| Page Range | 55813-55929 | |
| FR Document |
| Page and Subject | |
|---|---|
| 83 FR 55850 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Electronic Reporting for Federally Permitted Charter Vessels and Headboats in Gulf of Mexico Fisheries | |
| 83 FR 55916 - Sunshine Act Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55910 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice | |
| 83 FR 55914 - Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science Board | |
| 83 FR 55886 - Delegation of Authority to the Commonwealth of Virginia To Implement and Enforce Additional or Revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Standards and New Source Performance Standards | |
| 83 FR 55902 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meetings | |
| 83 FR 55890 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 55891 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 55925 - Convening of an Accountability Review Board To Examine the Facts and Circumstances Surrounding a January 6, 2017 Attack on a U.S. Government Employee of the U.S. Consulate General in Guadalajara, Mexico | |
| 83 FR 55927 - Notice of Intent of Waiver With Respect to Land; Capital Region International Airport, Lansing, Michigan | |
| 83 FR 55892 - Office on Trafficking in Persons; Notice of Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55912 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act | |
| 83 FR 55903 - National Toxicology Program Board of Scientific Counselors; Announcement of Meeting; Request for Comments | |
| 83 FR 55906 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meetings | |
| 83 FR 55902 - National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meetings | |
| 83 FR 55906 - Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing | |
| 83 FR 55904 - Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing | |
| 83 FR 55906 - National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55907 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings | |
| 83 FR 55905 - Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; National Children's Study (NCS) Vanguard Data and Sample Archive and Access System (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) | |
| 83 FR 55886 - Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC); Correction | |
| 83 FR 55888 - Board of Scientific Counselors, Office of Infectious Diseases (BSC, OID) | |
| 83 FR 55887 - Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee (CLIAC) | |
| 83 FR 55915 - SES Performance Review Board | |
| 83 FR 55894 - Data Exchange Standards for Improved Interoperability of Multiple Human Service Programs | |
| 83 FR 55893 - Request for Public Comment on the Proposed Adoption of Administration for Native Americans Program Policies and Procedures | |
| 83 FR 55878 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Consolidated Annual Report (CAR) for the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 | |
| 83 FR 55912 - Meeting of the NDCAC Executive Advisory Board | |
| 83 FR 55851 - Notice of Request for Extension and Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection | |
| 83 FR 55882 - City of River Falls; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (PAD), Commencement of Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the Pad and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study Requests | |
| 83 FR 55880 - Ampersand Christine Falls Hydro, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing Process | |
| 83 FR 55881 - Notice of Commission Staff Attendance | |
| 83 FR 55879 - Notice of Application; Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC | |
| 83 FR 55883 - Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Del-Mar Energy Pathway Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, Notice of Public Scoping Session, and Notice of Onsite Review | |
| 83 FR 55880 - Freeport LNG Development, L.P., FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Train 4 Project | |
| 83 FR 55908 - Current List of HHS-Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies | |
| 83 FR 55889 - Final National Occupational Research Agenda for Musculoskeletal Health | |
| 83 FR 55917 - New Postal Product | |
| 83 FR 55887 - Draft-National Occupational Research Agenda for Immune, Infectious and Dermal Disease Prevention (IID) | |
| 83 FR 55900 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Postmarketing Adverse Drug and Biological Product Experience Reporting and Recordkeeping | |
| 83 FR 55896 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Web-Based Pilot Survey To Assess Allergy to Cosmetics in the United States | |
| 83 FR 55898 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Registration of Producers of Drugs and Listing of Drugs in Commercial Distribution | |
| 83 FR 55909 - Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0096 | |
| 83 FR 55924 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of North Carolina | |
| 83 FR 55853 - Fisheries of the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico; South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55924 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands | |
| 83 FR 55911 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Currently Approved Collection; List of Responsible Persons | |
| 83 FR 55854 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55911 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Cellular V2X Device-to-Device Communication Consortium | |
| 83 FR 55853 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55854 - Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55823 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Atka Mackerel in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area | |
| 83 FR 55926 - Wolf Creek Railroad LLC-Lease and Operation Exemption-American Ordnance LLC, Owner's Representative for U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command | |
| 83 FR 55926 - Eyal Shapira-Continuance in Control Exemption-Iowa & Middletown Railway LLC and Wolf Creek Railroad LLC | |
