c) applies to the hypothetical distribution by substituting the phrase “owned (within the meaning of section 958(a))” for the term “held” each place it appears in section 246(c); and

    (B) Section 246(c) applies to the hypothetical distribution by substituting “the last day during the taxable year on which the foreign corporation is a controlled foreign corporation” for the phrase “the date on which such share becomes ex-dividend with respect to such dividend” in section 246(c)(1)(A).

    (3) Examples. The following examples illustrate the application of paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

    (i) Example 1. (A) Facts. (1) USP, a domestic corporation, owns all of the single class of stock of CFC1, which is treated as equity for U.S. income tax purposes and under the laws of the jurisdiction in which CFC1 is organized and liable to tax as a resident. The stock of CFC1 consists of 100 shares, and USP satisfies the holding period requirement of section 246(c) (as modified by paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(B) of this section) with respect to each share of CFC1 stock. CFC1 owns all of the stock of USS, a domestic corporation. CFC1's adjusted basis in the stock of USS is $0x.

    (2) The functional currency of CFC1 is the U.S. dollar. CFC1 has $100x of undistributed earnings as defined in section 245A(c)(2), $90x of which constitute undistributed foreign earnings as defined in section 245A(c)(3), and $10x of which are described in section 245(a)(5)(B) (that is, earnings attributable to a dividend that CFC1 received from USS). CFC1 would not receive a deduction or other tax benefit with respect to any income, war profits, or excess profits taxes on a distribution. None of the earnings and profits of CFC1 are described in section 959(c)(1) or (2) or are earnings and profits attributable to income excluded from subpart F income under section 952(b). CFC1's applicable earnings (as defined in section 956(b)(1)) are $100x. CFC1 also has held an obligation of USP with an adjusted basis of $120x on every day during the taxable year that was acquired while all of its stock was owned by USP.

    (B) Analysis. Because USP directly owns all of the stock of CFC1 at the end of CFC1's taxable year, USP's aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC1 is $100x, the lesser of USP's pro rata share of the average amounts of United States property held by CFC1 ($120x) and its pro rata share of CFC1's applicable earnings ($100x). Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC1 is its aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC1 reduced by the deduction under section 245A that USP would be allowed if USP received an amount equal to its aggregate tentative section 956 amount as a distribution with respect to the CFC1 stock. With respect to the tentative distribution from CFC1 to USP, USP would be allowed a $90x deduction under section 245A with respect to the foreign-source portion of the $100x hypothetical distribution (that is, an amount of the dividend that bears the same ratio to the dividend as the $90x of undistributed foreign earnings bears to the $100x of undistributed earnings). Accordingly, USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC1 is $10x, its aggregate tentative section 956 amount ($100x) with respect to CFC1 reduced by the amount of the deduction that USP would have been allowed under section 245A with respect to the hypothetical distribution ($90x).

    (ii) Example 2. (A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (A) of Example 1 in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, except that all $100x of CFC1's undistributed earnings are described in section 959(c)(2).

    (B) Analysis. As in paragraph (B) of Example 1 in this paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, USP's aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC1 is $100x, the lesser of USP's pro rata share of the average amounts of United States property held by CFC1 ($120x) and its pro rata share of CFC1's applicable earnings ($100x). However, paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not reduce USP's section 956 amount, because USP would not be allowed any deduction under section 245A with respect to the $100x hypothetical distribution by reason of section 959(a) and (d). Accordingly, USP's section 956 amount is $100x. However, under sections 959(a)(2) and 959(f)(1), USP's inclusion under section 951(a)(1)(B) with respect to CFC1 is $0, because USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC1 does not exceed the earnings and profits of CFC1 described in section 959(c)(2) with respect to USP. The $100x of earnings and profits of CFC1 described in section 959(c)(2) are reclassified as earnings and profits described in section 959(c)(1).

    (iii) Example 3. (A) Facts. (1) USP, a domestic corporation, owns all of the single class of stock of CFC1, and has held such stock for five years. CFC1 has held 70% of the single class of stock of CFC2 for three years. The other 30% of the CFC2 stock has been held by a foreign individual unrelated to USP or CFC1 since CFC2's formation. All of the stock of each of CFC1 and CFC2 is treated as equity for U.S. income tax purposes and under the laws of the jurisdiction in which each respective corporation is organized and liable to tax as a resident. CFC2 has a calendar taxable year. On December 1, Year 1, CFC1 acquires the remaining 30% of the stock of CFC2 for cash. On June 30, Year 2, CFC1 sells to a third party the 30% of CFC2 stock acquired in Year 1 at no gain. CFC2 made no distributions during Year 1.

    (2) The functional currency of CFC1 and CFC2 is the U.S. dollar. CFC2 has $120x of undistributed earnings as defined in section 245A(c)(2), all of which constitute undistributed foreign earnings. Neither CFC1 nor CFC2 would receive a deduction or other tax benefit with respect to any income, war profits, or excess profits taxes on a distribution. None of the earnings and profits of CFC2 are described in section 959(c)(1) or (2) or are earnings and profits attributable to income excluded from subpart F income under section 952(b). CFC2's applicable earnings (as defined in section 956(b)(1)) are $120x. CFC2 has held an obligation of USP with an adjusted basis of $100x on every day of Year 1 that was acquired while USP owned all of the stock of CFC1 and CFC1 held 70% of the single class of stock of CFC2.

    (B) Analysis. Because USP indirectly owns (within the meaning of section 958(a)) all of the stock of CFC2 at the end of Year 1, USP's aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 for Year 1 is $100x, the lesser of USP's pro rata share of the average amounts of United States property held by CFC2 ($100x) and its pro rata share of CFC2's applicable earnings ($120x). Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 for Year 1 is its aggregate tentative section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 reduced by the deduction under section 245A that USP would be allowed if USP received an amount equal to its aggregate tentative section 956 amount as a distribution with respect to the CFC2 stock that USP owns indirectly within the meaning of section 958(a)(2). For purposes of determining the consequences of this hypothetical distribution, under paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this section, USP is treated as owning the CFC2 stock directly. In addition, under paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A)(4) of this section, the holding period requirement of section 246(c) is applied by reference to the period during which USP owned (within the meaning of section 958(a)) the stock of CFC2. Therefore, with respect to the hypothetical distribution from CFC2 to USP, USP would satisfy the holding period requirement under section 246(c) with respect to the 70% of the CFC2 stock that USP indirectly owned for three years through CFC1, but not with respect to the 30% of the CFC2 stock that USP indirectly owned through CFC1 for a period of less than 365 days. Accordingly, USP's section 956 amount with respect to CFC2 for Year 1 is $30x, its aggregate tentative section 956 amount ($100x) reduced by the amount of the deduction that USP would have been allowed under section 245A with respect to the hypothetical distribution ($70x).

    (g) * * *

    (4) Paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section apply to taxable years of controlled foreign corporations beginning on or after the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section as final regulations in the Federal Register, and to taxable years of a United States shareholder in which or with which such taxable years of the controlled foreign corporation end.

    (5) Paragraph (e)(6) of this section applies to property acquired in exchanges occurring on or after June 24, 2011.

    Kirsten Wielobob, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24140 Filed 11-1-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 29 CFR Chapter I RIN 3142-AA13 The Standard for Determining Joint-Employer Status AGENCY:

    National Labor Relations Board

    ACTION:

    Proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Labor Relations Board (the Board) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register of September 14, 2018, seeking comments from the public concerning the standard for determining joint-employer status under the National Labor Relations Act. The date to submit responses to the Notice is extended for 30 days.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the notice of proposed rulemaking published at 83 FR 46681 is extended. Comments must be received by the Board on or before December 13, 2018. Comments replying to the comments submitted during the initial comment period must be received by the Board on or before December 20, 2018.

    Dated: October 31, 2018. Farah Z. Qureshi, Associate Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24134 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary 32 CFR Part 111 [Docket ID: DOD-2016-OS-0116] RIN 0790-AI99 Transitional Compensation (TC) for Abused Dependents AGENCY:

    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Transitional compensation is one of the many resources available to victims of domestic abuse. The Transitional Compensation for Abused Dependents program is a congressionally-authorized program which provides temporary monetary payments and military benefits to dependents of Service members, when the member has been separated from the military due to a dependent-abuse or child abuse offense. If adopted as final, this rulemaking would establish requirements and describes authorized benefits for an abused spouse and/or abused children affected by the separation or forfeiture of pay and allowances of a military Service member.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 4, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or RIN number and title, by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Chief Management Officer, Directorate for Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    CDR David T. Clark, 703-693-1068.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Legal Authority for This Program

    This program was established by Congress for abused dependents of military personnel based on (Pub. L. 103-160) in 1994. This rule consolidates and clarifies existing procedural requirements established by the Act and currently found in internal DOD guidance.

    The legislation authorized temporary payments for families in which the active duty soldier had been court-martialed with a qualifying sentence (forfeiture of all pay and allowances, or bad conduct discharge, or dishonorable discharge, or in the instance of officers and commissioned warrant officers, dismissal from the Service) or was being administratively separated from the military as a result of a dependent-abuse offense. DOD began authorizing payments in August 1995 in accordance with DoD Instruction (DoDI) 1342.24, Transitional Compensation for Abused Dependents which was last updated in January 1997 and can be found at http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/134224p.pdf.

    Eligibility Requirements for the Program

    To be eligible for the benefit a family member (spouse or dependent child) must have been living in the home of the Service member. The Service member must have been administratively separated for a dependent-abuse offense; or convicted of a dependent-abuse offense and either separated under a court-martial sentence or sentenced to a forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

    A dependent-abuse offense must be the basis for the administrative separation or conviction, although it does not have to be the primary reason. Active duty victims of dependent-abuse are also eligible for transitional compensation, when the offender is also active duty.

    Summary of Benefits Under This Program

    Amount of the benefit: The compensation amount is based on the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, which changes annually. Current amounts can be found at the Department of Veterans Affairs Dependency and Indemnity Compensation website at https://benefits.va.gov/compensation/types-dependency_and_indemnity.asp.

    Length of the benefit: The transitional compensation is available for the longer of 12 months or the unserved portion of the Service member's obligated active service. Compensation will not extend beyond 36 months.

    Maintaining eligibility: Individuals become ineligible for compensation and benefits if they remarry or move back in with the former Service member while receiving benefits.

    Recertifying eligibility: If compensation is available for more than 12 months, recertification is required annually to ensure eligibility for transitional compensation.

    Other benefits: As part of the Transitional Compensation Program, individuals may be eligible for other benefits including medical care, exchange privileges and commissary privileges.

    Transitional compensation is one of the many resources available to military families. Each installation's Family Advocacy Program or legal assistance office can help a family apply for transitional compensation as well as other means of assistance.

    Per DoD's Financial Management Regulation at https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/current/07b/07b_60.pdf, transitional compensation payments are not taxable. Transitional compensation recipients should not expect to receive a Form 1099 for tax purposes. Also, recipients need not report transitional compensation payments on their tax return.

    According to DoD Policy, transitional compensation for a dependent spouse or former spouse is at the same rate as defined in 38 U.S.C. 1311—Dependency & Indemnity Compensation to a Surviving Spouse. There is also an additional amount for children under this section. For children without a mil-spouse parent, the amount is the same as the rate defined in 38 U.S.C. 1313—Dependency & Indemnity Compensation to Children. You can find annual updates to these payments on the DoD Comptroller's website at https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/Volume_07b.pdf.

    Expected Impact of the Proposed Rule

    The intent of this program is to encourage victims of dependent-abuse to come forward and report abuse, provide assistance to victims to separate from the abuser, inform the victims of resources available to them as a victim of dependent-abuse, ensure the safety and well-being of the victims, and ensure the Department of Defense does not leave a spouse and family financially destitute when the abusing Service member is discharged from the military for a dependent-abuse offense. In accordance with statute, the rate of payment varies based on the rank of the Service member, but it is designed to cover living expenses such as food, clothing and housing. The Department spends approximately $17M each fiscal year in transitional compensation payments. This proposed rule publishes instructions internal to DoD without any changes to the policies already in place, and therefore will not result in any changes to the number of TC recipients or the amount they are paid.

    Regulatory Procedures Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review” and Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”

    Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has been designated a “significant regulatory action,” although not economically significant, under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    Executive Order 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”

    This proposed rule is not expected to by subject to the requirements of E.O. 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) because this proposed rule is expected be related to agency organization, management, or personnel.

    2 U.S.C. Ch. 25, “Unfunded Mandates Reform Act”

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1532) requires 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. This rule will not mandate any requirements for State, local, or tribal governments, nor will it affect private sector costs.

    Public Law 96-354, “Regulatory Flexibility Act” (5 U.S.C. Ch. 6)

    The Department of Defense certifies that this proposed rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act because it would not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, does not require us to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.

    Public Law 96-511, “Paperwork Reduction Act” (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

    Section 111.6(f)(1) of this proposed rule contains information collection requirements. These reporting requirements have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget and assigned OMB Control Number 0704-0578, “Transitional Compensation for Abused Dependents (TCAD).”

    The applicable Systems of Records Notice (SORN) is T7347b, Defense Military Retiree and Annuity Pay System Records (January 7, 2009, 74 FR 696), http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNsIndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article-View/Article/570196/t7347b/. The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) is available at https://www.dfas.mil/dam/jcr:5cf8a068-89c7-47eb-b844-1e2020ed5f73/Defense%20Retiree%20and%20Annuitant%20Pay%20System%20(DRAS)%202016.pdf; or https://www.dfas.mil/dfas/foia/privacyimpactassessments.html.

    Executive Order 13132, “Federalism”

    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. This proposed rule will not have a substantial effect on State and local governments.

    List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 111

    Abuse, Dependent children, Transitional compensation.

    Accordingly, 32 CFR part 111 is proposed to be added to read as follows: PART 111—TRANSITIONAL COMPENSATION FOR ABUSED DEPENDENTS Sec. 111.1 Purpose. 111.2 Applicability. 111.3 Definitions. 111.4 Policy. 111.5 Responsibilities. 111.6 Procedures. Authority:

    10 U.S.C. 1059.

    PART 111—TRANSITIONAL COMPENSATION FOR ABUSED DEPENDENTS
    § 111.1 Purpose.

    This part establishes policy, assigns responsibilities, and prescribes procedures for the payment of monthly Transitional Compensation (TC) to dependents of Service members separated for dependent abuse.

    § 111.2 Applicability.

    This part applies to The Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities in the DoD.

    § 111.3 Definitions.

    Unless otherwise noted, these terms and their definitions are for the purposes of this part.

    Dependent abuse offense. Conduct by an individual while a Military Service member on active duty for a period of more than 30 days that involves abuse of a then-current spouse or a dependent child of the Service member and that is a criminal offense, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or another criminal code applicable to the jurisdiction where the act of abuse is committed. The term “involves abuse of the then-current spouse or a dependent child” means that the criminal offense is against the person of that spouse or a dependent child. Crimes that may qualify as dependent-abuse offenses include sexual assault, rape, sodomy, assault, battery, murder, and manslaughter. (This is not an exhaustive or exclusive listing of dependent-abuse offenses, but is provided for illustrative purposes only. The facts and circumstances of a particular case should always be interpreted in a manner most favorable to the spouse or a dependent child of the member when determining whether the conduct constitutes a “dependent abuse offense.”)

    Dependent child. As defined in 10 U.S.C. 1059.

    Exchange stores. The Army and Air Force Exchange Service, the Navy Exchange, the Marine Corps Exchange, and the Coast Guard Exchange.

    Parent. The natural father or mother, or father or mother through adoption. For purposes of TC, parent does not include persons who have stood “in loco parentis” to a dependent child.

    Secretary concerned. Includes the Secretary of the Military Departments and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, when applicable.

    Service member. Includes former Service members, where appropriate.

    Spouse. An individual married to a Service member, but does not include a domestic partner.

    § 111.4 Policy.

    The DoD will make monthly TC payments and provide other benefits described in this part for spouses or dependents of Service members who meet the eligibility requirements of 10 U.S.C. 1059 and this part.

    § 111.5 Responsibilities.

    (a) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)):

    (1) Establishes and prescribes procedures for the payment of TC to dependents of Service members separated for dependent abuse.

    (2) Oversees compliance with this part.

    (b) The Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, when applicable:

    (1) Appoint representatives to coordinate requests for TC, approve requests (except exceptional eligibility requests), and forward those requests for payment in accordance with Chapter 60, Volume 7B of DoD 7000.14-R, “Department of Defense Financial Management Regulations (FMRs): Military Pay Policy—Retired Pay” (available at http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/fmr/Volume_07b.pdf).

    (2) Review and approve or disapprove requests for TC benefits in accordance with the exceptional eligibility authority in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1059. This responsibility may not be delegated.

    (3) Ensure dependents who are victims of a dependent-abuse offense are aware of their eligibility to apply for TC.

    (4) Establish departmental guidance to implement this part.

    § 111.6 Procedures.

    (a) Recipients of payment. The Secretary concerned makes TC payments to Service member dependents, former dependents, or court-appointed guardians as described by 10 U.S.C. 1059. If a recipient is incapable of handling his or her own affairs, payments may be made only to a court-appointed guardian.

    (b) Payments.

    (1) Payments begin in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1059.

    (2) Payments must continue for at least 12 months and no more than 36 months, as prescribed by the applicable Secretary of the Military Department. When the unserved portion of the Service member's obligated active duty service, as of the starting date of payment, is greater than 12 months and less than or equal to 36 months, payments continue for no less than the unserved portion.

    (i) For enlisted Service members, obligated active duty service is the time remaining on their terms of enlistment.

    (ii) For officers, obligated active duty service is indefinite unless an officer has a date of separation established. In that case, it is the time remaining until the date of separation.

    (3) The amount of payment will be in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1059. Partial month entitlements are pro-rated. If a recipient dies, arrears of payments are not paid.

    (4) Payments will be stopped in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1059.

    (i) Payments will end on the first day of the first month following the month in which the Secretary concerned notifies the recipient of such transitional compensation in writing that the payment of TC will stop.

    (ii) Recipients are not required to repay amounts of TC received before the effective date payment is stopped, in accordance with paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section; however, TC may be recouped for erroneous payments or payments made based on false information provided.

    (c) Forfeiture provisions. In addition to 10 U.S.C. 1059, the following requirements apply:

    (1) The former spouse receiving TC must notify the Defense Finance Accounting Services (DFAS) within 30 days of remarriage or if the spouse or former spouse begins residing in the same household as the spouse or former spouse.

    (2) If a Service member's dependent child is not living in the same household as the spouse or former spouse who forfeits TC, payments are made to each dependent child or his or her court-appointed guardian.

    (3) In order to continue benefits, the spouse or former spouse must annually certify to DFAS that he or she is not remarried or is not cohabitating with the Service member separated for the abuse. DFAS will provide a form for recertification of benefits.

    (d) Coordination of benefits. A spouse or former spouse may not concurrently receive TC payments and retired pay payments pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 1059 and 1408(h), respectively. If a spouse or former spouse is eligible for both TC payments and retired pay payments, the spouse or former spouse chooses which of the two payments to receive. If the spouse or former spouse receives TC payments and later receives payments from a Service member's retired pay, any TC received concurrently with retired pay must be recouped.

    (e) Source of funds. TC must be paid from operations and maintenance funds of the Department of the Service member.

    (f) Application of procedures. An individual must initiate a request for TC through a Service-appointed representative. The Service-appointed representative:

    (1) Collects data and validates the claim using DD Form 2698 (available at http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd2698.pdf).

    (2) Approves payment and forwards the application to DFAS unless otherwise submitted by the Secretary concerned in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1059.

    (g) Commissary and exchange benefits

    (1) A recipient of TC is entitled to use commissary and exchange stores while receiving payments.

    (2) If a recipient entitled to use commissary and exchange stores is also entitled to use commissary and exchange stores under another provision of law, the entitlement is determined under the other provision of law and not paragraph (g)(1).

    (h) Medical benefits.

    (1) The Secretary concerned will determine appropriate medical and dental care eligibility for TC recipients and affected dependents. At a minimum, an abused dependent who is receiving TC in accordance with paragraph (a) of this part may receive medical and dental care, including mental health services, in facilities of the military services or through the TRICARE program as outlined in 10 U.S.C. 1076 and 1077.

    (2) Dental care may be provided on a space-available basis in facilities of the military services.

    (3) Eligible dependents of a member who is retirement eligible, but who loses eligibility for retirement pay because of dependent-abuse misconduct, may receive medical and dental care in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1408(h).