| 83 FR 55927 - Iowa and Middletown Railway LLC-Lease and Operation Exemption-American Ordinance LLC, Owner's Representative for U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command | |
| 83 FR 55925 - Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the State of Wisconsin | |
| 83 FR 55925 - Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Montana | |
| 83 FR 55924 - Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public Assistance Only for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands | |
| 83 FR 55889 - Privacy Act of 1974; Matching Program | |
| 83 FR 55851 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 55915 - Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences; Notice of Meeting | |
| 83 FR 55876 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55859 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55855 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55867 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55928 - Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council; Renewal of Charter | |
| 83 FR 55857 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55869 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55873 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55864 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55852 - Proposed Voluntary Product Standard 2-10, Performance Standard for Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels | |
| 83 FR 55915 - Approval of Exemption From the Bond/Escrow Requirement Relating to the Sale of Assets by an Employer That Contributes to a Multiemployer Plan: Marlins Holdings LLC and the Miami Marlins Major League Baseball Franchise | |
| 83 FR 55861 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55871 - Arms Sales Notification | |
| 83 FR 55918 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Partial Amendment No. 1, Related to The Options Clearing Corporation's Margin Methodology for Incorporating Variations in Implied Volatility | |
| 83 FR 55922 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Section 805(c)(5) of the Guide to Change the Threshold for Qualifying as a Smaller Reporting Company To Qualify for Certain Exemptions From the Compensation Committee Requirements | |
| 83 FR 55913 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection; Fourth National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Thrownaway Children (NISMART-4) | |
| 83 FR 55910 - Mattresses From China | |
| 83 FR 55830 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS | |
| 83 FR 55917 - New Postal Products | |
| 83 FR 55813 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 55833 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 55828 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 55825 - Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 55816 - Airworthiness Directives; Engine Alliance Turbofan Engines | |
| 83 FR 55928 - Notice of OFAC Sanctions Actions | |
| 83 FR 55838 - General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); Adoption of Construction Project Delivery Method Involving Early Industry Engagement-Construction Manager as Constructor (CMc) | |
| 83 FR 55837 - Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Program Technical Amendments; Reopening of Comment Period | |
| 83 FR 55821 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments | |
| 83 FR 55818 - Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments |
Agricultural Marketing Service
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Children and Families Administration
Food and Drug Administration
National Institutes of Health
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Coast Guard
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau
Antitrust Division
Justice Programs Office
Federal Aviation Administration
Foreign Assets Control Office
Internal Revenue Service
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.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of a close gap between the wing lower cover (WLC) and wing rib feet. This AD requires revising the operator's minimum equipment list (MEL) to change certain MEL items. This AD also requires an inspection for discrepancies and structural damage of certain wing rib foot locations, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD becomes effective November 23, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 23, 2018.
We must receive comments on this AD by December 24, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3218.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0220, dated October 12, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. The MCAI states:
A deviation was identified on certain A350 aeroplanes, where a gap check between some wing rib feet and the wing lower cover (WLC) was not systematically performed. Due to tolerance build-up during wing manufacture, close gap between the WLC and wing rib feet could occur in some locations. Under some flight loading conditions, intermittent or permanent contact may occur.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, combined with an empty fuel tank or fuel level below the rib foot area, could create an ignition source for the fuel vapour inside the tanks which, in case of a lightning strike of high intensity in the immediate area, could possibly result in ignition of the fuel-air mixture in the affected fuel tank and consequent loss of the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the AOT [Alert Operators Transmission A57P011-18] to provide inspection instructions, and an MER [major event revision] of the A350 MMEL [master minimum equipment list] that incorporates temporary restrictions of the MMEL items related to the fuel tank inerting system.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires implementation of certain dispatch restrictions. This [EASA] AD also requires a one-time detailed inspection (DET) of the affected areas and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s). No findings, or accomplishment of [related investigative and] corrective action(s), as applicable, allows removal of the MMEL restrictions.
This [EASA] AD is considered to be an interim action and further [EASA] AD action may follow.