    Dated: October 29, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-23964 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0999] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone for Fireworks Display, Upper Potomac River, Washington Channel, DC AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Upper Potomac River. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters of the Washington Channel adjacent to The Wharf DC, Washington, DC, during a fireworks display on December 1, 2018. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before November 19, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2018-0999 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Ron Houck, Sector Maryland-National Capital Region Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410-576-2674, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    On October 10, 2018, Pyrotecnico, Inc., of New Castle, PA, notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 7:45 p.m. to 8 p.m. on December 1, 2018, sponsored by The Wharf DC. The fireworks are to be launched from a barge in the Washington Channel, adjacent to The Wharf DC in Washington, DC. Additional details were received on October 18, 2018. Hazards from the fireworks display include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. The Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks to be used in this display would be a safety concern for anyone within 200 feet of the fireworks barge.

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels on the navigable waters within 200 feet of the fireworks barge on the Washington Channel before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

    Because of when final details of the event were provided to the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard does not have time to provide a full 30 day comment period and publish a final rule. Instead, the Coast Guard is providing 14 day comment period. The Coast Guard believes that 14 days will provide adequate time for interested individuals to review and provide meaningful comment on the proposal.

    III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish a temporary safety zone in the Washington Channel from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. on December 1, 2018. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters within 200 feet of the fireworks barge in the Washington Channel located within an area bounded on the south by latitude 38°52′30″ W, and bounded on the north by the Francis Case (I-395) Memorial Bridge, located at Washington, DC. The duration of the safety zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

    IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This 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, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Although vessel traffic will not be able to safely transit around this safety zone, the impact would be for 2 hours during the evening when vessel traffic in Washington Channel is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    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 proposed 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting 2 hours that would prohibit entry within a portion of the Washington Channel. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

    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.

    V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

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

    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T05-0999 to read as follows:
    § 165.T05-0999 Safety Zone for Fireworks Display, Upper Potomac River, Washington Channel, Washington, DC.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters of the Washington Channel within 200 feet of the fireworks barge located within an area bounded on the south by latitude 38°52′30″ W, and bounded on the north by the southern extent of the Francis Case (I-395) Memorial Bridge, located at Washington, DC. All coordinates refer to datum NAD 1983.

    (b) Definitions. As used in this section:

    (1) Captain of the Port (COTP) means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.

    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. All vessels underway within this safety zone at the time it is activated are to depart the zone.

    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative by telephone at 410-576-2693 or on Marine Band Radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).

    (3) Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

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

    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. on December 1, 2018.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Joseph B. Loring, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24121 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board 37 CFR Chapter III [Docket No. 18-CRB-0012-RM] Modification and Amendment of Regulations To Conform to the MMA AGENCY:

    Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.

    ACTION:

    Notification of inquiry.

    SUMMARY:

    The Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) publish a notice of inquiry regarding necessary and appropriate modifications and amendments to agency regulations following enactment of a new law regarding the music industry.

    DATES:

    Comments and proposals, if any, are due no later than November 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments and proposals, identified by docket number 18-CRB-0012-RM, by any of the following methods:

    CRB's electronic filing application: Submit comments and proposals online in eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/.

    U.S. mail: Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024-0977; or Overnight service (only USPS Express Mail is acceptable): Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024-0977; or

    Commercial courier: Address package to: Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building, LM-403, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559-6000. Deliver to: Congressional Courier Acceptance Site, 2nd Street NE and D Street NE, Washington, DC; or

    Hand delivery: Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building, LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559-6000.

    Instructions: Unless submitting online, commenters must submit an original, two paper copies, and an electronic version on a CD. All submissions must include a reference to the CRB and this docket number. All submissions will be posted without change to eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/ including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read submitted background documents or comments, go to eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board's electronic filing and case management system, at https://app.crb.gov/ and search for docket number 18-CRB-0012-RM.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707-7658 or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act, Public Law 115-264, 132 Stat. 3676 (Oct. 11, 2018) (MMA), implements changes in administration of copyright royalties relating to the music industry. The most sweeping changes relate to the copyrights of songwriters and publishers of nondramatic musical works. Prior to enactment of the MMA, section 115 of title 17 (Copyright Act) detailed procedures for administration of the compulsory license (also known as the “mechanical” compulsory license) to reproduce and distribute, including by digital transmissions, phonorecords embodying copyrighted musical works.

    Chapter 8 of the Copyright Act requires the Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) to conduct proceedings every five years to determine the rates and terms for the section 115 license. See 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(1), 804(b)(4). In the MMA, Congress authorized designation of an entity, the Mechanical License Collective (MLC) to serve as a clearinghouse for collection and distribution of royalties and to develop a comprehensive database to ensure efficient and appropriate payment and distribution of those royalties.

    Creation of the MLC and the other statutory changes in the MMA requires or authorizes modification of the Judges' regulations relating to section 115. For example, section 102(d) of the MMA requires the Judges, not later than 270 days after enactment of the MMA, to amend part 385 of 37, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) “to conform the definitions used in such part to the definitions of the same terms described in section 115(e) of title 17, United States Code, as added by” section 102(a) of the MMA. That provision also directs the Judges to “make adjustments to the language of the regulations as necessary to achieve the same purpose and effect as the original regulations with respect to the rates and terms previously adopted by the [Judges].” In addition, the MMA authorizes the Judges to adopt regulations concerning proceedings to set the administrative assessment established by the statute to fund the MLC. 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(7)(D)(viii), 115(d)(12)(A).

    The MMA also adds a new section 801(b)(8) to the Copyright Act, which authorizes the Judges “to determine the administrative assessment to be paid by digital music providers under section 115(d)” but states that “[t]he provisions of section 115(d) shall apply to the conduct of proceedings by the [Judges] under section 115(d) and not the procedures in this section, or section 803, 804, or 805.”

    The Judges seek input from persons and entities who reasonably believe they have a significant interest in the content of necessary or appropriate changes to the regulations in chapter III, title 37, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The Judges also seek input from persons and entities who reasonably believe they have a significant interest in interpreting and applying the changes the MMA purports to make to chapter 8 of the Copyright Act.

    Specifically, but not exclusively, the Judges seek comments regarding the following questions.

    (1) What regulations in chapter III, title 37 CFR, if any, must be changed and how?

    (2) What regulations in chapter III, title 37 CFR, if any, should be changed and how?

    (3) What effect, if any, does the new language in subparagraph 8 of section 801(b) have on the Judges' ability to make necessary procedural or evidentiary rulings under sections 801, 803, 804, and/or 805 1 of the Copyright Act, and, in particular, does the new language have the effect that the Judges are now required to adopt new regulations, notwithstanding their general authority under section 801(c)?

    1 Examples: Section 801(c) (necessary procedural and evidentiary rulings), section 803(b)(5) (paper proceedings), section 803(b)(6)(C)(ix) (subpoenas), section 803(c)(2) (rehearings), section 803(c)(5) (protective orders).

    (4) If the new language in subparagraph 8 of section 801(b) affects the Judges' authority under other subsections of section 801, how does it change that authority or the procedures to exercise that authority?

    The Judges solicit proposed new or modified regulatory language that may be necessary to fully implement the MMA. Commenting persons and entities must support each legal conclusion and each proposed regulatory change with appropriate legal analysis and citation to authority. After considering the proposals, if the Judges determine that rulemaking is required, the Judges will publish a formal notice of proposed rulemaking in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Suzanne M. Barnett, Chief Copyright Royalty Judge.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24089 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410-72-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0432; FRL-9986-18-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: NOX Rule Revisions AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ) on June 5, 2017, as supplemented on June 28, 2018. This submittal seeks to revise the State's SIP-approved rules regarding nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions from large stationary combustion sources. This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

    DATES:

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

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0432 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jane Spann, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Spann can be reached by phone at (404) 562-9029 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    On September 18, 2001, North Carolina submitted a rule section regarding the control of NOX emissions from large stationary combustion sources to EPA for approval into its SIP.1 The rule section—NCAC 15A 02D .1400—contained Rules .1401—“Definitions”; .1403—“Compliance Schedules”; .1413—“Sources Not Otherwise Listed in This Section”; .1414—“Tune-up Requirements”; and .1423—“Large Internal Combustion Engines” as well as other rules not related to today's proposed action. The submittal also included a rule entitled “.1406 Utility Boilers (Repealed)” with no regulatory text. EPA approved the September 18, 2001, SIP revision on December 27, 2002, with the exception of Rule .1406 and the addition of Rules .1413, and .1414, among others. EPA did not act on Rule .1406 because the rule contained no regulatory text and because Rule .1406 was not in the SIP, thus there was nothing to repeal. See 67 FR 78987 for further information.

    1 See Rule .1402—“Applicability” and the definition of “source” in Rule .1401 for the scope of this rule section.

    On August 14, 2002, North Carolina submitted a SIP revision to EPA containing changes to its Section 1400 NOX rules. The submission included changes to Rule .1401—“Definitions”; .1403—“Compliance Schedules”; .1413—“Sources Not Otherwise Listed in This Section”; .1414—“Tune-up Requirements”; and .1423—“Large Internal Combustion Engines” as well as changes to other rules not related to today's proposed action. The submittal again included a rule entitled “.1406 Utility Boilers (Repealed)” with no regulatory text. North Carolina took these rule changes to hearing on May 21, 2001, and June 5, 2001. EPA did not act on the August 14, 2002, submittal.

    On June 5, 2017, North Carolina withdrew its August 14, 2002, SIP submittal and resubmitted the changes to Rules .1401, .1403, .1413, .1414, and .1423 contained in the 2002 submittal along with the repeal of Rule .1406. The June 5, 2017, submittal relies on the hearing record associated with the August 14, 2002, submittal because the rule text is identical. On June 28, 2018, North Carolina supplemented its June 5, 2017, submittal to acknowledge that Rules .1413 and .1414 are not in the SIP.

    II. Analysis of North Carolina's June 5, 2017, Submittal and June 28, 2018, Supplement

    EPA has reviewed the June 5, 2017, submittal, as supplemented on June 28, 2018, and proposes to act on Rules .1401, .1413, and .1414 and not to act on Rules .1403, .1406, and .1423, as discussed below.2

    2 On June 5, 2017, NCDAQ submitted a SIP revision addressing Rules .1407—“Boilers and Indirect-Fired Process Heaters” and .1408—“Stationary Combustion Turbines” that is separate from the SIP revision that EPA is proposing to act on today. On August 14, 2002, and again on November 19, 2008, NCDAQ submitted amendments to Rules .1407 and .1408 along with many other rule amendments. NCDAQ's intention, as outlined in its June 5, 2017, SIP submittal for Rules .1407 and .1408, was to withdraw the November 19, 2008, submittal related to these rules. However, EPA already approved the portion of the November 19, 2008, submittal related to Rules .1407 and .1408 on May 9, 2013. See 78 FR 27065.

    a. Rule .1401—“Definitions”

    North Carolina modified Rule .1401 to clarify which definitions outside of the rule apply to Section .1400, including definitions from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as discussed below; add a definition of “combustion turbine”; revise several existing definitions; and renumber the paragraphs within the rule. The State added the definition of “combustion turbine” from 40 CFR 96.2—“an enclosed fossil or other fuel-fired device that is comprised of a compressor, a combustor, and a turbine, and in which the flue gas resulting from the combustion of fuel in the combustor passes through the turbine, rotating the turbine”—for consistency with the federal rule. The revised definitions are discussed below.

    North Carolina modified the definition of “reasonable effort” to replace the term “optimization of” with “utilization” in the phrase “`Reasonable effort' means the proper installation of technology designed to meet the requirements of Rule .1407, .1408, or .1409 of this Section and the optimization of this technology, according to the manufacturer's recommendations or other similar guidance for not less than six months, in an effort to meet the applicable limitation for a source.” Given the limited applicability of the provision, the continued requirement to follow manufacturers' recommendations or other similar guidance, the fact that it was state effective in 2002, and the lack of nonattainment areas in the State for any criteria pollutant, EPA does not believe that incorporating the revision into the SIP will interfere with any applicable requirement regarding attainment and reasonable further progress or any other applicable CAA requirement.

    Under the SIP-approved definitions of “emergency generator” and “emergency use internal combustion engines,” subject internal combustion engines are included only during the loss of primary power at the facility that is beyond the control of the owner or operator of the facility or during maintenance “when necessary to protect the environment.” In its June 5, 2017, SIP revision, North Carolina replaced the phrase “when necessary to protect the environment” with the phrase “when maintenance is being performed on the power supply to equipment that is essential in protecting the environment or to such equipment itself.” EPA believes that this is a clarifying change and therefore does not relax the rule.

    The State made a number of additional clarifying changes. North Carolina reworded the definition of “fossil fuel fired” to clarify that the term applies to certain sources where fossil fuel is combusted either alone or in combustion with other fuel. The definition of “ozone season” is revised in the submittal to clarify that it begins on May 31 and ends on September 30 for 2004 and begins on May 1 and ends on September 30 for all other years. The definitions of “seasonal energy input” and “seasonal energy output” are also revised to clarify that they cover the period beginning on May 1 and ending on September 30. In addition, the State clarified that the definitions in 15A NCAC 2D .0101 from the general definitions and references section of Chapter 2D apply to Section 1400 (unless there is a conflict, in which case the definitions in Rule .1401 control) as well as N.C.G.S. 143-121 and 143-213, the definitions in the governing state air statute. The State also added paragraph (b) stating that whenever reference is made to the CFR, the definitions in the CFR apply unless specifically stated otherwise. These clarifying changes do not alter the meaning of these definitions.

    b. Section .1403—“Compliance Schedules”

    The version of Rule .1403 included in the June 5, 2017, SIP revision was state effective in 2002. However, on January 31, 2008, the State submitted a SIP revision to EPA containing a version of the rule that was state effective on July 1, 2007. EPA approved the portion of that SIP revision regarding Rule .1403 and incorporated the July 1, 2007, version of the rule into the SIP on May 9, 2013 (78 FR 27065). Because the later version of the rule superseded the July 15, 2002, version contained in the June 5, 2017, SIP revision, EPA is not taking action on the portion of the submittal regarding Rule .1403.

    c. Rule .1406—“Utility Boilers (Repealed)”

    The June 5, 2017, SIP revision includes a rule entitled “.1406 Utility Boilers (Repealed)” with no regulatory text. EPA is not proposing to act on Rule .1406 because the rule contains no regulatory text and because Rule .1406 is not in the SIP.

    d. Rule .1413—“Sources Not Otherwise Listed in This Section”

    Rule .1413 requires subject sources of NOX other than boilers, indirect-fired process heaters, stationary combustion turbines, and stationary internal combustion engines at facilities with a potential to emit of 100 tons per year or more of NOX or 560 pounds per calendar day or more from May 1 through September 30 to apply Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT). The rule also requires owners or operators of such sources to submit certain information to the State, including a proposed limitation for consideration as RACT, and requires the Director to approve the proposed limitation if he finds that the source has submitted all of the necessary information, the source is covered under the rule, and that the proposed limitation is RACT for the source.

    The June 5, 2017, SIP revision identified changes to Rule .1413 in a redline/strikeout format; however, EPA has never incorporated Rule .1413 into the SIP. Therefore, on June 28, 2018, North Carolina supplemented its submittal with a revised redline/strikeout version of the rule acknowledging that none of the rule text is in the SIP. EPA is now proposing to incorporate Rule .1413 into the SIP because the rule imposes NOX emissions controls on sources in the State and is thus a SIP strengthening measure.

    e. Rule .1414—“Tune-up Requirements”

    Rule .1414 provides tune-up requirements for certain boilers, indirect-fired process heaters, and stationary internal combustion engines. Owners and operators with equipment subject to the rule must perform tune-ups at least annually in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations and maintain records of the tune-ups.

    The June 5, 2017, SIP revision identified changes to Rule .1414 in a redline/strikeout format; however, EPA has never incorporated Rule .1414 into the SIP. Therefore, on June 28, 2018, North Carolina supplemented its submittal with a revised redline/strikeout version of the rule acknowledging that none of the rule text is in the SIP. EPA is now proposing to incorporate Rule .1414 into the SIP because the rule imposes maintenance requirements on certain NOX emitting equipment in the State to ensure proper operation and is thus a SIP strengthening measure.

    f. Rule .1423—“Large Internal Combustion Engines”

    EPA is not proposing to act on the changes to Rule .1423 at this time.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference North Carolina regulations 15 NCAC 02D .1401—“Definitions,” modified to clarify which definitions outside of the rule apply to Section .1400, including definitions from the CFR, add a definition for “combustion turbine,” modify the definition of “reasonable effort,” “emergency generator,” “emergency use internal combustion engines,” “fossil fuel fired,” “ozone season,” “seasonal energy input” and “seasonal energy output,” and renumber the paragraphs within the rule, state effective on July 15, 2002; .1413—“Sources Not Otherwise Listed in This Section,” which includes rules for NOX sources not otherwise listed in section .1400, state effective on July 18, 2002; and .1414—“Tune-Up Requirements,” which includes tune-up requirements for certain boilers, indirect-fired process heaters and stationary internal combustion engines, state effective on July 18, 2002. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).

    IV. Proposed Action

    Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is proposing to approve the aforementioned changes to the North Carolina SIP. EPA has evaluated the relevant portions of North Carolina's June 5, 2017, SIP revision, as supplemented on June 28, 2018, and is proposing to determine that they meet the applicable requirements of the CAA and its implementing regulations.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: October 25, 2018. Onis “Trey” Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24179 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0213, EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0767, EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0426; FRL-9986-17-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; KY; Minor Sources Infrastructure Requirement for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions of three State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions, submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Energy and Environment Cabinet, Department for Environmental Protection, through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ) on April 26, 2013 (two submissions), and February 8, 2016. The submissions address requirements for implementation of the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), and 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). When EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires the state to make a new SIP submission establishing that the existing SIP meets the various applicable requirements, or revising the SIP to meet those requirements. This type of SIP submission is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure” SIP. In this proposed action, EPA is proposing to approve the portions of these infrastructure SIP submissions from Kentucky that relate to the minor source program requirements for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0213, EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0767, EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0426 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or the telephone number (404) 562-9031.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Under section 110 of the CAA, states are required to have SIPs that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. States are further required to make a SIP submission meeting the applicable requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) within three years of EPA promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.1 EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as “infrastructure SIP” submissions. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address basic SIP elements such as for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the newly established or revised NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs; section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for infrastructure SIPs related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. The contents of an infrastructure SIP submission may vary depending upon the data and analytical tools available to the state, as well as the provisions already contained in the state's implementation plan at the time in which the state develops and submits the submission for a new or revised NAAQS.

    1See EPA's May 10, 2017, action proposing to approve other portions of Kentucky's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for a discussion of EPA's general approach to reviewing infrastructure SIP submittals. 82 FR 21751.

    This action pertains to one of the requirements of section 110(a)(2) that is relevant in the context of a state's development, and EPA's evaluation of, infrastructure SIP submissions: the minor source requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C). Specifically, this action pertains to the Kentucky infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2012 annual primary PM2.5, 2010 primary NO2, and 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. All other applicable infrastructure requirements for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS for Kentucky are being or have been addressed in separate rulemakings.