The inspection is intended to detect structural damage as well as other discrepancies including missing sealant at each wing rib foot location and a close gap between the wing rib foot and the WLC inboard and outboard side of the rib.
You may examine the MCAI on the internet at
Airbus has issued Alert Operators Transmission A57P011-18, dated October 8, 2018, which describes procedures for a detailed inspection and related investigative and corrective actions. Related investigative actions include a gap check. Corrective actions include rework of the wing rib foot and repair. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
This AD revises the operator's MEL to change certain MEL items. This AD also requires an inspection for discrepancies and structural damage of certain wing rib foot locations, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary.
The MCAI specifies to revise the MMEL to change certain MMEL items. This AD refers to the operator's MEL instead of the MMEL. It is unnecessary to reference the MMEL, as operators are required in 14 CFR part 91 to have an MEL to operate with inoperable equipment and provisions for relief cannot be in an MEL without first being part of the MMEL. The intent of the provision has not changed.
An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because contact between the WLC and wing rib feet, combined with an empty fuel tank or fuel level below the wing rib foot area, could create an ignition source for the fuel vapor inside the tanks. In case of a lightning strike of high intensity in the immediate area, this condition could possibly result in ignition of the fuel-air mixture in the affected fuel tank and consequent loss of the airplane. Therefore, we find good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable. In addition, for the reasons stated above, we find that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We estimate that this AD affects 1 airplane of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for on-condition repair of structural damage specified in this AD. We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required to address other discrepancies based on the results of any required actions.
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.
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD becomes effective November 23, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to the Airbus SAS airplanes, certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
(1) Model A350-941 airplanes, manufacturer serial numbers (MSNs) 203, 205, 208, 209, 210, 212, 213, 218, 219, 221, 227, 228, and 235.
(2) Model A350-1041 airplanes, MSN 188.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
This AD was prompted by a report of a close gap between the wing lower cover (WLC) and wing rib feet. We are issuing this AD to address potential contact between the WLC and wing rib feet, which, combined with an empty fuel tank or fuel level below the wing rib foot area, could create an ignition source for the fuel vapor inside the tanks. In case of a lightning strike of high intensity in the immediate area, this condition could possibly result in ignition of the fuel-air mixture in the affected fuel tank and consequent loss of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the operator's MEL to prohibit dispatch of the airplane with any inoperative MEL item listed in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD.
Within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, accomplish a detailed inspection to detect discrepancies and structural damage at the wing rib foot locations specified in, and in accordance with Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A57P011-18, dated October 8, 2018.
(1) If any discrepancy is detected, do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight, in accordance with Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A57P011-18, dated October 8, 2018.
(2) If any structural damage 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.
After accomplishment of the inspection and all applicable related investigative and corrective actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD on an operator's fleet, the MEL revision specified in paragraph (g) of this AD is no longer required by this AD, and the provisions for relief for the affected MEL items in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD may be restored, provided those items are not otherwise restricted by the existing master minimum equipment list (MMEL).
Although Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A57P011-18, dated October 8, 2018, specifies sending inspection results to Airbus, this AD does not require a report.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0220, dated October 12, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3218.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A57P011-18, dated October 8, 2018.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email
(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:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Engine Alliance (EA) GP7270, GP7272, and GP7277 turbofan engines with a certain high-pressure turbine (HPT) case installed. This AD requires removal of affected HPT stator cases (HPT cases) from service and their replacement with a part eligible for installation. This AD was prompted by the discovery of a quality escape at a manufacturing facility involving unapproved welds on HPT cases. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 23, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 23, 2018.