    A brief background regarding the NAAQS relevant to today's proposal is provided below. For comprehensive information on these NAAQS, please refer to the Federal Register rulemakings cited below.

    a. 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS

    On December 14, 2012 (78 FR 3086, January 15, 2013), EPA revised the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The standard was strengthened from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) to 12.0 μg/m3. States were required to submit infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than December 14, 2015. For the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA is proposing to approve the minor source element of the infrastructure SIP submission submitted by KDAQ on February 8, 2016.2

    2 EPA approved portions of Kentucky's February 8, 2016, PM2.5 infrastructure submission in a separate action. See 82 FR 37012 (August 8, 2017). EPA has not yet acted on the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.

    b. 2010 NO2 NAAQS

    On January 22, 2010 (75 FR 6474, February 9, 2010), EPA established a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. States were required to submit infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than January 22, 2013. For the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, EPA is proposing to approve the minor source element of the infrastructure SIP submission submitted by KDAQ on April 26, 2013.3

    3 EPA approved portions of Kentucky's April 26, 2013, NO2 infrastructure submission in separate actions. See 81 FR 83152 (November 21, 2016), and 80 FR 14019 (March 18, 2015). EPA has not yet acted on the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4) for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

    c. 2010 SO2 NAAQS

    On June 2, 2010 (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010), EPA revised the primary SO2 NAAQS to an hourly standard at a level of 75 ppb, based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. States were required to submit infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS (“2010 SO2 NAAQS”) to EPA no later than June 2, 2013. For the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, EPA is proposing to approve the minor source element of the infrastructure SIP submission submitted by KDAQ on April 26, 2013.4

    4 EPA approved portions of Kentucky's April 26, 2013, SO2 infrastructure submission in a separate action. See 81 FR 87817 (December 6, 2016). EPA has not yet acted on the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4) for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

    II. What are States required to address under section 110(a)(2)(C) related to the minor sources element?

    Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to “include a program to provide for the enforcement of the measures described in subparagraph (A) [i.e., enforceable emission limitations and measures], and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that the [NAAQS] are achieved, including the permit program as required in parts C and D of this subchapter.” Generally, EPA summarizes the requirements of 110(a)(2)(C) as requiring that SIPs address three components: enforcement, state-wide regulation of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources; and prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permitting of major sources and major modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the PSD program).5 EPA is proposing action only on the minor source program element of 110(a)(2)(C) for Kentucky's infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

    5 EPA has long noted that a literal reading of the statutory provision to meet all requirements of section 110(a)(2) on the schedule provided in section 110(a)(1) would create a conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of Title I of the CAA, which specifically address nonattainment area SIP requirements. See id. at 4. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C), in part, pertains to the permit program required in part D of the CAA, which are nonattainment SIP requirements. The provisions in section 172(b) for submission of such plans for nonattainment areas differ from the timing requirements for an infrastructure SIP submission under 110(a)(1). Thus, rather than applying all the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict, literal sense, EPA has determined that certain provisions like the part D permit program requirements in 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(I) are not applicable for a particular infrastructure SIP submission. See generally “Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),” Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013 (hereinafter, “2013 Guidance”), at 4-5, 24, and 52.

    EPA rules addressing SIP requirements for pre-construction regulatory programs that apply to minor sources and minor modifications are at 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.164. Pursuant the 2013 guidance, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to the minor source requirements in section 110(a)(2)(C) focuses on assuring that the state's SIP meets basic minor source program requirements. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has identified existing EPA-approved SIP provisions (or submitted for approval new provisions) containing requirements for minor sources and minor modifications (minor new source review (NSR) program) and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS.6

    6 2013 Guidance at 24.

    III. What is EPA's analysis of how Kentucky addressed section 110(a)(2)(C) related to the minor sources element?

    On April 26, 2013, and February 8, 2016, KDAQ submitted infrastructure SIP submissions to EPA that addressed the minor source element of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the pollutants relevant to the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS, in addition to other infrastructure SIP requirements. KDAQ also provided clarifying information to EPA on December 18, 2017, and May 2, 2018, describing Kentucky's suite of SIP-approved regulations which comprise the basic structural elements of the minor source program in the Commonwealth.7 Specifically, the Commonwealth cited to the following Kentucky Administrative Regulations (KAR) under title 401 to meet the minor source SIP requirements: Kentucky's NSR permitting regulations are found at 401 KAR 51:001, Definitions of Chapter 51; 401 KAR 51:017, Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality; and 401 KAR 51:052, Review of new sources in or impacting upon nonattainment areas. Kentucky addresses requirements for public participation and public availability of information through 401 KAR 52:100, Public, affected state, and U.S. EPA review. 401 KAR 50:060, Enforcement, establishes legally enforceable procedures. Air dispersion modeling requirements under the NSR permitting process are addressed in 401 KAR 51:017; 401 KAR 51:052; and 401 KAR 50:040, Air quality models. 401 KAR 50:065, Conformity of general federal actions, sets forth procedures for determining the conformity of general federal actions to the Kentucky SIP and requires consultation between federal government and state government, and, as applicable, any local agency. 401 KAR 50:042, Good engineering practice stack height, addresses stack height requirements. Further, Kentucky's May 2, 2018, correspondence describes how minor sources are evaluated in the NSR permitting process, including how these sources are incorporated into NSR air dispersion modeling analyses as relevant to each case.

    7 Kentucky correspondence to EPA dated December 18, 2017, and May 2, 2018, are in each of the dockets for this action under “Proposed Rule-2.”

    Based on the information Kentucky provided in its SIP submissions dated February 8, 2016, and April 26, 2013, and clarified in correspondence to EPA dated December 18, 2017, and May 2, 2018, EPA is proposing to determine Kentucky has a SIP-approved minor NSR program that addresses the pollutants relevant to the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA has therefore made the preliminary determination that Kentucky's SIP satisfies section 110(a)(2)(C) for new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources related to the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

    IV. Proposed Action

    As described above, EPA is proposing to approve the portions of the infrastructure SIP submissions from Kentucky dated February 8, 2016, and April 26, 2013, addressing the minor source requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA is proposing approval of the minor source portions of these submissions because they are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: October 25, 2018. Onis “Trey” Glen, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24203 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 282 [EPA-R08-UST-2018-0169; FRL-9982-20-Region 8] Utah: Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program Revisions, Codification, and Incorporation by Reference AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA or Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the State of Utah's Underground Storage Tank (UST) program submitted by the State. This action is based on EPA's determination that the State's revisions satisfy all requirements for UST program approval. This action also proposes to codify Utah's state program as revised by Utah and approved by the EPA and to incorporate by reference the State regulations that we have determined meet the requirements for approval. The State's federally-authorized and codified UST program, as revised pursuant to this action, will remain subject to the EPA's inspection and enforcement authorities under sections 9005 and 9006 of RCRA subtitle I and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.

    DATES:

    Send written comments by December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments by one of the following methods:

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

    2. Email: [email protected]

    3. Mail: Matthew Langenfeld, Region 8, Project Officer, UST, Solid Waste and PCB Unit, Resource Conservation and Recovery Program, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance (8P-R), EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.

    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Matthew Langenfeld, Region 8, Project Officer, UST, Solid Waste and PCB Unit, Resource Conservation and Recovery Program, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance (8P-R), EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-UST-2018-0169. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov, or email. The federal http://www.regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties, and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    You can view and copy the documents that form the basis for this action and associated publicly available materials from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday at the following location: EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, phone number (303) 312-6284. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 2 days in advance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Matthew Langenfeld, (303) 312-6284, Region 8, Project Officer, UST, Solid Waste and PCB Unit, Resource Conservation and Recovery Program, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory Assistance (8P-R), EPA Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, phone number (303) 312-6284, email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For additional information, see the direct final rule published in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register.

    Authority:

    This rule is issued under the authority of Sections 2002(a), 9004, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912, 6991c, 6991d, and 6991e.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 282

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by Reference, State program approval, Underground storage tanks.

    Dated: October 26, 2018. Douglas Benevento, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24061 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0010; 4500030114] RIN 1018-BD54 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Spring Pygmy Sunfish AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; revision and reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the reopening of the comment period on our October 2, 2012, proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the spring pygmy sunfish (Elassoma alabamae), under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In this document, we propose to add one critical habitat unit (123 hectares (ha) (303 acres (ac)) in Madison County, Alabama, to the critical habitat designation. As a result, our proposed revised critical habitat designation for the species now includes three critical habitat units, totaling approximately 749 ha (1,852 ac), in Alabama. This reopened comment period will provide the public with an opportunity to submit written comments on both the revision described in this document and the October 2, 2012, proposed rule, as well as intervening relevant publications. Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted, as they will be fully considered in preparation of the final rule.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed rule published October 2, 2012, at 77 FR 60180 is reopened. We will consider comments received or postmarked on or before December 5, 2018. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date.

    ADDRESSES:

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

    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R4-ES-2013-0010, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the Search button. On the resulting page, in the Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, click on the Proposed Rule box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!”

    (2) By hard copy: Submit your comments by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2013-0010, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    We request that you send comments only by methods described above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see Public Comments, below, for more details).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Pearson, Field Supervisor, Alabama Ecological Services Field Office, 1208 Main Street, Daphne, AL 36526; telephone 251-441-5181. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Comments

    We will accept written comments and information during this reopened comment period on our proposed designation of critical habitat for the spring pygmy sunfish that was published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2012 (77 FR 60180); the revision to the proposed boundaries of Unit 1 described in our April 29, 2013, Federal Register publication (78 FR 25033); the potential exclusions to the designation that we described in our February 5, 2014, Federal Register publication (79 FR 6871); and the new proposed Unit 3 that is described in this document. We will consider information and recommendations we receive from all interested parties. We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will be based on the best scientific data available and be as accurate and effective as possible.

    We request comments or information from any interested party on any aspect of the proposed designation. However, we particularly seek comments concerning:

    (1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitats as “critical habitat” under section 4 of the Act, including whether there are threats to the species from human activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit of designation such that the designation of critical habitat is not prudent.

    (2) Land use designation and current or planned activities in the subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.

    If you submitted comments or information on the proposed rule during the initial comment period from October 2, 2012, to December 3, 2012; during the second comment period from April 29, 2013, to May 29, 2013; or during the third comment period from February 5, 2014, to March 7, 2014, please do not resubmit them. We have incorporated them into the public record as part of the previous three comment periods, and we will fully consider them in the preparation of our final determination.

    You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire comment—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the website. We will post all hardcopy comments on http://regulations.gov as well. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing the proposed rule, are available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0010, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alabama Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Background Species Information

    For information on the spring pygmy sunfish's biology, status, distribution, and habitat, refer to the October 12, 2012, proposed listing and critical habitat rule (77 FR 60180), and the October 2, 2013, final listing rule (78 FR 60766).

    Previous Federal Actions

    On October 2, 2012, we published a proposed rule (77 FR 60180) to list the spring pygmy sunfish as a threatened species and to designate critical habitat for the species. In that proposed rule, we proposed to designate two critical habitat units, totaling approximately 12.9 kilometers (km) (8 stream miles (mi)) and 654.4 hectares (ha) (1,617 acres (ac)) of spring system habitat and adjacent upland buffer in Limestone County, Alabama. Previous Federal actions occurring before October 2, 2012, are summarized in that proposed rule.

    On April 29, 2013, we published a document (78 FR 25033) reopening the comment period on the proposed listing and critical habitat for 30 days. That document requested public comments on amendments to the required determinations section of the October 2, 2012, proposal, the draft economic analysis, and a proposed reduction in the size of the critical habitat designation based on information we received during the original public comment period. Specifically, we proposed to reduce the size of Unit 1 by 27.3 ha (67.6 ac), resulting in a proposed critical habitat designation totaling approximately 12.9 km (8 stream mi) and 627.02 ha (1,549.4 ac).

    On October 2, 2013, we published a final rule (78 FR 60766) listing the spring pygmy sunfish as a threatened species.

    On February 5, 2014, we again reopened the comment period, for an additional 30 days, on the proposed designation of critical habitat to announce exclusions we are considering to proposed critical habitat Unit 1 (79 FR 6871). In that document, we asked for public comments on excluding lands enrolled in candidate conservation agreements with assurances (CCAAs) in accordance with section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Specifically, we are considering excluding all areas covered by the Belle Mina Farms Ltd., McDonald Farm, and Horton Farm CCAAs based on our partnerships with the landowners and the conservation benefits that these agreements afford the spring pygmy sunfish. We will make the final determination on these exclusions in our final rule.

    Critical Habitat

    It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to the designation of critical habitat for the spring pygmy sunfish in this document.

    Section 3 of the Act defines critical habitat as the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or biological features (PBFs) essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection, and specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. If the proposed rule is made final, section 7 of the Act will prohibit destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat by any activity funded, authorized, or carried out by any Federal agency. Federal agencies proposing actions affecting critical habitat must consult with us on the effects of their proposed actions, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act.

    Evaluation of a Documented New Population of Spring Pygmy Sunfish

    In November 2015, surveys conducted by the Geologic Survey of Alabama (GSA) and Service employees on Wheeler National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in Madison County, Alabama, verified a new population of spring pygmy sunfish in Blackwell Swamp following the documentation of the species at the swamp in September 2015, by researchers from Jacksonville State University. The discovery of the new population is significant because it occurs outside the Beaverdam Spring complex, the only known occupied site on October 2, 2013, when we listed the spring pygmy sunfish as a threatened species under the Act, and increases the number of known metapopulations from one to two. Based on new information gathered during the November 2015 survey, we are revising the proposed designation of critical habitat to include a new unit (Unit 3) in Madison County, Alabama. This new unit contains all of the PBFs for the spring pygmy sunfish. Because of the limited range of the spring pygmy sunfish, we have determined that the new population in Blackwell Swamp and its associated habitat is essential to the conservation of the species and may require special management considerations or protection. A map of proposed Unit 3 appears under Proposed Regulation Promulgation, below.

    Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

    Based on the above information, we are proposing to revise the proposed critical habitat designation to include Blackwell Swamp as Unit 3. We provide occupancy and ownership tables below that include information on all three proposed critical habitat units.

    Table 1—Occupancy of the Proposed Critical Habitat Units for the Spring Pygmy Sunfish Unit Location Occupied? 1 Beaverdam Spring/Creek Yes. 2 Pryor Spring/Branch No. 3 Blackwell Swamp/Run Yes. Table 2—Ownership of the Proposed Critical Habitat Units for the Spring Pygmy Sunfish Unit Location Private ownership km (mi); ha (ac) Federal ownership km (mi); ha (ac) Total length km (mi) Total area ha (ac) 1 Beaverdam Spring/Creek 5.9 (3.7); 210 (518) 3.5 (2.21); 344 (849) 9.5 (5.9) 553 (1,367) 2 Pryor Spring/Branch 0.2 (0.15); 8.1 (20) 3.1 (1.95); 65 (162) 3.4 (2.1) 73 (182) 3 Blackwell Swamp/Run 0; 0 2.3 (1.4); 123 (303) 2.3 (1.4) 123 (303) Total 6.1 (3.85); 218 (538) 8.8 (5.56); 532 (1,314) 15.2 (9.4) 749 (1,852) * Totals may not sum due to rounding.

    We present a brief description of Unit 3, and reasons why it meets the definition of critical habitat, below.

    Unit 3: Blackwell Swamp/Run, Madison County, Alabama

    Unit 3 includes a total of 123 ha (303 ac) of Federal land and 2.3 stream km (1.4 mi), all of which is federally owned within the Wheeler NWR in Madison County, Alabama. This unit is located about 4.3 km (2.7 mi) due west of the town of Triana. This unit is 0.96 km (0.6 mi) north of Blackwell Run's confluence with the Tennessee River; approximately 1 km (0.5 mi) south of Swancott Road SW; about 1 km (0.5 mi) west of Landess Circle; and just to the east of B. Road/County Line Road SW. Unit 3 is currently occupied by spring pygmy sunfish and contains all the PBFs essential to the species' survival and eventual recovery. Unit 3 provides habitat for the spring pygmy sunfish via the spring systems of Blackwell Swamp, which include spring runs and a large spring-fed pool that was enlarged after Blackwell Spring Run was impounded (PBF 1).

    There is adequate water quality (PBF 2), water quantity and flow (PBF 3), and a diversity of emergent vegetation (PBF 4) to support the normal life stages and behavior of the spring pygmy sunfish and its prey sources (PBF 4).

    Wheeler NWR actively manages water levels in proposed Unit 3 to enhance use by waterfowl. The water in the unit is replenished by surface flow from runoff, a small stream in the northeast corner, and numerous spring seeps of the Blackwell Spring system. The Tennessee River does not influence the spring pool unless allowed to enter the pool through the water control structure, which may occur in the course of waterfowl management. During flood conditions, water inundates and enters secondary channels and sloughs located to the south and southeastern portion of the unit and flows in a southerly direction with the spring run, sometimes overtopping the roads on the west and east side of the unit.

    Threats to the spring pygmy sunfish and its habitat in Unit 3 that may require special management or protection of the PBFs include structures, such as boat ramps; an unpaved, gravel-maintained, refuge road (11.7 km; 7.3 mi) circling the unit; and sewer, gas, and water easements, including a City of Huntsville sewer line right-of-way to the east. Additional threats outside and adjacent to the unit include increased agriculture, urbanization, and industrialization activities (such as channel modification for flood control, construction of impoundments, and water extraction) that significantly alter spring flow regime and water quality and quantity; inadequate stormwater management; water diversion; significant changes in streambed material composition and quality as a result of construction projects and maintenance activities that damage or destroy aquatic vegetation and vegetation in the riparian zone; off-road vehicle use; bridge and road construction and maintenance, and culvert and pipe placement; and other watershed and floodplain disturbances that release sediments or nutrients into the water. Many threats that result in decreased water quality and quantity are likely to be amplified during drought events.

    Consideration of Economic Impacts

    The spring pygmy sunfish occurs in Unit 3, which is entirely within Wheeler NWR. In areas where the spring pygmy sunfish is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult with the Service under section 7 of the Act on activities they authorize, fund, or carry out that may affect the species. If we finalize the proposed critical habitat designation, measures to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat would be incorporated into the existing consultation process for refuge activities. Therefore, the draft economic analysis prepared for Unit 1 and Unit 2 (78 FR 25033) is not significantly affected by the addition of Unit 3 in proposed critical habitat.

    Authors

    The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the Alabama Ecological Services Field Office.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to further amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to be amended at 77 FR 60180 (October 2, 2012) as set forth below:

    PART 17—ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Amend § 17.95(e) by revising paragraph (5) in, and adding a paragraph (8) to, the entry proposed at 77 FR 60180 for “Spring Pygmy Sunfish (Elassoma alabamae)” as set forth below:
    § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife.

    (e) Fishes.

    Spring Pygmy Sunfish (Elassoma alabamae)

    (5) Index map of critical habitat for the spring pygmy sunfish follows:

    BILLING CODE 4333-15-P EP05NO18.008

    (8) Unit 3: Blackwell Swamp/Run, Madison County, Alabama.

    (i) General Description: Unit 3 includes a total of 123 ha (303 ac) of land and 2.3 stream km (1.4 stream mi), all which is federally owned within the Wheeler National Wildlife Refuge. Unit 3 is located approximately 4.3 km (2.7 mi) due west of the town of Triana. This unit is 0.96 km (0.6 mi) north of Blackwell Run's confluence with the Tennessee River; approximately 1 km (0.5 mi) south of Swancott Road SW; about 1 km (0.5 mi) west of Landess Circle; and just to the east of B. Road/County Line Road SW.

    (ii) Map of Unit 3 follows:

    EP05NO18.009
    Dated: August 14, 2018. James W. Kurth, Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Exercising the Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24162 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
    83 214 Monday, November 5, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of the Census (U.S. Census Bureau) is giving notice of a meeting of the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee (FESAC). The Committee advises the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, the Directors of the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) and the Census Bureau, and the Commissioner of the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on statistical methodology and other technical matters related to the collection, tabulation, and analysis of federal economic statistics. If you plan to attend the meeting, please register by Friday, December 7, 2018. You may access the online registration form with the following link: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/federal-economic-statistics-advisory-committee-fesac-meeting-tickets-51549926217. Seating is available to the public on a first-come, first-served basis. An agenda will be accessible before the meeting at the following link: https://www.census.gov/fesac.

    DATES:

    December 14, 2018. The meeting will begin at approximately 9:00 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 4:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the U.S. Census Bureau Conference Center, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Suitland, MD 20746.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    James R. Spletzer, Designated Federal Official, Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Research and Methodology Directorate, Room 5K175, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233, telephone 301-763-4069, email: [email protected] For TTY callers, please call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and give them the above listed number. This service is free and confidential.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the FESAC are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce. The Committee advises the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, the Directors of the BEA and the Census Bureau, and the Commissioner of the Department of Labor's BLS on statistical methodology and other technical matters related to the collection, tabulation, and analysis of federal economic statistics. The Committee is established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5, United States Code, Appendix 2).

    The meeting is open to the public, and a brief period is set aside for public comments and questions. Persons with extensive questions or statements must submit them in writing at least three days before the meeting to the Designated Federal Official named above.

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should also be directed to the Designated Federal Official as soon as known, and preferably two weeks prior to the meeting.

    Due to security protocols and for access to the meeting, please call 301-763-9906 upon arrival at the Census Bureau on the day of the meeting. A photo identification must be presented in order to receive your visitor's badge. Visitors are not allowed beyond the first floor.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Ron S. Jarmin, Deputy Director, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24063 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-868] Large Residential Washers From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that LG Electronics, Inc. (LGE) did not make sales of large residential washers at prices below normal value (NV) during the February 1, 2017, through January 31, 2018, period of review. We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 5, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Goldberger, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4136.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are all large residential washers and certain subassemblies thereof from Korea. The products are currently classifiable under subheadings 8450.20.0040 and 8450.20.0080 of the Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (HTSUS). Products subject to this order may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive.1

    1 For a full description of the scope of the order, see Memorandum “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 2017-2018 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Residential Washers from Korea,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Methodology

    Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price and constructed export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. NV is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to this notice.

    Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, Commerce preliminarily determines that a weighted-average margin of 0.00 percent exists for LGE for the period February 1, 2017, through January 31, 2018.

    Disclosure and Public Comment

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed to parties in this segment of the proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than 30 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results, unless the Secretary alters the time limit.2 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the deadline for case briefs.3 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    2See 19 CFR 351.309(c).

    3See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number; the number of participants; and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined.4 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    4See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    All submissions, with limited exceptions, must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the due date. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the APO/Dockets Unit in Room 18022 and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 5 p.m. ET on the due date.

    Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless the deadline is extended.5

    5See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.6

    6See 19 CFR 351.212(b).

    We will calculate importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the examined sales to that importer. Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c), or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.7 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.8

    7See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8103 (February 14, 2012).

    8See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act.

    We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for LGE will be the rate established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 11.80 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation.9 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    9See Large Residential Washers From Mexico and the Republic of Korea: Antidumping Duty Orders, 78 FR 11148, 11150 (February 15, 2013).

    Notification to Importers

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

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: October 29, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Discussion of the Methodology A. Comparisons to Normal Value 1. Determination of Comparison Method 2. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis B. Product Comparisons C. Export Price and Constructed Export Price D. Normal Value 1. Home Market Viability and Selection of Comparison Market 2. Affiliated Party Transactions and Arm's-Length Test 3. Level of Trade E. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of COP 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 3. Results of the COP Test F. Calculation of NV Based on Comparison Market Prices G. Calculation of NV Based on CV H. Currency Conversion V. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2018-24144 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Estuarine Research Reserve System AGENCY:

    Stewardship Division, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of approval for the Jacques Cousteau, New Jersey National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan revision.

    SUMMARY:

    Under applicable Federal regulations, notice is hereby given that the Stewardship Division, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce approves the revised Management Plan for the Jacques Cousteau, New Jersey National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan. In accordance with applicable Federal regulations, the Jacques Cousteau Reserve revised its Management Plan, which will replace the plan previously approved in 2009.

    The revised Management Plan outlines the administrative structure; the research/monitoring, stewardship, education, and training programs of the Reserve; and the plans for future land acquisition and facility development to support Reserve operations.

    The Jacques Cousteau Reserve takes an integrated approach to management, linking research, education, coastal training, and stewardship functions. The Reserve has outlined how it will manage administration and its core program providing detailed actions that will enable it to accomplish specific goals and objectives. Since the last management plan, the reserve has: Developed core programs; expanded monitoring programs within Jacques Cousteau and its watershed; enhanced exhibits and trails; provided technical assistance to coastal communities throughout the state of New Jersey, conducted training workshops; implemented K-12 education programs; and built new and innovative partnerships with local, state, regional, and U.S. organizations and universities.

    On January 9, 2018, NOAA issued a notice of a thirty day public comment period for the Jacques Cousteau Reserve revised plan (83 FR 1027). Responses to the written and oral comments received, and an explanation of how comments were incorporated into the final revised plan, are available in Appendix D of the revised plan.

    The revised Management Plan will serve as the guiding document for the Jacques Cousteau Reserve. View the Jacques Cousteau Reserve Management Plan at URL: https://jcnerr.org/JCNERR_REVISEDMGMTPLAN%202018.2022.pdf.

    The impacts of the revised management plan have not changed and the initial Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared at the time of designation is still valid. NOAA has made the determination that the revision of the management plan will not have a significant effect on the human environment and therefore qualifies for a categorical exclusion under NOAA Administrative Order 216-6. An environmental assessment will not be prepared.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nina Garfield at (240) 533-0817 or Erica Seiden at (240) 533-0781 of NOAA's National Ocean Service, Stewardship Division, Office for Coastal Management, 1305 East-West Highway, N/ORM5, 10th floor, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

    Dated: October 25, 2018. Keelin Kuipers, Deputy Director, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24196 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG383 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Gustavus Ferry Terminal Improvements Project AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of an Incidental Harassment Authorization.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that we have issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take small numbers of animals, by Level A and Level B harassment, incidental to the Gustavus Ferry Terminal Improvements project in Gustavus, Alaska

    DATES:

    The authorization is effective from December 15, 2018, through December 14, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rob Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application, supporting documents, as well as the issued IHA may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

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

    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as “mitigation”); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (NDAA)(Pub. L. 108-136) removed the “small numbers” and “specified geographical region” limitations indicated above and amended the definition of “harassment” as it applies to a “military readiness activity.” The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.

    History of Request

    On July 31, 2015, NMFS received an application from the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) requesting the take of marine mammals incidental to reconstructing the existing Gustavus Ferry Terminal in Gustavus, Alaska. NMFS published a notice of proposed IHA and request for comments in the Federal Register on June 23, 2016 (81 FR 40852). We subsequently published the final notice of our issuance of the IHA on April 10, 2017 (82 FR 17209), making the IHA effective from December 15, 2017 through December 14, 2018. In-water work associated with the project was expected to be completed within the one-year timeframe of the IHA. The specified activities were expected to result in the take of seven species of marine mammals including harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli), killer whale (Orcinus orca), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), and minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata).

    On May 8, 2018, ADOT&PF informed NMFS that work on the project would be postponed due to design revisions and local community considerations and that no work would be completed under the 2017-2018 IHA. ADOT&PF requested that a new IHA be issued that would be effective from December 15, 2018 through December 14, 2019. NMFS published a notice of a proposed IHA and request for comments in the Federal Register on August 9, 2018 (83 FR 39424). Under this IHA, ADOT&PF will conduct pile driving activities between the in water work window dates of March 1 through May 31, 2019, and September 1 through November 30, 2019. Although there were minor modifications to the work plan covered under the issued IHA, the number of authorized takes remains unchanged from those listed in the 2017-2018 Authorization.

    Description of the Specified Activities

    The 2018-2019 IHA covers the same in-water construction activities as those covered by the 2017-2018 IHA which was issued for the modernization of the Gustavus Ferry Terminal project. Minor revisions have been made to the number and types of piles that will be installed and removed. These revisions were described by NMFS in a notice of proposed IHA and request for comments published in the Federal Register on August 9, 2018 (83 FR 39424). Additionally, NMFS refers the reader to the documents related to the previously issued 2017-2018 IHA for more detailed description of the project activities. These previous documents include the Federal Register notice of the issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA for ADOT&PF's Gustavus Ferry Terminal Improvements project (82 FR 17209; April 10, 2017), ADOT&PF's application, the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (81 FR 40852; June 23, 2016) and all associated references and documents. A detailed description of the planned vibratory and impact pile driving activities at the ferry terminal improvements project is found in these documents. The description remains accurate with the exception of the minor modifications noted below.

    Differences between the 2017-2018 IHA and the issued 2018-2019 IHA are shown in Table 1. Generally speaking, pile driving and removal will occur over the same number of days (maximum of 50) with installation and removal of 16 additional piles over 21 additional hours for the 2018-2019 IHA. These changes represent a 3.5 percent increase in the number of piles installed and a 21.9 percent increase in the number of piles removed. The duration of impact driving will remain the same while the time spent vibratory driving will increase by 18.4 percent. The additional time required for vibratory driving is due to the increase in anticipated number of piles removed. Note that these changes will have a nominal impact on the calculated Level A harassment isopleths and no effect on Level B harassment isopleths. Therefore, the size of the Level A harassment and Level B harassment zones remains unchanged.

    Table 1—Gustavus Ferry Pile Installation and Removal Summary Pile size (Inches) # of piles—2017-2018 IHA # of piles—2018-2019 IHA 30 14 18. 24 40 34 install/12 remove. 18 0 4 remove. 16 0 4 install/4 remove. 12.75 3 install/16 remove 3 install/9 remove. Total installed/total Piles 57/73 59/89. Driving Time Duration 2017-2018 IHA (hours) 2018-2019 IHA (hours). Impact Driving 57 57. Vibratory Driving 114 135. Total 171 192.

    A description of ADOT&PF's planned project is provided in the Federal Register notice for proposed IHA (83 FR 39424; August 9, 2018). Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice and related documents for the description of the specific activity.

    Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the Federal Register on August 9, 2018 (83 FR 39424). That notice described ADOT&PF's proposed activity, the marine mammal species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received a single comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission). Specific comments from the Commission's letter and corresponding responses are provided below.

    Comment 1: The Commission wrote that in the original IHA application submitted in 2016, ADOT&PF proposed to use 154.3 decibels (dB) re 1 micropascal (µPa) at 10 meters (m) as the proxy source level (SL) for vibratory pile driving of 30-inch steel piles based on measurement of a single pile obtained at the ferry terminal in Kake, Alaska (McGillivray et al. 2015). The Commission noted that this measurement is much lower than other measurements obtained from vibratory pile driving of 30-in steel piles at other locations and lower than measurements obtained from another pile at Kake. The Commission asserts that the primary factor affecting the source level is the sediment composition, which at Kake consists of organic mud. However, Starkes and Stutes (2016) stated that geotechnical reports indicated that substrates at Kake and Gustavus differ and that substrates at Gustavus are composed primarily of sand and silty sands. The Commission recommended use of a mean of 166 dB re 1 µPa based on source levels obtained at other locations where the substrates are comprised of sand and silt rather than 157.7 dB re 1 µPa at 10 m NMFS adopted for Gustavus. The Commission also recommends that NMFS re-estimate the extents of the Level A and B harassment zones accordingly and increase the numbers of marine mammal takes appropriately.

    NMFS Response: As noted above, NMFS used a proxy source level of 157.7 dB re 1 μPa for vibratory driving of 30-in steel piles during the estimated take analysis used to develop the original Gustavus IHA. ADOT&PF will be using the same type of vibratory hammers at Gustavus as were used at Kake while the pile types and sizes are comparable between the two sites. NMFS does not dispute that the SL used in the Gustavus analysis is generally lower than others that have been recorded across various sites. However, SLs for similar piles measured at different locations tend to cover a range of values. For example, SL measurements from Kodiak for vibratory driving of the same size and type of pile were even lower than those recorded at Kake, although the researchers speculated that the low values be due to the drilling/socketing of piles or sediment composition at Kodiak (Denes et al., 2017). For the Gustavus analysis, NMFS elected to use a value from the lower end of recorded ranges. In order to confirm that the SLs adopted by NMFS are appropriate for use at Gustavus, NMFS will require ADOT&PF to conduct sound source verification (SSV) testing. If the recorded SLs at Gustavus are appreciably greater than those measured at Kake, ADOT&PF will increase the shutdown and harassment zones as appropriate.

    Comment 2: The Commission recommends that NMFS require ADOT&PF to use at least three Protected Species Observers (PSO) to monitor the full extent of the Level B harassment zone during all vibratory pile-driving activities and ensure the numbers of animals taken are extrapolated to the full extent of the Level B harassment zone, if unable to be fully monitored.

    NMFS Response: NMFS believes that the existing Level B harassment zone can be adequately measured utilizing only two PSOs. The option of adding more PSOs was discussed with ADOT&PF. NMFS suggested that PSOs could be stationed on vessels or on nearby islands. However, due to the frequency, severity and unpredictability of weather in Icy Passage, ADOT&PF was reluctant to employ vessels for monitoring purposes since the safety of PSOs could be at risk. Additionally, island-based PSOs could be stranded on these uninhabited islands overnight, or longer, if retrieval vessels are unable to pick up observers due to weather conditions. NMFS concurred with these assessments. To estimate the total number of takes, NMFS will require ADOT&PF to extrapolate observed take numbers to cover the entire Level B harassment zone if portions cannot be monitored effectively by PSOs.

    Comment 3: The Commission recommends that NMFS (1) increase the numbers of Level A harassment takes for harbor seals, harbor porpoises, and Steller sea lions based on their residency patterns, social behavior, and potential to occur within the various Level A harassment zones and (2) reduce the size of the shutdown zone for Steller sea lions to reduce frequency of shutdowns.

    NMFS Response: NMFS discussed with ADOT&PF both increasing take of the species listed above and reducing the size of the Steller sea lion shutdown zone. Based on observational data collected by Gustavus, NMFS and the applicant believe that the existing take numbers are adequate. Note that ADOT&PF is currently required to shut down at 4 p.m., after which Steller sea lions are known to follow charter fishing vessels to the dock. Additionally, shutdown will occur when five or more Steller sea lions are observed following charter fishing vessels to the dock prior to 4 p.m. These are the conditions that would most likely result in take of Seller sea lions. Given these requirements, ADOT&PF and NMFS do not believe that the existing shutdown zone will result in a high rate of shutdowns.

    Comment 4: If NMFS does not follow the Commission's recommendations, the Commission recommends that NMFS require ADOT&PF to cease its activities if authorized take limits are met. The Commission recommends that the authorization only be revised after a 30-day public comment period is afforded for review of any revisions to the authorization issued in 2018. The Commission understands that in certain circumstances (e.g., unexpected impacts from El Niño conditions) the numbers of authorized takes may not be sufficient. However, the Commission does not believe those types of unforeseeable circumstances should not be treated equally to those which arise from NMFS failing to authorize adequate numbers of takes.

    NMFS Response: NMFS believes that the number of takes authorized under this IHA is adequate to cover the action planned by ADOT&PF. As is the case for any IHA, if take numbers for one or more authorized species are exceeded, the applicant is required to cease in-water pile driving activities and contact NMFS. Furthermore, NMFS is requiring ADOT&PF to conduct SSV testing to confirm that measured sound source levels at the action site are similar to the values that were used to estimate take as well identify shutdown and harassment zone sizes. As noted in the IHA, NMFS will revise shutdown and harassment zone sizes if necessary based on SSV testing results without requiring a 30-day comment period.

    Comment 5: The Commission had previously recommended that NMFS make several general improvements for pile-driving authorizations. As part of this comment letter, the Commission indicated that NMFS should (1) incorporate the Commission's various recommendations into its pile-driving assessment guidance, (2) finalize that guidance in the near term, including compiling source level data into a central database, and (3) make such guidance available on NMFS's incidental take authorization website.

    NMFS Response: NMFS appreciates the Commission's interest in improving pile-driving authorizations. NMFS has been developing pile-driving guidance documents that include many of the Commission's recommendations. As soon as draft documents have been completed, they will be shared with the Commission. Once the guidance documents have been finalized, they will be posted on NMFS's incidental take authorization website, as appropriate.

    Comment 6: The Commission recommends that NMFS require action proponents to provide proposed hydroacoustic monitoring plans when authorization applications are submitted and make those plans available for public comment. If such plans are not provided in a timely manner, at the very least, NMFS should provide them to the Commission for review sufficiently in advance of issuing the final authorization.

    NMFS Response: During the initial review period, NMFS requests that applicants provide basic information regarding proposed hydroacoustic monitoring plans as part of IHA applications. We also generally ask for comprehensive monitoring plans for review prior to publication of the final IHA. If NMFS has received the monitoring plan before publication of the final IHA, it is shared with the Commission and posted to our website. However, the MMPA does not require submission of the monitoring plan prior to publication of the final IHA. Under these conditions, NMFS indicates in the final IHA that a hydroacoustic monitoring plan must be submitted to NMFS and approved prior to initiation of the monitoring. NMFS will also share the plan with the Commission for review in such cases.

    Comment 7: The Commission recommends that NMFS, in lieu of adopting its proposed renewal process for extending authorizations beyond their original one-year period of validity without providing a new opportunity for public review and comment, use abbreviated Federal Register notices and reference existing documents to streamline the incidental harassment authorization process. If NMFS adopts the proposed renewal process notwithstanding the Commission's recommendation, the Commission further recommends that NMFS provide the Commission and the public with a legal analysis supporting its conclusion that the process is consistent with the requirements under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.

    NMFS Response: NMFS appreciates the streamlining achieved by the use of abbreviated FR notices and intends to continue using them for proposed IHAs that include minor changes from previously issued IHAs, but which do not satisfy the renewal requirements.

    We believe our method for issuing renewals meets statutory requirements and maximizes efficiency. Importantly, such renewals would be limited to circumstances where: The activities are identical or nearly identical to those analyzed in the proposed IHA; monitoring does not indicate impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized; and, the mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language for future proposed IHAs to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as they are for all IHAs. The option for issuing renewal IHAs has been in NMFS's incidental take regulations since 1996. We will provide any additional information to the Commission and consider posting a description of the renewal process on our website before any renewal is issued utilizing this process.

    Description of Marine Mammals

    A description of the marine mammals in the area of the activities is found in these previous documents, which remains applicable to the issued 2018-2019 IHA as well. In addition, NMFS has reviewed recent draft Stock Assessment Reports, information on relevant Unusual Mortality Events, and recent scientific literature, and determined that no new information affects our original analysis of impacts under the 2017-2018 IHA.

    Potential Effects on Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    A description of the potential effects of the specified activities on marine mammals and their habitat may be found in these previous documents, which remains applicable to the issuance of the 2018-2019 IHA. There is no new information on potential effects.

    Estimated Take

    A detailed description of the methods and inputs used to estimate authorized take is found in these previous documents. The methods of estimating take for the 2018-2019 IHA are identical to those used in the 2017-2018 IHA. The source levels remain unchanged from the previously issued IHA, and NMFS' 2016 acoustic technical guidance was used to address new acoustic thresholds in the notice of issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA. Specifically, local observational data was used to calculate daily take rates in the absence of density data. Since the number of pile-driving days (50) planned for both the 2017-2018 IHA and the 2018-2019 IHA are the same, the total estimated take projections will be identical.

    Description of Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Measures

    A description of mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures is found in the previous documents, which are identical to those contained in the 2018-2019 IHA. The following measures would apply to ADOT&PF's mitigation requirements:

    Establishment of Shutdown Zone—For all pile driving activities, ADOT&PF will establish a shutdown zone identical to those described in the initial Federal Register notice of issuance (82 FR 17209; April 10, 2017) The purpose of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). In this case, shutdown zones are intended to contain areas in which sound pressure levels (SPLs) equal or exceed acoustic injury criteria for some authorized species, based on NMFS' acoustic technical guidance published in the Federal Register on August 4, 2016 (81 FR 51693).

    Establishment of Monitoring Zones—ADOT&PF must establish Level A harassment zones. These zones include areas where animals may be exposed to sound levels that could result in permanent threshold shift (PTS). ADOT&PF will establish Level B harassment disturbance zones which are areas where SPLs equal or exceed 160 dB rms for impact driving and 120 dB rms during vibratory driving. The Level A and Level B harassment zones are the same as those described in the initial Federal Register notice of issuance (82 FR 17209; April 10, 2017). Observation of monitoring zones enables observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area and outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of activity. NMFS has established monitoring protocols, including recording the number of animal observed in the Level A and Level B harassment zones. These protocols are described in the Federal Register notice of the issuance (82 FR 17209; April 10, 2017) and are based on the distance and size of the monitoring and shutdown zones. These same protocols are contained in this 2018-2019 IHA. Shutdown, Level A harassment and Level B harassment zones are depicted in Table 2.

    Table 2—Shutdown, Level A Harassment and Level B Harassment Isopleths Associated with Impact and Vibratory Pile Driving Species Shutdown zone—impact/vibratory
  • (meters)
  • Level A
  • harassment
  • zone—impact
  • (meters)
  • Level B
  • harassment
  • zone—impact/
  • vibratory
  • (meters)
  • Steller Sea Lion 25/10 n/a 2,090/3,265 Humpback whale 550/20 n/a 2,090/3,265 Harbor Seal 100/10 285 2,090/3,265 Harbor Porpoise 100/20 630 2,090/3,265 Killer whale 25/10 n/a 2,090/3,265 Minke whale 550/20 n/a 2,090/3,265 Dall's Porpoise 100/20 630 2,090/3,265

    Temporal and Seasonal Restrictions—Work may only occur during daylight hours, when visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted and all in-water construction will be limited to the periods between March 1 and May 31, 2019, and September 1 and November 30, 2019.

    Soft Start—The use of a soft-start procedure is believed to provide additional protection to marine mammals by providing warning and/or giving marine mammals a chance to leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity. For impact pile driving, contractors will be required to implement soft start procedures. Soft start is not required during vibratory pile driving and removal activities.

    Visual Marine Mammal Observation—Monitoring must be conducted by PSOs, who are trained biologists, with minimum qualifications described in the Federal Register notice of the issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA (82 FR 17209; April 4, 2017). In order to effectively monitor the pile driving monitoring zones, two MMOs must be positioned at the best practical vantage point(s). If waters exceed a sea-state which restricts the observers' ability to make observations within the shutdown zone (e.g., excessive wind or fog), pile installation and removal will cease. Pile driving will not be initiated until the entire shutdown zone is visible. MMOs shall record specific information on the sighting forms as described in the Federal Register notice of the issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA (82 FR 17209; April 10, 2017). At the conclusion of the in-water construction work, ADOT&PF will provide NMFS with a monitoring report which includes summaries of recorded takes and estimates of the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed.

    Determinations

    ADOT&PF plans to conduct in-water construction activities similar to those covered in the previous 2017-2018 IHA. As described above, the number of estimated takes of the same stocks of marine mammals is the same as those authorized in the 2017-2018 IHA that were found to meet the negligible impact and small numbers standards. Our analysis showed that less than 9.07 percent of the populations of affected stocks, with the exception of minke and killer whales, could be taken by harassment. For Northern resident and West Coast transient killer whales, the percentages, when instances of take are compared to abundance, are 48.2 percent and 51.8 percent, respectively. However, the takes estimated for these stocks (up to 126 instances assuming all takes are accrued to a single stock) are not likely to represent unique individuals. Instead, we anticipate that there will be multiple takes of a smaller number of individuals.

    The Northern resident killer whale stock are most commonly seen in the waters around the northern end of Vancouver Island, and in sheltered inlets along B.C.'s Central and North Coasts. They also range northward into Southeast Alaska in the winter months. Pile driving operations are not permitted from December through February. It is unlikely that such a large portion of Northern resident killer whales with ranges of this magnitude would be concentrated in and around Icy Passage.

    NMFS believes that small numbers of the West coast transient killer whale stock would be taken based on the limited region of exposure in comparison with the known distribution of the transient stock. The West coast transient stock ranges from Southeast Alaska to California, while the planned project activity would be stationary. A notable percentage of West coast transient whales have never been observed in Southeast Alaska. Only 155 West coast transient killer whales have been identified as occurring in Southeast Alaska according to Dahlheim and White (2010). The same study identified three pods of transients, equivalent to 19 animals that remained almost exclusively in the southern part of Southeast Alaska (i.e. Clarence Strait and Sumner Strait). This information indicates that only a small subset of the entire West coast Transient stock would be at risk for take in the Icy Passage area because a sizable portion of the stock has either not been observed in Southeast Alaska or consistently remains far south of Icy Passage.

    There is no current abundance estimate for minke whale since population data on this species is dated. However, the authorized take of 42 minke whales may be considered small. A visual survey for cetaceans was conducted in the central-eastern Bering Sea in July-August 1999, and in the southeastern Bering Sea in 2000. Results of the surveys in 1999 and 2000 provide provisional abundance estimates of 810 and 1,003 minke whales in the central-eastern and southeastern Bering Sea, respectively (Moore et al., 2002). Additionally, line-transect surveys were conducted in shelf and nearshore waters in 2001-2003 from the Kenai Fjords in the Gulf of Alaska to the central Aleutian Islands. Minke whale abundance was estimated to be 1,233 for this area (Zerbini et al., 2006). However, these estimates cannot be used as an estimate of the entire Alaska stock of minke whales because only a portion of the stock's range was surveyed. (Allen and Anglis 2012). Clearly, 42 authorized takes should be considered a small number, as it constitutes only 5.2 percent of the smallest abundance estimate generated during the surveys just described and each of these surveys represented only a portion of the minke whale range.

    Therefore, the number of individual animals authorized to be taken for all species are considered small relative to the relevant stocks or populations.

    The 2018-2019 IHA includes mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements that are identical to those depicted in the 2017-2018 IHA, and there is no new information suggesting that our analysis or findings should change.

    Based on the information contained here and in the referenced documents, NMFS has determined the following: (1) The required mitigation measures will effect the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat; (2) the authorized takes will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks; (3) the authorized takes represent small numbers of marine mammals relative to the affected stock abundances; and (4) ADOT&PF's activities will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on taking for subsistence purposes as no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals are implicated by this action.

    Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species.

    In order to comply with the ESA, NMFS Alaska Regional Office (AKR) Protected Resources Division issued a Biological Opinion on March 21, 2017 under section 7 of the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to ADOT&PF under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA. This consultation concluded that the project was likely to adversely affect but unlikely to jeopardize the continued existence of the threatened Mexico DPS of humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) or the endangered western DPS of Steller sea lion (Eumatopias jubatus), or adversely modify designated critical habitat for Steller sea lions. In a memo dated June 13, 2018, NMFS AKR concluded that re-initiation of section 7 consultation is not necessary for the issuance of the 2018-2019 IHA. The only modification to the project is a time shift of one year. No additional take has been requested by ADOT&PF or has been authorized by NMFS. All mitigation measures described in the Biological Opinion would be implemented to reduce harassment of marine mammals and document take of marine mammals. For these reasons, we anticipate no new or changed effects of the action beyond what was considered in the 2017 Biological Opinion.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    In compliance with NOAA policy, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), NMFS determined the issuance of the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review. This action is consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion.

    Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to ADOT&PF for conducting the described construction activities related to city dock and ferry terminal improvements from December 15, 2018 through December 14, 2019, provided the previously described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: October 26, 2018. Catherine Marzin, Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24064 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Inland Waterways Users Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The notice of an open meeting scheduled for November 28, 2018 published in the Federal Register on October 26, 2018 has a new date. The meeting will be held on November 29, 2018.

    DATES:

    The Inland Waterways Users Board will meet from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on November 29, 2018. Public registration will begin at 7:15 a.m.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Mark R. Pointon, the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the committee, in writing at the Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CEIWR-GM, 7701 Telegraph Road, Casey Building, Alexandria, VA 22315-3868; by telephone at 703-428-6438; and by email at [email protected] Alternatively, contact Mr. Kenneth E. Lichtman, the Alternate Designated Federal Officer (ADFO), in writing at the Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CEIWR-GW, 7701 Telegraph Road, Casey Building, Alexandria, VA 22315-3868; by telephone at 703-428-8083; and by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    None.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24147 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2018-ICCD-0116] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application Forms and Instructions for the Fulbright-Hays Seminars Abroad Program AGENCY:

    Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a reinstatement of a previously approved information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2018-ICCD-0116. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, Washington, DC 20202-0023.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Sara Starke, 202-453-7681.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Application Forms and Instructions for the Fulbright-Hays Seminars Abroad Program.

    OMB Control Number: 1840-0501.

    Type of Review: A reinstatement of a previously approved information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 300.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 900.

    Abstract: The Department of Education (US/ED) is responsible for administering the Fulbright-Hays Seminars Abroad (SA) Program under authority of Section 102(b)(6) of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange (Fulbright-Hays) Act of 1961, as amended. The program is administered under the policies established by the J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board (FSB), a 12-member body appointed by the President. US/ED recruits and recommends candidates for seminar positions abroad in accordance with FSB policies, which support the purposes of the Fulbright-Hays Act. The application is necessary in order for the Department to award funds under this program.

    Dated: October 31, 2018. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24178 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Agency Information Collection Extension AGENCY:

    U.S. Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE), pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995), intends to extend for three years, an information collection request with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before January 4, 2019. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting comments within that period, contact the person listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments may be sent to Courtney Bracey by email at [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Courtney Bracey, [email protected], (301) 903-1844.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the extended collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. This information collection request contains:

    (1) OMB No. {1910-5178};

    (2) Information Collection Request Title: Portfolio Analysis and Management System (PAMS);

    (3) Type of Review: {extension};

    (4) Purpose: This existing collection is based on the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Electronic Handbooks software. Discretionary financial assistance proposals continue to be collected using Grants.gov but are imported into PAMS for use by the program offices. Under the existing information collection, an external interface in PAMS allows two other types of proposal submission: DOE National Laboratories are able to submit proposals for technical work authorizations directly into PAMS, while other Federal Agencies will be able to submit Proposals for interagency awards directly into PAMS. External users from all institution types are able to submit Solicitation Letters of Intent and Pre-proposals directly into PAMS. All applicants, whether they submitted through Grants.gov or PAMS, are able to register with PAMS to view the proposals that were submitted. They also are able to maintain a minimal amount of information in their personal profile. The existing collection automates and streamlines the submission, tracking, and correspondence portions of financial award pre-review processes.

    The information collected is used by DOE to select applicants and projects for financial awards;

    (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: {The following numbers are calculated using the average of data received in fiscal year 2015 through fiscal year 2018. 6,533 PAMS new registrants, who are to include 9,700 submitters of lab proposals, interagency proposals, pre-proposals, and Letters Of Intent (LOI) (assuming one person per estimated submission) and 10,900 reviewers of proposals submitted through Grants.gov;

    (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: The Office of Science receives about 370 DOE national laboratory and interagency proposals per year, based on an average number of submissions received for (fiscal year 2015 through fiscal year 2018) and about 4,600 pre-proposals and letters of intent per year, based on an average of the data collected between fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2018;

    (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: The time it takes to complete a form depends upon the type of form being completed. External users will need to register with PAMS in order to access the system. It takes approximately 30 minutes for external users to complete the forms required to become a registered PAMS user. Both LOI and pre-proposal forms take 15 minutes each, whereas completing a lab/interagency proposal will take about 3 hours. The reviewers require about 3 hour of analysis, per submission. Based on the annual estimated number of responses, broken down by DOE national laboratory, letter of intent and pre-proposal, the annual estimated time required for reviewers to complete analysis or responses and the time required for external users to register with PAMS, the estimated annual number of burden hours is 30,150;

    (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.

    Statutory Authority: Section 641 of the Department of Energy Organization Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7251.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on October 22, 2018. Vasilios Kountouris, Director, Office of Information Technology and Services, Office of Science, Department of Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24131 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah River Site AGENCY:

    Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Savannah River Site. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Monday, November 26, 2018, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.

    Tuesday, November 27, 2018, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Partridge Inn, 2110 Walton Way, Augusta, GA 30904.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amy Boyette, Office of External Affairs, Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC, 29802; Phone: (803) 952-6120.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

    Tentative Agenda Monday, November 26, 2018 Opening, Chair Update, and Agenda Review Agency Updates Break Administrative & Outreach Committee Update Facilities Disposition & Site Remediation Committee Update Nuclear Materials Committee Update Strategic & Legacy Management Committee Update Waste Management Committee Update Presentation: Defense Waste Processing Facility and Glass Waste Storage Status Discussion of Draft Recommendation: Pollinator Management Program Public Comments Recess Tuesday, November 27, 2018 Reconvene Agenda Review Presentations • Annual Site Environmental Report • Environmental Management Systems • Plutonium Disposition Options Lunch Break Presentations • DOE-EM Performance Metrics • National Environmental Research Park Break Presentations • Solid Waste Program, Naval Waste and Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) update • Mercury in the Liquid Waste System Public Comments Voting on Recommendations Adjourn

    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Savannah River Site, 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 Amy Boyette at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Amy Boyette's office at the address or telephone listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Amy Boyette at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: http://cab.srs.gov/srs-cab.html.

    Signed in Washington, DC on October 31, 2018. LaTanya Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24137 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 6440-009] Lakeport Hydroelectric One, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.

    b. Project No.: 6440-009.

    c. Date Filed: August 31, 2018.

    d. Submitted By: Lakeport Hydroelectric One, LLC (Lakeport).

    e. Name of Project: Lakeport Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: On the Winnipesaukee River in Laconia, Belknap County, New Hampshire. No federal lands are occupied by the project works or located within the project boundary.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 and 5.5 of the Commission's regulations.

    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Michael Scarzello, Director, Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, 116 N State Street, P.O. Box 167, Neshkoro, WI 54960-0167; Phone at (973) 998-8400, or email at [email protected]

    i. FERC Contact: Erin Kimsey at (202) 502-8621; or [email protected]

    j. Lakeport filed its request to use the Traditional Licensing Process on August 31, 2018 and provided public notice of the request on August 31, 2018. In a letter dated October 30, 2018, the Director of the Division of Hydropower Licensing approved Lakeport's request to use the Traditional Licensing Process.

    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating consultation with the New Hampshire State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.

    l. With this notice, we are designating Lakeport as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act; and consultation pursuant to section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

    m. Lakeport filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the Commission pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.

    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website (http://www.ferc.gov), using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the Laconia Public Library, 695 N Main Street, Laconia, NH 03246.

    o. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an application for a subsequent license for Project No. 6440-009. Pursuant to 18 CFR 16.20, each application for a subsequent license and any competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All applications for license for this project must be filed by August 31, 2021.

    p. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24108 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AC19-13-000] Entergy Louisiana, LLC; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on October 29, 2018, Entergy Louisiana, LLC filed a request for approval to use Account 439, authorized by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 19, 2018.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24106 Filed 11-2-18; 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: EC19-17-000.

    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc.

    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of Entergy Arkansas, Inc.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5170.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-18-000.

    Applicants: Entergy Services, LLC, Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, LLC, Entergy Texas, Inc.

    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of Entergy Services, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5180.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: EC19-19-000.

    Applicants: Plymouth Rock Energy, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Plymouth Rock Energy, LLC.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5094.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1911-003; ER12-1912-003; ER12-1913-003; ER12-1915-003; ER12-1916-003; ER12-1917-003; ER14-41-002; ER14-42-002.

    Applicants: RE McKenzie 1 LLC, RE McKenzie 2 LLC, RE McKenzie 3 LLC, RE McKenzie 4 LLC, RE McKenzie 5 LLC, RE McKenzie 6 LLC, RE Rosamond One LLC, RE Rosamond Two LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the McKenzie and Rosamond Sellers.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5174.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1628-001.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2018-10-29_Additional Compliance for Order 842 Primary Frequency Response to be effective 5/15/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5143.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2419-001.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2018-10-30_SA 2953 Quilt Block Wind Farm-ATC Substitute 2nd Rev GIA (J395 J652) to be effective 8/28/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5064.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-209-000.

    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2019 SDGE TRBAA Update to Transmission Owner Tariff Filing to be effective 1/1/2019.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5122.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-210-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Maintenance Adder Revisions to the PJM Tariff to be effective 12/31/9998.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-211-000.

    Applicants: Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, LLC, Entergy Texas, Inc., Entergy Arkansas, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: TCCs JOOA to be effective 12/31/9998.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5161.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-212-000.

    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SA 296 5th Rev—NITSA-NOA with Exxon Mobil Corporation to be effective 8/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/29/18.

    Accession Number: 20181029-5162.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-213-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: NCEMPA 1 RS No. 318 (2019) to be effective 1/1/2019.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5029.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-214-000.

    Applicants: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SCPSA Interconnection Agreement to be effective 12/31/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5041.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-215-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Cane Creek Solar LGIA Filing to be effective 10/23/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5047.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-216-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Moonshot Solar LGIA Filing to be effective 10/23/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5053.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-217-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: DEP-NCEMC (RS-182) Amendment to be effective 1/1/2019.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5061.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-218-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-10-30_SA 3193 OSER-Ameren Illinois GIA (J644) to be effective 10/17/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5090.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-219-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2019 RSBAA Update Filing to be effective 1/1/2019.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5120.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-222-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Power and Light Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: WPL—Mazomanie Wholesale Service Agreement to be effective 12/31/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/30/18.

    Accession Number: 20181030-5156.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

    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: October 30, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24095 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2146-111; Project No. 82-000; Project No. 618-000] Alabama Power Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare Environmental Impact Statement and Soliciting Scoping Comments

    On July 28, 2005, Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power) filed, pursuant to sections 4(e) and 15 of the Federal Power Act,1 an application for a single new license to continue operation and maintenance of three previously separately licensed projects that include seven developments: (1) The Coosa Hydroelectric Project No. 2146, which comprises the Weiss, H. Neely Henry, Logan Martin, Lay, and Bouldin developments; (2) the Mitchell Dam Hydroelectric Project No. 82; and (3) the Jordan Dam Hydroelectric Project No. 618. The single new operating license would combine all of these projects as one project, the Coosa River Hydroelectric Project (Coosa River Project) No. 2146, with a combined 960.9 megawatts of hydroelectric generating capacity. The projects are located on the Coosa River, in the states of Alabama and Georgia, and occupy about 280 acres of federal land administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.

    1 16 U.S.C. 797(e) and 808 (2012).

    On December 31, 2009, Commission staff issued a final Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Coosa River Project. On June 20, 2013 (June 20 Order), the Commission issued a single new 30-year license to Alabama Power for the continued operation and maintenance of the Coosa River Project.2 On July 18, 2013, Alabama Rivers Alliance and American Rivers (jointly) filed a request for rehearing of the Commission's June 20 Order. On July 22, 2013, Alabama Power and Georgia Environmental Protection Division also filed separate requests for rehearing of the Commission's June 20 Order.3 On April 21, 2016 (April 21 Order), the Commission issued an order on rehearing and clarification regarding the new license for the project.4 On May 17, 2016, Alabama Rivers Alliance and American Rivers (jointly) filed a request for rehearing of the April 21 Order. On September 12, 2016, the Commission issued an order denying rehearing of the April 21 Order. Subsequently, Alabama Rivers Alliance and American Rivers (jointly) filed a petition in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (court), and on July 6, 2018, the court issued an opinion vacating and remanding the new license to the Commission for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.5

    2Alabama Power Company, 143 FERC 61,249 (2013), order on reh'g and clarification, 155 FERC 61,080 (2016), order denying reh'g, 156 FERC 61,171 (2016).

    3 The Atlanta Regional Commission adopted and incorporated by reference Georgia Environmental Protection Division's request for rehearing.

    4Alabama Power Company, 155 FERC 61,080 (2016).

    5American Rivers v. FERC, 895 F.3d 32 (D.C. Cir. 2018). By notice issued on September 10, 2018, the previous licenses for the Coosa River, Jordan, and Mitchell Hydroelectric Projects were reinstated; each project is currently operating under an annual license.

    In order to address the issues identified by the court, Commission staff intend to prepare a draft and final environmental impact statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EIS will describe and evaluate the probable effects of the proposed action and alternatives. The focus of the EIS will be the issues identified by the court as requiring further analyses (i.e., dissolved oxygen, fish entrainment and turbine mortality, federally listed threatened and endangered species, and cumulative effects). For the resource areas not the subject of the opinion, the EIS will either include or incorporate by reference the analysis in the Commission's final EA.

    To support and assist this environmental review, we are conducting scoping on the issues to be addressed in the EIS and are issuing a scoping document for comment under separate cover. Individuals, organizations, and agencies with environmental expertise and concerns are encouraged to comment on the scoping document. At this time, we do not anticipate holding public or agency scoping meetings.

    With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR part 402.

    The deadline for filing scoping comments is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file scoping comments using the Commission's eFiling system at https://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 https://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-2146-111.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.

    The record for this proceeding is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access documents. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Copies of the scoping document outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the EIS were distributed to the parties on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of the scoping document may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support.

    The draft EIS will be sent to all persons and entities on the Commission's service and mailing lists for the Coosa River Project. The draft EIS will include our recommendations for operating procedures, and environmental protection and enhancement measures that should be part of any new license issued by the Commission. Recipients will then have 60 days to review the draft EIS and file written comments with the Commission. All comments filed with the Commission on the final EIS will be considered in the Order taking final action on the license application. The application will be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate.

    Milestone Target date Issue Scoping Document October 2018. Comments Due on Scoping Document November 2018. Issue Revised Scoping Document (if necessary) December 2018. Issue Additional Information Request (if necessary) December 2018. Additional Information Response Due March 2019. Draft EIS Issued August 2019. Comments Due on Draft EIS October 2019. Final EIS Issued December 2019.

    This notice informs all interested individuals, organizations, and agencies with environmental expertise and concerns, that: (1) The Commission staff has decided to prepare an EIS addressing the issues raised by the court; and (2) the comments, recommendations, and terms and conditions already on file with the Commission on the application will be taken into account in the EIS.

    Any questions regarding this notice may be directed to Aaron Liberty at (202) 502-6862, or by email at [email protected]

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24107 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-89-000] Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Empire North Project; Empire Pipeline, Inc.

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the Empire North Project, proposed by Empire Pipeline, Inc. (Empire) in the above-referenced docket. Empire requests authorization to construct and operate gas compression facilities in Tioga County, Pennsylvania, and Ontario County, New York.