We must receive comments on this AD by December 24, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Engine Alliance, 411 Silver Lane, East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 800-565-0140; email:
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Matthew Smith, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7735; fax: 781-238-7199; email:
We learned from EA of a quality escape at one of their suppliers, AECC Aero Science and Technology Co., Ltd., which was performing welds on newly-manufactured components to correct errors introduced in their manufacturing process. These welds were not reviewed or approved by either EA or the FAA. EA's review of manufacturing records determined that these parts include HPT cases installed on EA GP7270, GP7272, and GP7277 turbofan engines. These HPT cases are life limited. The unapproved repairs reduced the material capability of these HPT cases, which requires their removal prior to reaching their published Airworthiness Limitation Section life limit. This condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the HPT case, engine fire, and damage to the airplane. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We reviewed EA Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) EAGP7-A72-401, dated August 23, 2018; and EA Service Bulletin (SB) EAGP7-72-399, dated June 4, 2018. EA ASB EAGP7-A72-401 describes procedures for removing and replacing the affected HPT case, within the identified cycles. EA SB EAGP7-72-399 describes procedures for removing and replacing the affected HPT case within the specified part cycles since new or part cycles since overhaul. 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
We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This AD requires removal of the affected HPT cases from service and their replacement with a part eligible for installation.
No domestic operators use this product. Therefore, we find good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary. In addition, for the reason stated above, we find that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We estimate that this AD affects zero engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
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.
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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective November 23, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to Engine Alliance (EA) GP7270, GP7272, and GP7277 turbofan engines, with a high-pressure turbine (HPT) stator case (HPT case), part number (P/N) 2060M40G02 or 2137M29G01 installed, and with HPT case serial numbers (S/Ns) listed in Planning Information, Table 1, of EA Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) EAGP7-A72-401, dated August 23, 2018, and in Planning Information, Table 1, of EA Service Bulletin (SB) EAGP7-72-399, dated June 4, 2018.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine Section.
This AD was prompted by the discovery of a quality escape at a manufacturing facility performing unapproved welds on HPT cases. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HPT case. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in engine fire and damage to the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For HPT cases listed in Planning Information, Table 1, of EA ASB EAGP7-A72-401, dated August 23, 2018, remove the affected HPT case from service within the cycles identified in Table 1 of EA SB EAGP7-A72-401 after the effective date of this AD.
(2) For HPT cases listed in Planning Information, Table 1, of EAGP7-72-399, dated June 4, 2018, remove the affected HPT cases from service, using the number of part cycles since new (PCSN) or part cycles since overhaul (PCSO), whichever is less, as specified in Table 1 to paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.
(3) Replace the removed HPT case with a part eligible for installation before further flight.
For the purpose of this AD, a “part eligible for installation” is any HPT case not identified in paragraph (c) of this AD or an HPT case listed in this AD that has been inspected and repaired by a method approved by the Manager, ECO Branch, FAA.
(1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. You may email your request to:
(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.
For more information about this AD, contact Matthew Smith, Aerospace Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7735; fax: 781-238-7199; email:
(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) Engine Alliance (EA) Alert Service Bulletin EAGP7-A72-401, dated August 23, 2018.
(ii) EA Service Bulletin EAGP7-72-399, dated June 4, 2018.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Engine Alliance, 411 Silver Lane, East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 800-565-0140; email:
(4) You may view this service information at 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.
(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:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and
This rule is effective November 8, 2018. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 8, 2018.
Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;
3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at
Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK. 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK. 73125) telephone: (405) 954-4164.
This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make their verbatim publication in the
This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure and the amendment number.
The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the
The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.
This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.
The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than 30 days.
Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal regulations, part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.
By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, Identified as follows:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.
This rule is effective November 8, 2018. The compliance date for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the amendatory provisions.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of November 8, 2018.
Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the amendment is as follows:
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the affected airport is located;
3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at
Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125) Telephone: (405) 954-4164.
This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when required by an entry on 8260-15A.
The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the
The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as listed in the
The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS as identified in the amendatory language for part 97 of this final rule.
This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as Amended in the transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate flight safety relating
The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C 553(d), good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:
follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Temporary rule; closure.
NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Atka mackerel in the Bering Sea subarea and Eastern Aleutian district (BS/EAI) of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI) by vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery. This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the 2018 total allowable catch (TAC) of Atka mackerel in this area allocated to vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery.
Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), November 5, 2018, through 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2018.
Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.
NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the
The 2018 TAC of Atka mackerel, in the BS/EAI, allocated to vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery was established as a directed fishing allowance of 3,164 metric tons by the final 2018 and 2019 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (83 FR 8365, February 27, 2018).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Atka mackerel in the BS/EAI by vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery.
While this closure is effective, the maximum retainable amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time during a trip.
This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, (AA) finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such a requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the closure of the Atka mackerel directed fishery in the BS/EAI for vessels participating in the BSAI trawl limited access fishery. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of November 2, 2018. The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.
This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
16 U.S.C. 1801
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a main landing gear (MLG) collapse due to a broken drag stay; an investigation revealed that the drag stay failure was due to fatigue cracks, introduced by incorrect machining of the affected drag stay tube during production. This proposed AD would require an inspection of the drag stay unit to determine the signal indication, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 24, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For Fokker service information identified in this NPRM, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3226.
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0015, dated January 25, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes. The MCAI states:
In 1993, an occurrence was reported concerning an MLG collapse due to a broken drag stay on a Fokker F27 Mark 500 RFV (rough field version/configuration). The investigation revealed that the drag stay failure was due to fatigue cracks, introduced by incorrect machining (not smooth, with a notch) of the affected drag stay tube bore during production.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to MLG collapse, possibly resulting in damage to the aeroplane during landing and consequent injury to occupants.
To address this unsafe condition, DALG [Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear] issued SB 32-169B and SB 32-82W (both later revised), and Fokker Services issued SB F27/32-167, to provide inspection instructions. Consequently, the Civil Aviation Authority of the Netherlands (CAA-NL) issued AD (BLA) 93-169 (later revised) [which corresponded to FAA AD 97-04-08, Amendment 39-9932 (62 FR 7924, February 21, 1997), and applies to certain Fokker Model F27 Mark 050, 100, 200, 300, 400, 600, and 700 airplanes], requiring a one-time ultrasonic inspection to identify the type of drag stay tube installed (with stepped or straight bore) on each affected drag stay unit, inspection of the affected drag stay tubes for the presence of cracks, and, depending on findings, re-identification.
After CAA-NL AD (BLA) 93-169/2 was issued, another occurrence was reported on an F27 Mark 500 RFV. Investigation results determined that the drag stay tube of the second occurrence had not been inspected as required by CAA-NL AD (BLA) 93-169, due to misinterpretation of the instructions of Fokker SB F27/32-167. Prompted by these findings, Fokker Services issued SB F27-32-171, providing additional inspection instructions, and CAA-NL issued AD NL-2005-003 (EASA approval 2005-3869) [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-25-06, Amendment 39-14847 (71 FR 71475, December 11, 2006) and applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 500 airplanes]
Since those SBs and [CAA-NL] ADs were issued, the applicable CMM [component maintenance manual] were changed, although with incorrect P/N information, as a result of which an affected drag stay tube with a non-conforming bore radius may inadvertently have been installed on an aeroplane. Prompted by these findings, the applicable CMM were corrected and re-issued, and SLS issued Service Letter (SL) F27-W-8 to inform the operators, and Fokker Services introduced the relevant corrections in the F27 Mark 100 through Mark 700 Illustrated Parts Catalogue (IPC) in September 2017.
Installation of an affected drag stay tube with a non-conforming bore radius, on an MLG drag stay unit that has been re-identified,
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-time inspection of the affected drag stay units to determine whether an affected drag stay tube is installed, repetitive inspections of those that have an affected drag stay tube installed, and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s) [which includes replacement of the drag stay tube].
With the issuance of this [EASA] AD and [EASA] AD 2018-0016 [dated January 25, 2018], the requirements of CAA-NL AD (BLA) 93-169/2 dated 29 April 1994 are no longer necessary and that AD is also cancelled.
EASA AD 2018-0016, dated January 25, 2018, applies to Model F27 Mark 500 airplanes and has been added to the Required Airworthiness Action List.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
Fokker Services B.V. has issued Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017. This service information describes procedures for an inspection of the drag stay unit to determine the signal indication, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary.
SAFRAN Landing Systems (previously Messier-Dowty, Dowty Aerospace) has issued Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear Service Bulletin 32-82W, Revision 2, dated July 29, 1994; and Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear Service Bulletin 32-169B, Revision 2, dated July 29, 1994. The service information describes procedures for reworking the drag stay tube. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.