    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of construction and operation of the Empire North Project in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

    The U.S. Department of Transportation participated as a cooperating agency in the preparation of the EA. Cooperating agencies have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to resources potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the NEPA analysis.

    The proposed Empire North Project includes the following facilities:

    • A new 21,000 horsepower compressor station in Jackson Township, Tioga County, Pennsylvania;

    • a new 32,000 horsepower compressor station in the Town of Farmington, Ontario County, New York;

    • modifications of the existing regulator valves and station piping and installation of metering facilities at the existing New Victor Regulator Station in Ontario County, New York;

    • minor modifications to the existing Jackson Meter and Regulator Station in Jackson Township, Tioga County, Pennsylvania; and

    • upgrading the maximum allowable operating pressure of the Empire Connector Pipeline from 1,290 to 1,440 pounds per square inch gauge.

    The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability to federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. The EA is only available in electronic format. It may be viewed and downloaded from the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the Environmental Documents page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis.asp). In addition, the EA may be accessed by using the eLibrary link on the FERC's website. Click on the eLibrary link (https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp), click on General Search, and enter the docket number in the Docket Number field, excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP18-89). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments should focus on the EA's disclosure and discussion of potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to consider your comments prior to making its decision on this project, it is important that we receive your comments in Washington, DC, on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 29, 2018.

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-3676 or [email protected] Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on eRegister. You must select the type of filing you are making. If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing;” or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number (CP18-89-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426

    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214). Motions to intervene are more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing or judicial review of the Commission's decision. The Commission may grant affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.

    Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24105 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM98-1-000] Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.

    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication.

    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v).

    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Docket No. File date Presenter or requester Prohibited: 1. CP17-117-000 10-16-2018 Youngstown/Warren Regional Chamber. CP17-118-000 President and CEO James Dignan. Exempt: 1. CP17-101-000 10-16-2018 FERC Staff. 1 2. CP17-101-000 10-16-2018 FERC Staff. 2 3. CP17-41-000 10-23-2018 FERC Staff. 3 4. CP17-117-000 10-25-2018 State of Louisiana. CP17-118-000 House Representative Taylor F. Barras.

    1 Conference Call Notes for meeting on October 3, 2018 with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

    2 Conference Call Notes for meeting on October 3, 2018 with Transco.

    3 Conference Call Notes for meeting on October 19, 2018 with Environmental Resources Managements, Inc., Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC, Cardno, and Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24096 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9986-04-Region 3] Delegation of Authority to the State of West Virginia To Implement and Enforce Additional or Revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Standards and New Source Performance Standards AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of delegation of authority.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 11, 2017 and September 21, 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sent the State of West Virginia (West Virginia) letters acknowledging that West Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) had been updated, as provided for under previously approved delegation mechanisms. To inform regulated facilities and the public, EPA is making available a copy of EPA's letters to West Virginia through this notice.

    DATES:

    On September 11, 2017 and September 21, 2018, EPA sent West Virginia letters acknowledging that West Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce Federal NESHAPs and NSPS had been updated.

    ADDRESSES:

    Copies of documents pertaining to this action are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029. Copies of West Virginia's submittal are also available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE, Charleston, West Virginia 25304.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emily Bertram, (215) 814-5273, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 6, 2017, West Virginia notified EPA that West Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of Federal NESHAP and NSPS to include many such standards as found in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 60, 61, and 63 as of June 1, 2016. On September 11, 2017, EPA sent West Virginia a letter acknowledging that West Virginia now has the authority to implement and enforce the NESHAP and NSPS as specified by West Virginia in its notice to EPA, as provided for under previously approved automatic delegation mechanisms. All notifications, applications, reports, and other correspondence required pursuant to the delegated NESHAP and NSPS must be submitted to both EPA Region III and to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, unless the delegated standard specifically provides that such submittals may be sent to EPA or a delegated State. In such cases, the submittals should be sent only to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. A copy of EPA's September 11, 2017 letter to West Virginia follows:

    Mr. William F. Durham, Director Division of Air Quality West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 601 57th Street Charleston, West Virginia 25304 Dear Mr. Durham:

    The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously delegated to the State of West Virginia the authority to implement and enforce various federal National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), which are found at 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. In those actions EPA also delegated to West Virginia the authority to implement and enforce any future EPA NESHAP or NSPS on the condition that West Virginia legally adopt the future standards, make only allowed wording changes, and provide specified notice to EPA.

    In a letter dated June 6, 2017, West Virginia informed EPA that West Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of federal NESHAP and NSPS to include many such standards as found in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 as of June 1, 2016. West Virginia noted that it understood it was automatically delegated the authority to implement these standards. West Virginia committed to enforcing the standards in conformance with the terms of EPA's previous delegations of authority. West Virginia made only allowed wording changes.

    West Virginia provided copies of the revised West Virginia Legislative Rules which specify the NESHAP and NSPS which West Virginia has adopted by reference. These revised Legislative Rules are entitled 45 CSR 34—“Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,” and 45 CSR 16—“Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources.” These revised Rules have an effective date of June 1, 2017.

    Accordingly, EPA acknowledges that West Virginia now has the authority, as provided for under the terms of EPA's previous delegation actions, to implement and enforce the NESHAP and NSPS standards which West Virginia adopted by reference in West Virginia's revised Legislative Rules 45 CSR 34 and 45 CSR 16, both effective on June 1, 2017.

    Please note that on December 19, 2008 in Sierra Club vs. EPA, 1 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated certain provisions of the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 relating to exemptions for startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). On October 16, 2009, the Court issued the mandate vacating these SSM exemption provisions, which are found at 40 CFR part 63, § 63.6(f)(1), and (h)(1).

    1Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3rd 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

    Accordingly, EPA no longer allows sources to use the SSM exemption as provided for in the vacated provisions at 40 CFR part 63, § 63.6(f)(1), and (h)(1), even though EPA has not yet formally removed the SSM exemption provisions from the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63. Because West Virginia incorporated 40 CFR part 63 by reference, West Virginia should also no longer allow sources to use the former SSM exemption from the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 due to the Court's ruling in Sierra Club vs. EPA.

    EPA appreciates West Virginia's continuing NESHAP and NSPS enforcement efforts, and also West Virginia's decision to take automatic delegation of additional and more recent NESHAP and NSPS by adopting them by reference.

    If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Marcos Aquino, Acting Associate Director, Office of Permits and State Programs, at 215-814-3422.

    Sincerely, Cristina Fernandez, Director Air Protection Division

    On June 5, 2018, West Virginia notified EPA that West Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of Federal NESHAP and NSPS to include many such standards as found in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 60, 61, and 63 as of June 1, 2017. On September 21, 2018, EPA sent West Virginia a letter acknowledging that West Virginia now has the authority to implement and enforce the NESHAP and NSPS as specified by West Virginia in its notice to EPA, as provided for under previously approved automatic delegation mechanisms. All notifications, applications, reports, and other correspondence required pursuant to the delegated NESHAP and NSPS must be submitted to both EPA Region III and to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, unless the delegated standard specifically provides that such submittals may be sent to EPA or a delegated State. In such cases, the submittals should be sent only to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. A copy of EPA's September 21, 2018 letter to West Virginia follows:

    Mr. William F. Durham, Director Division of Air Quality West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 601 57th Street, SE Charleston, West Virginia 25304 Dear Mr. Durham:

    The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously delegated to the State of West Virginia the authority to implement and enforce various federal National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), which are found at 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. In those actions EPA also delegated to West Virginia the authority to implement and enforce any future EPA NESHAP or NSPS on the condition that West Virginia legally adopt the future standards, make only allowed wording changes, and provide specified notice to EPA.

    In a letter dated June 5, 2018, West Virginia informed EPA that West Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of federal NESHAP and NSPS to include many such standards as found in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 as of June 1, 2017. West Virginia noted that it understood it was automatically delegated the authority to implement these standards. West Virginia committed to enforcing the standards in conformance with the terms of EPA's previous delegations of authority. West Virginia made only allowed wording changes.

    West Virginia provided copies of the revised West Virginia Legislative Rules which specify the NESHAP and NSPS which West Virginia has adopted by reference. These revised Legislative Rules are entitled 45 CSR 34—“Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,” and 45 CSR 16—“Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources.” These revised Rules have an effective date of June 1, 2018.

    Accordingly, EPA acknowledges that West Virginia now has the authority, as provided for under the terms of EPA's previous delegation actions, to implement and enforce the NESHAP and NSPS standards which West Virginia adopted by reference in West Virginia's revised Legislative Rules 45 CSR 34 and 45 CSR 16, both effective on June 1, 2018.

    Please note that on December 19, 2008 in Sierra Club vs. EPA, 2 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated certain provisions of the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 relating to exemptions for startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). On October 16, 2009, the Court issued the mandate vacating these SSM exemption provisions, which are found at 40 CFR part 63, § 63.6(f)(1), and (h)(1).

    2Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3rd 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

    Accordingly, EPA no longer allows sources to use the SSM exemption as provided for in the vacated provisions at 40 CFR part 63, § 63.6(f)(1), and (h)(1), even though EPA has not yet formally removed the SSM exemption provisions from the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63. Because West Virginia incorporated 40 CFR part 63 by reference, West Virginia should also no longer allow sources to use the former SSM exemption from the General Provisions of 40 CFR Part 63 due to the Court's ruling in Sierra Club vs. EPA.

    EPA appreciates West Virginia's continuing NESHAP and NSPS enforcement efforts, and also West Virginia's decision to take automatic delegation of additional and more recent NESHAP and NSPS by adopting them by reference.

    If you have any questions, please contact me or Ms. Zelma Maldonado, Acting Associate Director, Office of Permits and State Programs, at 215-814-3448.

    Sincerely, Cristina Fernandez, Director Air Protection Division

    This notice acknowledges the update of West Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce NESHAP and NSPS.

    Dated: October 23, 2018. Cristina Fernandez, Director, Air Protection Division, Region III.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24160 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0663; FRL-9986-11-OAR] Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for the Performance-Based Measurement System for Fuels (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an information collection request (ICR), “Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for the Performance-based Measurement System for Fuels” (EPA ICR No. 2459.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0692) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2019. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before January 4, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0663, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    James W. Caldwell, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 6405A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9303; fax number: 202-343-2802; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 80 set standards for certain parameters of gasoline and diesel fuel, such as sulfur content, to control harmful vehicle emissions and protect emission controls. Refiners and importers are required to test for these parameters and report the results to EPA. The regulations at 40 CFR part 80.47, 80.584, and 80.585 (1) identify acceptable test methods for some of the regulated parameters, (2) specify criteria for precision, accuracy, and quality control for the test methods used to measure the regulated parameters (certain test methods in use prior to October 28, 2013 are exempt from some of the criteria), and (3) establish procedures by which a test laboratory can demonstrate that an alternative test method meets the criteria and is thus “qualified” for use. This program for the qualification of test methods is known as the Performance-based Measurement System (PBMS). Test laboratories are required to generate certain records to demonstrate compliance with PBMS program requirements. This ICR covers the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for PBMS records. There are no required forms. Example formats for certain records are at: https://www.epa.gov/fuels-registration-reporting-and-compliance-help/compliance-performance-based-measurement-system.

    Form numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Laboratories that test gasoline and diesel fuel.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory.

    Estimated number of respondents: 1,000 (total).

    Frequency of response: On occasion, periodically (varies with test method).

    Total estimated burden: 26,696 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $2,460,454 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in estimates: There is an increase of 17,198 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to an incorrect estimate of 52 laboratories for the current approval while the actual number should have been near 1,000.

    Dated: October 29, 2018. Byron J. Bunker, Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24159 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9986-07-Region 9] Casmalia Resources Superfund Site; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis Settlement AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is hereby providing notice of a proposed administrative de minimis settlement concerning the Casmalia Resources Superfund Site in Santa Barbara County, California (the Casmalia Resources Site). CERCLA provides EPA with the authority to enter into administrative de minimis settlements. This settlement is intended to resolve the liabilities of the 104 settling parties identified below for the Casmalia Resources Site. These parties have also elected to resolve their liability for response costs and potential natural resource damage claims by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). These 104 parties sent 9,696,519 lbs. of waste to the Casmalia Resources Site, which represents 0.07% of the total Site waste of 5.6 billion pounds. This settlement requires these parties to pay $885,397 to EPA.

    DATES:

    EPA will receive written comments relating to the settlement until December 5, 2018. EPA will consider all comments it receives during this period, and may modify or withdraw consent to the settlement if any comments disclose facts or considerations indicating that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

    Public meeting: In accordance with section 7003(d) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6973(d), commenters may request an opportunity for a public meeting in the affected area. The deadline for requesting a public meeting is November 19, 2018. Requests for a public meeting may be made by contacting Russell Mechem by email at [email protected] If a public meeting is requested, information about the date and time of the meeting will be published in the local newspaper, The Santa Maria Times, and will be sent to persons on the EPA's Casmalia Resources Site mailing list. To be added to the mailing list, please contact: Alejandro Diaz at (415) 972-3242 or by email at [email protected]

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be addressed to Casmalia Case Team, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street (mail code SFD-7-1), San Francisco, California 94105-3901, or may be sent by email to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A copy of the settlement document and additional information about the Casmalia Resources Site and the proposed settlement may be obtained on the EPA-maintained Casmalia Resources Site website at: http://www.epa.gov/region09/casmalia or by calling Russell Mechem at (415) 972-3192.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 122(g) of CERCLA gives EPA authority to enter into administrative de minimis settlements. Section 122(i) of CERCLA and section 7003(d) of RCRA require that EPA publish notice of certain proposed settlements. This settlement is intended to resolve the liabilities of the settling parties under sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA and section 7003 of RCRA for the Casmalia Resources Site.

    The parties that have elected to settle their liability with EPA at this time are as follows: A/C Industrial Cleaning Co.; Adams Campbell Co.; Aerosol Services Co.; Afflu, Ltd dba Dalee Car Bath; AG RX; Alcorn Fence Co.; ALLFAST Fastening Systems; Armorlite Inc.; Arnold Engineering; Arvinyl; ASCO Sintering Co.; Audax Group; Axelson, Inc., acquired by Wheatley Corp/Dresser Industries and later merged into Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.; Bard Parker; BC Laboratories, Inc.; Berney Construction; Bien Nacido Vineyards; Briggman Disposal; Burke Chemical; C.P. National; CAE, Inc.; California Avi-Tron; Carl's Jr.; Centre Properties; Channel Disposal Co.; Cigna Health Plans of CA; Circuitry Engineering; City of Hidden Hills; Coast Welding Supply, Inc.; Commercial Coil Spring Company; Contract Applications, Inc.; County of San Luis Obispo; Crystallite Co.; Darnell Corp.; Data Card; Data Documents Systems; Dela-Tek, Incorporated; Denny's Restaurants; D-Whit, Inc. (fka Whitney Machinery, Inc.); Economics Lab, Inc.; EDCO Disposal; Ericsson; Foster & Kleiser; Fruit Growers Supply; Futura Metal Technology; Gannett; Gannon Manufacturing Company; Haley Brothers; Harsco Corporation, through its April 11, 1966 Acquisition of Certain Assets of Borden Metal Products Henry Company, Resin Technology Division; Honetreat Corporation; IAMA, Inc.; IMAAC Corporation; Inca Products Company; J. Colavin & Sons; Jack in the Box; Jostens, Inc.; K&N Engineering, Inc.; K/J Plating; Kerr Dental; Kerr Glass Mfg. Corp.; Keystone Products, Inc.; Keystone RV Company, successor by merger to Dutchmen Manufacturing, Inc., sucessor to Komfort Corporation; Kilovac Corp.; Magnet Sales & Manufacturing, Inc.; Manufacturers Life Insurance; Marriott International, Inc.; Martin Decker Company; Merck & Co., Inc.; Metelics; Nanofilm; Norris Plumbing Fixtures; Pacific Resins & Chemical; Pacific Ship Repair; PCB Engineering; Penhall Company; Petroleum Contractors, Inc.; Precision Anodizing & Plating, Inc.; Precision Autobody; QT Optoelectronics; Rain Bird Sprinkler Mfg. Corp.; S I I Willis Oil Tool Company; Schuster Flexible Packaging/Schuster Cellophane; Sea-Land Service, Inc.; Shepherd Machinery; Silicon Valley Group; Smart Supply Company; Soco West, Inc.; Southern California Carton; Stanley Bostich; Steve Reynolds, Prado Road Service; Sun Eight Company, Inc.; Sundance Spas, Inc.; Super Seal & Stripe; Superior Gear; Thermo Analytical, Inc./EAL; Thornton Coast Ring Corp.; Tryad Service Corporation; Tulip Corporation; Universal Molding Company; US Foods;Ventura Rubbish; Vorelco, Inc.; Western Specialty Coatings Co.

    Dated: September 27, 2018. Enrique Manzanilla, Director, Superfund Division, U.S. EPA Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24201 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate Receiverships

    Notice is Hereby Given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver), as Receiver for the institutions listed below, intends to terminate its receivership for said institutions.

    Notice of Intent To Terminate Receiverships Fund Receivership name City State Date of
  • appointment
  • of receiver
  • 10442 Farmers' & Traders' State Bank Shabbona IL 06/08/2012 10198 Century Security Bank Duluth GA 03/19/2010 10529 The Farmers and Merchants State Bank of Argonia Argonia KS 10/13/2017

    The liquidation of the assets for each receivership has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receiverships will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receiverships shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of any of the receiverships, such comment must be made in writing, identify the receivership to which the comment pertains, and be sent within thirty days of the date of this notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of the above-mentioned receiverships will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on October 31, 2018. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24115 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of Intent To Terminate Receivership

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver) as Receiver for the institution listed below intends to terminate its receivership for said institution.

    Notice of Intent To Terminate Receivership Fund Receivership name City State Date of
  • appointment
  • of receiver
  • 10522 Allied Bank Mulberry AR 09/23/2016

    The liquidation of the assets for the receivership has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing, identify the receivership to which the comment pertains, and sent within thirty days of the date of this notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on October 31, 2018. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24172 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be closed to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109.

    Matters relating to internal personnel decisions, or internal rules and practices.

    Investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes and production would disclose investigative techniques.

    Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed Commission action.

    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

    Contact Person for More Information: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

    Laura E. Sinram, Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24245 Filed 11-1-18; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et seq.) (HOLA), Regulation LL (12 CFR part 238), and Regulation MM (12 CFR part 239), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a savings and loan holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a savings association and nonbanking companies owned by the savings and loan 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 application also will 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 HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(e)). 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 10(c)(4)(B) of the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(4)(B)). 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 November 27, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (William Spaniel, Senior Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105-1521. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]hil.frb.org:

    1. WSFS Financial Corporation, Wilmington, Delaware; to merge with Beneficial Bancorp, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and thereby indirectly acquire shares of Beneficial Bank, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Beneficial Bancorp Inc. intends to apply to become a savings and loan holding company with respect to Beneficial Bank's conversion to a stock federal savings association.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 30, 2018. Ann Misback, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24074 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than November 21, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. Kanwar Deep Suri, Dallas, Texas, and Noah Ratilal Shah, Bartonville, Texas; to each acquire voting shares of One World Holding, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of One World Bank, both of Dallas, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 30, 2018. Ann Misback, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24083 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-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 November 30, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. Geneva State Company, Geneva, Nebraska; to acquire voting shares of Jefferson County Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Jefferson County Bank, both of Daykin, Nebraska.

    2. Geneva State Company, Geneva, Nebraska; to acquire voting shares of First National Fairbury Corporation, and thereby indirectly acquire First National Bank of Fairbury, both of Fairbury, Nebraska.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 31, 2018. Ann Misback, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24143 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    ACTION:

    Notice, request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) invites comment on a proposal to extend for three years, with revision, the Consolidated Holding Company Report of Equity Investments in Nonfinancial Companies (FR Y-12; OMB No. 7100-0300) and the Annual Report of Merchant Banking Investments Held for an Extended Period (FR Y-12A; OMB No. 7100-0300).

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before January 4, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by FR Y-12 or FR Y-12A, by any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include OMB number in the subject line of the message.

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

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

    All public comments are available from the Board's website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/proposedregs.aspx as submitted, unless modified for technical reasons or to remove sensitive personally identifiable information at the commenter's request. Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper form in Room 3515, 1801 K Street NW (between 18th and 19th Streets NW), Washington, DC 20006 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays. For security reasons, the Board requires that visitors make an appointment to inspect comments. You may do so by calling (202) 452-3684. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo identification and to submit to security screening in order to inspect and photocopy comments.