These 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
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.
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.
Although the procedures specified in Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017, permits further flight if cracks are detected in the drag stay tube, this proposed AD does not. We have determined that, because of the safety implications and consequences associated with that cracking, any cracked drag stay tube must be repaired or modified before further flight. This difference has been coordinated with the manufacturer.
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 1 airplane of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.
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.
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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by December 24, 2018.
This AD affects AD 2006-25-06, Amendment 39-14847 (71 FR 71475, December 11, 2006) (“AD 2006-25-06”) and AD 97-04-08, Amendment 39-9932 (62 FR 7924, February 21, 1997) (“AD 97-04-08”).
This AD applies to all Fokker Services B.V. Model F.27 Mark 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 airplanes, certificated in any category.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Main landing gear.
This AD was prompted by a report of a main landing gear (MLG) collapse due to a broken drag stay; an investigation revealed that the drag stay failure was due to fatigue cracks, introduced by incorrect machining of the affected drag stay tube during production. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, which could lead to MLG collapse and result in damage to the airplane during landing and consequent injury to passengers.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For purposes of this AD, an affected drag stay unit is SAFRAN Landing Systems (previously Messier-Dowty, Dowty Aerospace) main landing gear (MLG) drag stay unit, part number (P/N) 200261001, P/N 200261002, P/N 200261003, P/N 200261004, P/N 200485001, P/N 200485002, P/N 200485003, P/N 200485004, P/N 200684001, P/N 200684002, P/N 200684003, and P/N 200684004.
(2) For purposes of this AD, an affected drag stay tube is a SAFRAN Landing Systems (previously Messier-Dowty, Dowty Aerospace) MLG drag stay tube, P/N 200259300, which has a change in section (stepped bore).
Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do an ultrasonic inspection of each affected drag stay unit to determine the configuration of the drag stay tube, in accordance with step F. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
(1) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, an affected drag stay unit is found to have a straight bore drag stay tube, P/N 200485300, installed: Before further flight, re-identify that affected drag stay unit in accordance with step I.(2), I.(3), or I.(4), as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
(2) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, an affected drag stay unit is found to have an affected drag stay tube, P/N 200259300, installed with a correct radius: Before further flight, re-identify the affected drag stay unit in accordance with step J.(1), J.(2), or J.(3), as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
(3) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, an affected drag stay unit is found to have an affected drag stay tube, P/N 200259300, installed with an incorrect radius: Before further flight, re-identify the affected drag stay unit in accordance with step K.(1), K.(2), or K.(3), as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
For affected drag stay units having P/N 200261002, P/N 200261003, P/N 200485002, P/N 200485003, P/N 200684002, and P/N 200684003: Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do an ultrasonic inspection of the affected drag stay tube for any cracking, in accordance with step G. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
(1) If, during the ultrasonic inspection, a crack indication is found, before further flight, replace the affected drag stay tube with a serviceable part, in accordance with step H. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
(2) For affected drag stay units having P/N 200261002, P/N 200485002, and P/N 200684002 (drag stay units with incorrect bore radius drag stay tubes): If, during the ultrasonic inspection, no indication of cracking is found, within 1,500 flight cycles after that inspection, and, thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 1,500 flight cycles until the next scheduled MLG overhaul, repeat the ultrasonic inspection of the affected drag stay tube in accordance with step G. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017.
As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on any airplane, a drag stay unit (which includes installation of a replacement MLG), unless it has been determined that no affected drag stay tube is installed; or the installed affected drag stay tube has been reworked during the MLG overhaul in accordance with the instructions of Appendix B of Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear Service Bulletin 32-82W, Revision 2, dated July 29, 1994 (for Model F.27 Mark 500 airplanes), or Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear Service Bulletin 32-169B, Revision 2, dated July 29, 1994 (for Model F.27 Mark 100, 200, 300, 400, 600, and 700 airplanes), as applicable; or has passed an inspection (confirmed correct bore radius) in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF27-32-173, dated November 30, 2017. For the purpose of this AD, removal of an MLG or an affected drag stay unit from an airplane and re-installing that MLG or drag stay unit on the same airplane is not “installation.”