    Additionally, commenters may send a copy of their comments to the OMB Desk Officer—Shagufta Ahmed—Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-6974.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A copy of the PRA OMB submission, including the proposed reporting form and instructions, supporting statement, and other documentation will be placed into OMB's public docket files, if approved. These documents will also be made available on the Board's public website at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/reportforms/review.aspx or may be requested from the agency clearance officer, whose name appears below.

    Federal Reserve Board Clearance Officer—Nuha Elmaghrabi—Office of the Chief Data Officer, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551, (202) 452-3829. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) users may contact (202) 263-4869, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On June 15, 1984, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and assign OMB control numbers to collection of information requests and requirements conducted or sponsored by the Board. In exercising this delegated authority, the Board is directed to take every reasonable step to solicit comment. In determining whether to approve a collection of information, the Board will consider all comments received from the public and other agencies.

    Request for Comment on Information Collection Proposal

    The Board invites public comment on the following information collection, which is being reviewed under authority delegated by the OMB under the PRA. Comments are invited on the following:

    a. Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the Board's functions; including whether the information has practical utility;

    b. The accuracy of the Board's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    c. Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    d. Ways to minimize the burden of information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

    e. Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

    At the end of the comment period, the comments and recommendations received will be analyzed to determine the extent to which the Board should modify the proposal.

    Proposal To Approve Under OMB Delegated Authority the Extension for Three Years, With Revision, of the Following Report

    Report Title: Consolidated Bank Holding Company Report of Equity Investments in Nonfinancial Companies, and the Annual Report of Merchant Banking Investments Held for an Extended Period.

    Agency form number: FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A, respectively.

    OMB control number: 7100-0300.

    Frequency: FR Y-12, quarterly and semiannually; and FR Y-12A, annually.

    Reporters: Bank holding companies (BHCs), savings and loan holding companies (SLHCs), U.S. intermediate holding companies (IHCs), and financial holding companies (FHCs) that hold merchant banking investments that are approaching the end of the holding periods permissible under Regulation Y.

    Estimated annual reporting hours: FR Y-12 quarterly, 1,782 hours; FR Y-12 semiannual, 165 hours; and FR Y-12A, 3,293 hours.

    Estimated average hours per response: FR Y-12, 16.5 hours; and FR Y-12A, 7.5 hours.

    Number of respondents: FR Y-12 quarterly, 27; FR Y-12 semiannual, 5; and FR Y-12A, 439.

    General description of report: The FR Y-12 collects information from certain domestic BHCs, SLHCs, and U.S. intermediate holding companies (collectively, holding companies) on their equity investments in nonfinancial companies. Respondents report the FR Y-12 either quarterly or semiannually based on reporting threshold criteria. The FR Y-12A is filed annually by FHCs that hold merchant banking investments that are approaching the end of the holding periods permissible under Regulation Y (covered investments).

    Proposed revisions: The Board proposes to revise the FRY-12 by (1) requiring that dollar values be reported in thousands instead of millions, and (2) no longer requiring firms to report the fax number of the person to be contacted regarding a report submission. The Board proposes to revise the FR Y-12A by (1) requiring that dollar values be reported in thousands instead of millions, (2) adding an item for the holding period expiration date of the covered investment, (3) expanding the scope of the item where a respondent indicates its plan and schedule for disposition of its covered investment, (4) clarifying that the top-tier FHC should be the filer for each submitted report, (5) adding an item for the RSSD ID of the direct holder of the covered investment, (6) clarifying that an FHC needs to continue to file the report until it ceases to hold the covered investment, (7) no longer requiring firms to report the fax number of the person to be contacted regarding a report submission, and (8) making other minor clarifications throughout the instructions. The proposed revisions to the FR Y-12 would be effective for the March 30, 2019, report date. The proposed revisions to the FR Y-12A would be effective for the December 31, 2019, report date.

    FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A

    The Board is proposing to require firms to report dollar values on the FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A reports in thousands instead of millions. Since firms currently file the reports in millions, any amounts reported that are less than $500 thousand round down and are reported as a $0. On the FRY-12A report, this can cause problems as the Board may not be adequately able to assess a respondent's plan for disposing of its covered investment without knowing the dollar value of the investment. For consistency between the FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A reports, the Board is proposing this change for both reports.

    The Board is also proposing to remove the item that captures the fax number of the person to be contacted regarding a report submission from the FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A reports, as this information is no longer needed.

    FR Y-12A Only

    The Board is proposing to add an item indicating when the permissible holding period expires for a merchant banking investment. As previously mentioned, FHCs are only allowed to hold merchant banking investments for a specified number of years, unless the Board approves an extension request. Currently, the date of expiration for the permissible holding period is not included on the form. As a result, Board staff routinely need to follow up with FHCs for this information. To streamline this process, the Board is proposing to revise the FR Y-12A to require respondents to indicate the date on which the permissible holding period expires for a covered investment (proposed item 1.a).

    The Board is also proposing to expand the scope of the existing item where an FHC indicates its plan and schedule for disposition of its covered investment (current item 8). Since FHCs can only hold merchant banking investments for a specified number of years, the FRY-12A report currently contains an item where FHCs explain their plans and schedules for disposition of these investments. In reviewing these plans, the Board frequently needs to reach out to the FHCs to obtain more information than is provided in FR Y-12A submissions. For example, the Board may ask about previous efforts to dispose of the covered investment, or any potential challenges related to the disposition. Therefore, the Board is proposing to expand the scope of current item 8 in order to have a more complete picture of the disposition process. This expanded item will streamline the review process for the FR Y-12A report by allowing the Board to ask FHCs fewer follow up questions regarding FR Y-12A submissions. To better incorporate this expanded scope, the Board is proposing to rename this item from `Plan and Schedule for disposition of the Covered Investment' to `Past Efforts and Future Plan, Including Timing, to Achieve Disposition of Covered Investment Within the Holding Period.'

    The Board is further proposing to clarify that the top-tier FHC should be the filer for each submitted report. Currently, there is diversity in practice among FR Y-12A filers in that some firms file at the FHC level, while other firms file at the direct holder level. The instructions are ambiguous as to which firm within the organization should be the filer. For consistency and clarity, the Board proposes to clarify the instructions to state that all firms should report at the FHC level. On a case-by-case basis, top-tier holding companies can be given exemptions to file certain regulatory reports. In these cases, lower-tier holding companies typically file on their behalf. The proposed revisions to the FR Y-12A would indicate that if the top-tier FHC is exempt from reporting the FR Y-12A report, then a lower-tier holding company must file on its behalf.

    In conjunction with the proposal to clarify that the top-tier FHC should be the FR Y-12A filer, the Board is also proposing to add an item that requires an FHC to report the RSSD ID of the direct holder of the covered investment within its organization. An RSSD ID is a unique identifier assigned to institutions by the Federal Reserve. The FR Y-12A report currently has an item for the name and location of the direct holder of the covered investment, but not an item for the RSSD ID of the direct holder. Submission of the RSSD ID of the direct holder will better enable the Board to monitor the covered investment, and will allow the Board to more effectively scope examinations to put more resources towards specific subsidiaries if they are direct holders of covered investments.

    Finally, the Board is proposing to clarify that an FHC needs to continue to file the FR Y-12A report until the FHC ceases to hold its covered investment. The instructions currently require FHCs to file the report if they hold merchant banking investments for longer than eight years (or 13 years in the case of an investment held through a qualifying private equity fund). An FHC may hold such investments beyond the permissible holding period if it receives Board approval to do so. However, the instructions do not clearly state that an FHC needs to continue to file the FRY-12 report until it ceases to hold its merchant banking investment, even if the permissible holding period has been extended by the Board. Adding such clarifying language will remove ambiguity about when an FHC can cease reporting the FR Y-12A report. Legal authorization and confidentiality: The Board's Legal Division has determined that the information collected under the FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A is mandatory and authorized to be collected from BHCs and FHCs pursuant to section 5(c) of the Bank Holding Company Act (BHC ACT) (12 U.S.C. 1844(c)(1)(A)); from SLHCs pursuant to section 10(b)(2) of the Home Owners Loan Act (HOLA) (12 U.S.C. 1467a(b)(2)), as amended by Section 369(8) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act); and from IHCs pursuant to Section 5(c) of the BHC Act, (12 U.S.C. 1844(c)(1)(A)), as well as pursuant to Sections 102(a)(1) and 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act, (12 U.S.C. 5311(a)(1)) and 5365,1 and Regulation YY, 12 CFR 252.153(b)(2).

    1 Section 165(b)(2) of Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act, (12 U.S.C. 5365(b)(2)), refers to “foreign-based bank holding company.” Section 102(a)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act, (12 U.S.C. 5311(a)(1)), defines “bank holding company” for purposes of Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act to include foreign banking organizations that are treated as bank holding companies under Section 8(a) of the International Banking Act, (12 U.S.C. 3106(a)). The Board has required, pursuant to Section 165(b)(1)(B)(iv) of the Dodd-Frank Act, (12 U.S.C. 5365(b)(1)(B)(iv)), certain of the foreign banking organizations that are subject to section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act to form U.S. intermediate holding companies. Accordingly, the parent foreign-based organization of a U.S. IHC is treated as a BHC for purposes of the BHC Act and Section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Because Section 5(c) of the BHC Act authorizes the Board to require reports from subsidiaries of BHCs, Section 5(c) provides additional authority to require U.S. IHCs to report the information contained in the FR Y-12 and FR Y-12A reports.

    In addition, with respect to the FR Y-12A report, Section 4(k)(7)(A) of the BHC Act, (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)(7)(A)), authorizes the Board and the Treasury Department to jointly develop implementing regulations governing merchant banking activities for purposes of section 4(k)(4)(H) of the BHC Act. Section 4(k)(4)(H) of the BHC Act, (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)(4)(H)), and subpart J of the Board's Regulation Y, (12 CFR 225.170 et seq.), authorize a BHC that has made an effective FHC election to acquire merchant banking investments that are not otherwise permissible for an FHC. Section 10(c)(2)(H) of HOLA, as amended by Section 606(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act, (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(2)(H)), and Section 8(a) of the International Bank Act, (12 U.S.C. 3106(a)), extend certain authorities and requirements of the BHC Act to SLHCs and to foreign banks, respectively.

    The Board does not consider information collected on the FR Y-12 report to be confidential, and the completed version of this report generally is made available to the public upon request. However, exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides an exemption from public disclosure for “trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.” (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). Thus, if a respondent feels that disclosure of confidential commercial or financial information on the FR Y-12 report is reasonably likely to result in substantial harm to its competitive position under exemption 4 of the FOIA, the respondent may request confidential treatment for such information pursuant to the Board's Rules Regarding the Availability of Information, 12 CFR 261.15.

    The Board generally considers the information collected on the FR Y-12A to be confidential under exemption 4 of the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). Information reported on the FR Y-12A is competitively sensitive and its release would likely result in substantial harm to the competitive position of an FHC or SLHC. In addition, if the FR Y-12A data is obtained as a part of an examination or supervision of a financial institution, this information may also be withheld pursuant to exemption 8 of the FOIA, which protects information contained in “examination, operating, or condition reports” obtained in the bank supervisory process (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(8)).

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 29, 2018. Michele Taylor Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24118 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 181 0152] Marathon Petroleum Corp.; Analysis To Aid Public Comment AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed Consent Agreement.

    SUMMARY:

    The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the complaint and the terms of the consent orders—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 26, 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: “Marathon Petroleum Corp.; File No. 1810152” on your comment, and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/marathonpetroleumcorpconsent by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “Marathon Petroleum Corp.; File No. 1810152” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), 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 D), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Helder G. Agostinho (202-326-3415), Bureau of Competition, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for October 25, 2018), on the World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/commission-actions.

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before November 26, 2018. Write “Marathon Petroleum Corp.; File No. 1810152” 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 https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments.

    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. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/marathonpetroleumcorpconsent/ by following the instructions on the web-based form. If this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that website.

    If you prefer to file your comment on paper, write “Marathon Petroleum Corp.; File No. 1810152” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex D), 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 D), 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.

    Visit the FTC website at http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the news release describing it. 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 November 26, 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.

    Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment I. Introduction

    The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted for public comment, subject to final approval, an Agreement Containing Consent Orders (“Consent Agreement”) from Marathon Petroleum Corporation (“Marathon”) and Express Mart Franchising Corp., Petr-All Petroleum Consulting Corporation, and REROB, LLC (“Express Mart” and collectively, the “Respondents”). The Consent Agreement is designed to remedy the anticompetitive effects that likely would result from Marathon's proposed acquisition of retail fuel outlets and other interests from Express Mart.

    Under the terms of the proposed Consent Agreement, Marathon must divest to the upfront buyer Sunoco LP (“Sunoco”) retail fuel outlets and related assets in five local markets in New York. Marathon must complete the divestiture within 90 days after the closing of Marathon's acquisition of Express Mart. The Commission and Respondents have agreed to an Order to Maintain Assets that requires Respondents to operate and maintain each divestiture outlet in the normal course of business through the date Sunoco acquires the outlet.

    The Commission has placed the proposed Consent Agreement on the public record for 30 days to solicit comments from interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After 30 days, the Commission will again review the proposed Consent Agreement and the comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the Consent Agreement, modify it, or make it final.

    II. The Respondents

    Respondent Marathon, a publicly traded company headquartered in Findlay, Ohio, operates a vertically integrated refining, marketing, retail, and transportation system. Marathon's wholly owned subsidiary, Speedway LLC (“Speedway”), owns and operates 2,740 convenience stores located in 21 states, making it the second-largest chain of company-owned and -operated gasoline and convenience stores in the United States. In addition, independent entrepreneurs own and operate 5,600 Marathon-branded retail fuel outlets in 20 states and the District of Columbia.

    Respondent Express Mart is a collection of closely held New York State S Corporations and limited liability companies headquartered in Syracuse, New York. Express Mart owns and operates convenience stores and retail fuel outlets stations primarily along the I-90 corridor in the Syracuse-Rochester-Buffalo region of upstate New York. Express Mart's network includes 77 convenience stores with attached fuel stations, as well as 11 franchise locations owned by independent contract dealers operating under the Express Mart banner. Express Mart's convenience stores operate under the Express Mart name, while its retail fuel stations operate primarily under the Sunoco banner.

    III. The Proposed Acquisition

    On April 13, 2018, Marathon, through its wholly owned subsidiary Speedway, entered into an agreement to acquire certain retail fuel outlets and other interests, from Express Mart (the “Transaction”). The Transaction would expand Speedway's presence across upstate New York.

    The Commission's Complaint alleges that the Transaction, if consummated, would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and that the Transaction agreement constitutes a violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45, by substantially lessening competition for the retail sale of gasoline and the retail sale of diesel in five local markets in New York.

    IV. The Retail Sales of Gasoline and Diesel

    The Commission's Complaint alleges that the relevant product markets in which to analyze the Transaction are the retail sale of gasoline and the retail sale of diesel. Consumers require gasoline for their gasoline-powered vehicles and can purchase gasoline only at retail fuel outlets. Likewise, consumers require diesel for their diesel-powered vehicles and can purchase diesel only at retail fuel outlets. The retail sale of gasoline and the retail sale of diesel constitute separate relevant markets because the two are not interchangeable—vehicles that run on gasoline cannot run on diesel and vehicles that run on diesel cannot run on gasoline.

    The Commission's Complaint alleges the relevant geographic markets in which to assess the competitive effects of the Transaction include five local markets within the following cities: Farmington, Fayetteville, Johnson City, Rochester, and Whitney Point in New York.

    The geographic markets for retail gasoline and retail diesel are highly localized, ranging up to a few miles, depending on local circumstances. Each relevant market is distinct and fact-dependent, reflecting a number of considerations, including commuting patterns, traffic flows, and outlet characteristics. Consumers typically choose between nearby retail fuel outlets with similar characteristics along their planned routes. The geographic markets for the retail sale of diesel may be similar to the corresponding geographic markets for retail gasoline as many diesel consumers exhibit the same preferences and behaviors as gasoline consumers.

    The Transaction would substantially increase the market concentration in each of the five local markets, resulting in five highly concentrated markets for the retail sale of gasoline and the retail sale of diesel. In four of the five local gasoline retail markets, the Transaction would reduce the number of competitively constraining independent market participants from three to two. In the fifth local gasoline retail market, the Transaction would reduce the number of competitively constraining independent participants from four the three. In three of the five retail diesel markets, the Transaction would result in a merger to monopoly. In the fourth diesel market, the Transaction would reduce the number of competitively constraining independent participants from three to two. In the fifth diesel market, the Transaction would reduce the number of competitively constraining independent participants from four to three.

    The Transaction would substantially lessen competition for the retail sale of gasoline and the retail sale of diesel in these local markets. Retail fuel outlets compete on price, store format, product offerings, and location, and pay close attention to competitors in close proximity, on similar traffic flows, and with similar store characteristics. The combined entity would be able to raise prices unilaterally in markets where Marathon and Express Mart are close competitors. Absent the Transaction, Marathon and Express Mart would continue to compete head to head in these local markets.

    Moreover, the Transaction would enhance the incentives for interdependent behavior in local markets where only two or three competitively constraining independent market participants would remain. Two aspects of the retail fuel industry make it vulnerable to such coordination. First, retail fuel outlets post their fuel prices on price signs that are visible from the street, allowing competitors to observe each other's fuel prices without difficulty. Second, retail fuel outlets regularly track their competitors' fuel prices and change their own prices in response. These repeated interactions give retail fuel outlets familiarity with how their competitors price and how changing prices affect their sales.

    Entry into each relevant market would not be timely, likely, or sufficient to deter or counteract the anticompetitive effects arising from the Acquisition. Significant entry barriers include the availability of attractive real estate, the time and cost associated with constructing a new retail fuel outlet, and the time associated with obtaining necessary permits and approvals.

    V. The Proposed Consent Agreement

    The proposed Consent Agreement would remedy the Acquisition's likely anticompetitive effects by requiring Marathon to divest certain Speedway and Express Mart retail fuel outlets and related assets to Sunoco in five local markets.

    The proposed Consent Agreement requires that the divestiture be completed no later than 90 days after Marathon consummates the Acquisition. This Agreement protects the Commission's ability to obtain complete and effective relief given the small number of outlets to be divested. The proposed Consent Agreement further requires Marathon and Express Mart to maintain the economic viability, marketability, and competitiveness of each divestiture asset until the divestiture to Sunoco is complete. For up to twelve months following the divestiture, Marathon and Express Mart must make available transitional services, as needed, to assist the buyer of each divestiture asset.

    In addition to requiring outlet divestitures, the proposed Consent Agreement also requires Respondents to provide the Commission notice before acquiring designated outlets in the five local areas for ten years. The prior notice provision is necessary because acquisitions of the designated outlets likely raise competitive concerns and may fall below the HSR Act premerger notification thresholds.

    Presently, in Rochester, New York, one local market of concern, Sunoco serves as the wholesale supplier to a retail fuel outlet that is an independent competitor to Speedway and Express Mart. By purchasing the Speedway outlet, Sunoco will also become a competitor to the outlet for which it is currently a wholesale supplier. To address this concern, Sunoco has agreed to implement a firewall between its wholesale and retail fuel pricing businesses in that local market. The firewall will restrict Sunoco retail pricing personnel's access to wholesale information, prohibiting Sunoco retail from knowing, among other information, how its pricing decisions affect the competing location's volumes.

    The proposed Consent Agreement contains additional provisions designed to ensure the effectiveness of the proposed relief. For example, Respondents have agreed to an Order to Maintain Assets that will issue at the time the proposed Consent Agreement is accepted for public comment. The Order to Maintain Assets requires Respondents to operate and maintain each divestiture outlet in the normal course of business, through the date the Respondents' complete divestiture of the outlet. During this period, and until such time as the buyer no longer requires transitional assistance, the Order to Maintain Assets authorizes the Commission to appoint an independent third party as a Monitor to oversee the Respondents' compliance with the requirements of the proposed Consent Agreement.

    The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the proposed Consent agreement, and the Commission does not intend this analysis to constitute an official interpretation of the proposed Consent Agreement or to modify its terms in any way.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24078 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-1967] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Biosimilars User Fee Program AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, Fax: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0718. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    JonnaLynn Capezzuto, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-3794, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Biosimilars User Fee Program OMB Control Number 0910-0718—Extension

    This information collection supports FDA's Biosimilars User Fee Program. The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act), amended the Public Health Service Act by adding section 351(k) (42 U.S.C. 262(k)) to create an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. This allows a company to apply for licensure of a biosimilar or interchangeable biological product (351(k) application). The BPCI Act also amended section 735 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379g) to include 351(k) applications as a type of application under “human drug application” for the purposes of the prescription drug user fee provisions.

    The Biosimilar User Fee Act of 2012 (BsUFA) authorized FDA to assess and collect user fees for certain activities in connection with biosimilar biological product development (BPD). BsUFA was reauthorized for an additional 5 years in August 2017 (BsUFA II). FDA's biosimilar biological product user fee program requires FDA to assess and collect user fees for certain meetings concerning biosimilar BPD (BPD meetings), investigational new drug applications (INDs) intended to support a biosimilar biological product application, and biosimilar biologic license applications (BLAs).

    Form FDA 3792, entitled “Biosimilars User Fee Cover Sheet”, is submitted by each new BPD entrant (identified via a new meeting request or IND submission) and new BLAs. Form FDA 3792 requests the minimum necessary information to identify the request and determine the amount of the fee to be assessed, and to account for and track user fees. The form provides a cross-reference of the fees submitted for an activity with the actual submission or activity by using a unique number tracking system. The information collected is used by FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research to initiate the administrative screening of biosimilar biological product INDs, and BLAs, and to account for and track user fees associated with BPD meetings.

    In addition to the Biosimilars User Fee Cover Sheet, the information collection includes an annual survey of all BsUFA II participants designed to provide information to FDA of anticipated BsUFA II activity in the upcoming fiscal year. This information helps FDA set appropriate annual BsUFA II fees.

    FDA has also developed the guidance entitled, “Assessing User Fees Under the Biosimilar User Fee Amendments of 2017” to assist industry in understanding when fees are incurred and the process by which applicants can submit payments. The guidance also explains how respondents can request discontinuation from the BPD program as well as how respondents can request to move products to the discontinued section of the biosimilar list. Finally, the guidance provides information on the consequences of failing to pay BsUFA II fees, as well as processes for submitting reconsideration and appeal requests. The guidance is available on our website at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM584984.pdf.

    In the Federal Register of June 29, 2018 (83 FR 30746), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Information
  • collection title
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden
  • per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total hours
    Biosimilar User Fee Cover Sheet; Form FDA 3792 35 1 35 * 0.5 17.5 Annual Survey 35 1 35 1 35 Request for discontinuation from BPD program 2 1 2 1 2 Request to move products to discontinued section of the biosimilar list 5 1 5 * 0.5 2.5 Total 57 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. * 30 minutes.

    We have increased our estimate by an additional 15 respondents since last OMB approval of the information collection. This estimated increase is based on our expectation that participation in the BPD program will continue to grow, consistent with our experience since establishment of the information collection in 2012.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24130 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6841] Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a guidance entitled “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.” This guidance describes FDA's intention with respect to the enforcement of unique device identification requirements for class I and unclassified devices, other than implantable, life-sustaining, or life-supporting (I/LS/LS) devices. FDA does not intend to enforce standard date formatting, labeling, and Global Unique Device Identification Database (GUDID) data submission requirements for these devices before September 24, 2020. In addition, FDA does not intend to enforce direct mark requirements for these devices before September 24, 2022. This guidance also describes FDA's direct mark compliance policy for class III, LS/LS, and class II devices that are nonsterile, manufactured and labeled prior to their applicable direct mark compliance date, and remain in inventory, as well as for class I and unclassified devices that are nonsterile, manufactured and labeled prior to September 24, 2022, and remain in inventory. FDA does not intend to enforce the direct mark requirements for these devices when the device's unique device identifier (UDI) can be derived from other information directly marked on the device. The guidance document is immediately in effect, but it remains subject to comment in accordance with the Agency's good guidance practices.

    DATES:

    The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal Register on November 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6841 for “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).

    An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for download from the internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written requests for a single hard copy of the guidance document entitled “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff” to the Office of the Center Director, Guidance and Policy Development, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your request.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For Center for Devices and Radiological Health-regulated devices: Christina Savisaar, UDI Regulatory Policy Support, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 3319, 301-796-5995, email: [email protected]

    For Center of Biologics Evaluation and Research-regulated devices: Stephen Ripley, Office of Communication, Outreach, and Development, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911, or call 1-800-835-4709 or 240-402-8010.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance entitled “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.” On September 24, 2013, FDA published a final rule establishing a unique device identification system designed to adequately identify devices through distribution and use (the UDI Rule). Phased implementation of the regulatory requirements set forth in that final rule is based on a series of established compliance dates based primarily on device classification, which range from September 24, 2014, to September 24, 2020.

    The UDI Rule requires a device to bear a unique device identifier on its label and packages unless an exception or alternative applies (see 21 CFR 801.20), and special labeling requirements apply to stand-alone software regulated as a device (21 CFR 801.50). The UDI Rule also requires that data pertaining to the key characteristics of each device required to bear a UDI be submitted to FDA's GUDID (21 CFR 830.300). In addition, the final rule added 21 CFR 801.18, which requires certain dates on device labels to be in a standard format. For devices that: (1) Must bear UDIs on their labels and (2) are intended to be used more than once and reprocessed between uses, 21 CFR 801.45 requires the devices to be directly marked with a UDI. Compliance dates for labeling, GUDID data submission, standard date format, and direct marking requirements can be found in 78 FR 58786 at 58815 to 58816.

    This guidance describes FDA's intention with regard to enforcement of labeling, standard date formatting, GUDID data submission, and direct marking for class I and unclassified devices, other than I/LS/LS devices. This guidance also describes FDA's intention with regard to direct mark requirements for class III, LS/LS, and class II devices that are nonsterile, manufactured and labeled prior to their applicable direct mark compliance date, and remain in inventory, as well as FDA's intention with regard to direct mark requirements for class I and unclassified devices that are nonsterile, manufactured and labeled prior to September 24, 2022, and remain in inventory.

    FDA considered comments received on the guidance that appeared in the Federal Register on January 16, 2018 (83 FR 2057). FDA revised the guidance as appropriate in response to the comments. This guidance supersedes the January 2018 guidance of the same name, “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff.”

    This guidance is being implemented without prior public comment because the Agency has determined that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate (§ 10.115(g)(2) (21 CFR 10.115(g)(2))). FDA has determined that this guidance document presents a less burdensome policy that is consistent with public health. Although this guidance is immediately in effect, FDA will consider all comments received and revise the guidance document as appropriate.

    II. Significance of Guidance

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (§ 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. This guidance document is also available at https://www.regulations.gov or https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/default.htm. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Unique Device Identification: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking; Immediately in Effect Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff” may send an email request to [email protected] to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number 17029 to identify the guidance you are requesting.

    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in the following FDA regulations have been approved by OMB as listed in the following table:

    21 CFR part Topic OMB control No. 801 subpart B and 830 Unique Device Identification 0910-0720 820 Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP); Quality System (QS) Regulation 0910-0073 Dated: October 31, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24177 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel “Vaccine Adjuvant Discovery Program”.

    Date: November 28-29, 2018.

    Time: 12:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Geetanjali Bansal, Ph.D., Scientific Reviewer Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G49, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9834, Bethesda, MD 20892-9834, (240) 669-5073, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel NIAID Clinical Trial Implementation Cooperative Agreement (U01).

    Date: November 29, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kumud K. Singh, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, DEA/NIAID/NIH/DHHS, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC-9823, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-761-7830, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24102 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; NIH Office of Intramural Training & Education—Application, Registration, and Alumni Systems, Office of the Director AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to provide opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Institutes of Health Office of Intramural Training & Education (OITE) will publish periodic summaries of propose projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Dr. Patricia Wagner, Program Analyst, Office of Intramural Training & Education (OITE), Office of Intramural Research (OIR), Office of the Director (OD), National Institutes of Health (NIH); 2 Center Drive: Building 2/Room 2E06; Bethesda, Maryland 20892 or call non-toll-free number 240-476-3619 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 requires: Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Proposed Collection Title: NIH Office of Intramural Training & Education—Application, Registration, and Alumni Systems, 0925-0299, 06/30/2019, REVISION, Office of Intramural Training & Education (OITE), Office of Intramural Research (OIR), Office of the Director (OD), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: The Office of Intramural Training & Education (OITE) administers a variety of programs and initiatives to recruit pre-college through pre-doctoral educational level individuals into the National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program (NIH-IRP) to facilitate their development into future biomedical scientists. The proposed information collection is necessary in order to determine the eligibility and quality of potential awardees for traineeships in these programs. The applications for admission consideration solicit information including: Personal information, ability to meet eligibility criteria, contact information, university-assigned student identification number, training program selection, scientific discipline interests, educational history, standardized examination scores, reference information, resume components, employment history, employment interests, dissertation research details, letters of recommendation, financial aid history, sensitive data, and travel information, as well as feedback questions about interviews and application submission experiences. Sensitive data collected on the applicants: Race, gender, ethnicity, relatives at NIH, and recruitment method, are made available only to OITE staff members or in aggregate form to select NIH offices and are not used by the admission committees for admission consideration. In addition, information to monitor trainee placement after departure from NIH is periodically collected.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 13,297.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average time/
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • High School Scientific Training & Enrichment Program—Orientation 25 1 10/60 4 High School Scientific Training & Enrichment Program 2.0—Orientation 25 1 10/60 4 HiSTEP & HiSTEP2—Alumni Tracking 125 2 30/60 125 Summer Internship Program—Application 8,000 1 45/60 6,000 Summer Internship Program—Recommendation Letters 16,000 1 10/60 2,667 Amgen Scholars at NIH—Supplemental Application 535 1 10/60 89 Amgen Scholars at NIH—Feedback 20 1 15/60 5 Amgen Scholars at NIH—Alumni Tracking 127 1 30/60 64 Community College Summer Enrichment Program—Alumni Tracking 158 1 10/60 26 College—Summer Opportunities in Advanced Research—Alumni Tracking 158 1 10/60 26 Graduate—Summer Opportunities in Advanced Research—Alumni Tracking 114 1 30/60 57 Graduate Data Science Summer Program—Alumni Tracking 30 1 30/60 15 Native American Visit Week—Application 15 1 20/60 5 Native American Visit Week—Recommendation Letters 15 1 10/60 3 Native American Visit Week—Feedback 15 1 15/60 4 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Application 125 1 60/60 125 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Recommendation Letters for Applicants 375 1 10/60 63 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Exceptional Financial Need—Completed by Applicant 125 1 3/60 8 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Exceptional Financial Need—Completed by University Staff 125 1 15/60 41 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Exceptional Financial Need Resubmission—Completed by Applicant 38 1 3/60 8 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Exceptional Financial Need Resubmission—Completed by University Staff 38 1 15/60 41 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Scholar Contract 25 1 10/60 4 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Evaluation of Scholar Pay Back Period 30 1 15/60 8 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Renewal Application 15 1 45/60 11 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Recommendation Letters for Renewals 15 1 10/60 3 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Deferment Form—Completed by Scholar 10 1 3/60 1 Undergraduate Scholarship Program—Deferment Form—Completed by University Staff 10 1 12/60 2 Postbaccalaureate Training Program—Application 2,250 1 45/60 1,688 Postbaccalaureate Training Program—Recommendation Letters 6,750 1 10/60 1,125 NIH Academy—Fellow & Certificate Programs Application 300 1 15/60 75 NIH Academy—Enrichment Program Application 175 1 15/60 44 Graduate Partnerships Program—Application 325 1 60/60 325 Graduate Partnerships Program—Recommendation Letters for Application 975 1 10/60 163 Graduate Partnerships Program—Interview Experience Survey 30 1 10/60 5 Graduate Partnerships Program—Registration 175 1 15/60 44 Graduate Partnerships Program—Awards Certificate 75 1 30/60 38 MyOITE—User Accounts 6,000 1 3/60 300 MyOITE—NIH Alumni 500 1 15/60 125 OITE Careers Blog—Success Stories 6 1 45/60 5 Totals 43,854 43,979 N/A 13,297
    Dated: October 29, 2018. Lawrence A. Tabak, Deputy Director, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24150 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel; Quantification of Drugs of Abuse and Related Compounds in Biological Specimens (8951).

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Lyle Furr, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, Room 4227, MSC 9550, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-9550, (301) 827-5702, lf33c.nih.gov.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No.: 93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24100 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK SEP: RC2.

    Date: November 19, 2018.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call)

    Contact Person: Peter J. Kozel, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7009, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, 301-594-4721, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. David D. Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24098 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Advisory Committee to the Director, National Institutes of Health.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: Advisory Committee to the Director, National Institutes of Health.

    Date: December 13, 2018.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    Agenda: NIH Director's Report, ACD Working Group Reports, Other Business of the Committee.

    Place: National Institutes of Health. Building 31, 6th Floor Conference Room 6C, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Gretchen Wood, Staff Assistant, National Institutes of Health, Office of the Director, One Center Drive, Building 1, Room 126, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-4272, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Advisory Committee to the Director, National Institutes of Health.

    Date: December 14, 2018.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: ACD Working Group Reports, Other Business of the Committee.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, 6th Floor Conference Room 6C, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Gretchen Wood, Staff Assistant, National Institutes of Health, Office of the Director, One Center Drive, Building 1, Room 126, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-4272, [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: http://acd.od.nih.gov, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.14, Intramural Research Training Award; 93.22, Clinical Research Loan Repayment Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; 93.232, Loan Repayment Program for Research Generally; 93.39, Academic Research Enhancement Award; 93.936, NIH Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Research Loan Repayment Program; 93.187, Undergraduate Scholarship Program for Individuals from Disadvantaged Backgrounds, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24097 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Cardiovascular Disease.

    Date: November 13, 2018.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Luis Espinoza, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4140, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0952, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; The Lasker Clinical Research Scholar Program.

    Date: November 28, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Abdelouahab Aitouche, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4222, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-2365, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Cancer Health Disparities.

    Date: November 29, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Reigh-Yi Lin, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-6009, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Cancer Health Disparities.

    Date: November 29-30, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Ola Mae Zack Howard, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4192, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-4467, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24103 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, NIDA.

    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, including consideration of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, NIDA.

    Date: December 3-4, 2018.

    Closed: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and performance, and competence of individual investigators.

    Place: Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, Johns Hopkins Bayview Campus, Baltimore, MD 21223.

    Contact Person: Joshua Kysiak, Program Specialist, Biomedical Research Center, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, 251 Bayview Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21224, 443-740-2465, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos.: 93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24099 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel Identification of Genetic and Genomic Variants by Next-Gen Sequencing in Non-human Animal Models (U01).

    Date: November 16, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate cooperative agreement applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Gerald L. McLaughlin, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Extramural Policy and Review, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 4238, MSC 9550, Bethesda, MD 20892-9550, 301-827-5819, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel PHASE II Interview: NIDA Avant-Garde Award Program for HIV/AIDS and Drug Use Research (DP1).

    Date: December 10, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Courtyard by Marriott Chevy Chase, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

    Contact Person: Hiromi Ono, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Extramural Policy and Review, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 4238, MSC 9550, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-5820, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos.: 93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24101 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Draft Report on Health Research and Development To Stem the Opioid Crisis: A Federal Roadmap; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health (NIH), on behalf of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC); Committee on Science; Fast Track Action Committee on Health Science and Technology Response to the Opioid Crisis (Opioid FTAC), is requesting input on the content of a draft report, “Health Research and Development to Stem the Opioid Crisis: A Federal Roadmap.”

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by email to [email protected] Please include “Health Research and Development to Stem the Opioid Crisis: A Federal Roadmap” in the subject line of the message.

    Instructions: The draft report is available for download at: https://www.nih.gov/draft-ftac. Response to this Notice for Public Comments is voluntary. Clearly indicate the section and page number, if applicable, to which submitted comments pertain. All submissions must be in English. Please clearly label submissions as regarding “Health Research and Development to Stem the Opioid Crisis: A Federal Roadmap.” When the final report is issued, relevant comments and the commenters' names, along with the commenters' responses, may become part of the public record and be made available to view online. NIH therefore requests that commenters do not submit business proprietary information, copyrighted information, or personally identifiable information in response to this Notice for Public Comment. Please note that the U.S. Government will not pay for response preparation or for the use of any information contained in the response.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sara Brenner, Office of Science and Technology Policy, (202) 456-444, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Opioid FTAC was chartered in December 2017 to facilitate coordination of health Research and Development (R&D) and related Science and Technology (S&T) activities across agencies, and with other Administration initiatives, in support of the national response to the opioid crisis; facilitate interagency sharing of opioid-related health R&D findings, standard-based data and tools, and best practices; assess gaps in, and opportunities for strengthening, the R&D and related S&T response to the opioid crisis; and, identify opportunities to expedite promising and potentially groundbreaking R&D efforts to rapidly combat the crisis.

    The draft report builds on the recommendations in the report from the President's Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and The Opioid Crisis, as well as recommendations from multiple other sources, such as the National Academy of Sciences report on Pain Management and the Opioid Epidemic, the Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee's Federal Pain Research Strategy, the National Governors Association report on Governor's Recommendations for Federal Action to End the Nation's Opioid Crisis, and the Surgeon General's report Facing Addiction in America, among others, to identify research and development opportunities to coordinate the Federal Government's S&T response to the opioid crisis. This notice solicits relevant public input on the draft report.

    The report describes:

    • Seven areas of R&D: (1) The Biology and Chemistry of Opioid Addiction and Pain, (2) Non-Biological Contributors to Opioid Addiction, (3) Pain Management, (4) Prevention of Opioid Addiction, (5) Treatment of Opioid Addiction and Withdrawal, (6) Overdose Prevention and Recovery, and (7) Community Consequences of Opioid Addiction;

    • Research recommendations generated by the Opioid FTAC in each of these areas;

    • An eighth section that includes recommendations on ways to enhance Federal interagency coordination as well as coordination with non-Federal stakeholders.

    Dated: October 29, 2018. Lawrence A. Tabak, Deputy Director, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24149 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4403-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Kansas; 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 Kansas (FEMA-4403-DR), dated October 19, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued October 19, 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 October 19, 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 Kansas resulting from severe storms, straight-line winds, and flooding during the period of September 1 to September 8, 2018, 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 Kansas.

    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 Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be 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, Paul Taylor, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the State of Kansas have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Barber, Clay, Kingman, Kiowa, Marshall, Pratt, Rice, and Riley Counties for Public Assistance.

    All areas within the State of Kansas 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. 2018-24191 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1859] Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings.

    DATES:

    Comments are to be submitted on or before February 4, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1859, to Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).

    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.

    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) David I. Maurstad, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Community Community map repository address Fremont County, Iowa and Incorporated Areas Project: 16-07-0307S Preliminary Date: June 29, 2018 City of Farragut City Hall, 518 Hartford Avenue, Farragut, IA 51639. City of Hamburg City Office, 1201 Main Street, Hamburg, IA 51640. City of Imogene City Hall, 101 South Railroad Street, Imogene, IA 51645. City of Randolph City Hall, 107 South Main Street, Randolph, IA 51649. City of Riverton City Office, 803 Summer Avenue, Riverton, IA 51650. City of Sidney City Hall, 604 Clay Street, Sidney, IA 51652. Town of Thurman Fremont County Courthouse, 2014 290th Avenue, Sidney, IA 51652. Unincorporated Areas of Fremont County Fremont County Courthouse, 2014 290th Avenue, Sidney, IA 51652. Mills County, Iowa and Incorporated Areas Project: 16-07-0303S Preliminary Date: June 29, 2018 City of Emerson City Hall, 410 Manchester Street, Emerson, IA 51533. City of Glenwood City Hall, 5 North Vine Street, Glenwood, IA 51534. City of Hastings City Hall, 401 Indian Avenue, Hastings, IA 51540. City of Henderson City Office, 310 Maple Street, Henderson, IA 51541. City of Malvern City Hall, 107 East 4th Street, Malvern, IA 51551. City of Pacific Junction City Hall, 407 Lincoln Avenue, Pacific Junction, IA 51561. City of Silver City City Hall, 417 Main Street, Silver City, IA 51571. Unincorporated Areas of Mills County Mills County Engineer's Office, 403 Railroad Avenue, Glenwood, IA 51534. Dodge County, Nebraska and Incorporated Areas Project: 17-07-1393S Preliminary Dates: November 17, 2017 and May 23, 2018 City of Hooper City Office, 124 North Main Street, Hooper, NE 68031. Unincorporated Areas of Dodge County Dodge County Courthouse, 435 North Park Avenue, Fremont, NE 68025.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24198 Filed 11-2-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002] Final Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or regulatory floodways on the Flood Insurance