Accomplishment of the actions required by this AD terminates all the requirements in AD 2006-25-06, Amendment 39-14847 (71 FR 71475, December 11, 2006); and AD 97-04-08, Amendment 39-9932 (62 FR 7924, February 21, 1997).
This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (j) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear Service Bulletin 32-82W, Revision 1, dated September 10, 1993, or Dowty Aerospace Landing Gear Service Bulletin 32-169B, Revision 1, dated September 10, 1993, which were incorporated by reference in AD 2006-25-06, Amendment 39-14847 (71 FR 71475, December 11, 2006).
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0015, dated January 25, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3226.
(3) For Fokker service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-400 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the splice plate on the lower sill of the overwing emergency exit doors. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for such cracking and applicable on-condition actions. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 24, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this NPRM, 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
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
James Guo, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137;
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We have received reports of cracking in the splice plate on the lower sill of the overwing emergency exit doors. During a maintenance check, a crack was found in the splice plate at station (STA) 601 on the right side of an airplane that had 28,153 total flight cycles and 63,360 total flight hours at the time of the crack finding. The crack had completely severed the one-inch-wide splice plate; the cracking was caused by fatigue stresses. Existing Corrosion Prevention Control Program (CPCP) inspections do not adequately detect cracking in the splice plate before it becomes critical. This cracking, if not addressed, could result in the inability of a principal structural element to
We reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018. This service information describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for cracking in the splice plate on the lower sill of the overwing emergency exit doors and applicable on-condition actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
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 in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions identified in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018, described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at
The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for annotating which steps in the service information are “required for compliance” (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept into Boeing service bulletins.
In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the development of a new process in which the service information more clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition in the “Accomplishment Instructions.” The new process results in a Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to address the unsafe condition (
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 85 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
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:
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.
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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by December 24, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-400 airplanes, certificated in any category, line numbers 1487 through 3132 inclusive.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the splice plate on the lower sill of the overwing emergency exit doors. We are issuing this AD to address cracking in the splice plate, which, if not addressed, could result in the inability of a principal structural element to sustain limit loads and possible rapid decompression of the fuselage.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the applicable times specified in the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018.
Guidance for accomplishing the actions required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1380, dated July 18, 2018, which is referred to in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018.
(1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018, uses the phrase “the original issue date of Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB,” this AD requires using “the effective date of this AD.”
(2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1380 RB, dated July 18, 2018, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions: This AD requires doing the repair and applicable on-condition actions before further flight using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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 (j)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(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 Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, 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.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact James Guo, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5357; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
(2) 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
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening of comment period.
We are revising an earlier proposal, which would have applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319 series airplanes; Model A320 series airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -253N, and -271N airplanes. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by including revised restrictive requirements and adding airplanes to the applicability. We are proposing this airworthiness directive (AD) to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions impose an additional burden over those proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment on these proposed changes.
The comment period for the NPRM published in the
We must receive comments on this SNPRM by December 24, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
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
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319 series airplanes; Model A320 series airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -253N, and -271N airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that new or more restrictive requirements in revised service information are necessary, and that the identified unsafe condition also exists or may develop on Airbus SAS Model A321-251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX, -272N, and -272NX airplanes.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0180, dated August 27, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A318 series airplanes; Model A319 series airplanes; Model A320 series airplanes; and Model A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:
The airworthiness limitations for the Airbus A320 family aeroplanes, which are approved by EASA, are currently defined and published in the A318/A319/A320/A321 ALS [Airworthiness Limitations Section] document(s). The airworthiness limitations applicable to the Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR), which are approved by EASA, are published in ALS Part 3.
Failure to accomplish these instructions could result in an unsafe condition.
Previously, EASA issued AD 2017-0168 to require accomplishment of all maintenance tasks as described in ALS Part 3 at Revision 05.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Airbus published the ALS, including new and/or more restrictive requirements, and new A321 models were certified and added to the Applicability of the ALS.
For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2017-0168, which is superseded, expands the Applicability and requires accomplishment of the actions specified in the ALS.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
Airbus SAS has issued Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 3, Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR), Revision 06, dated June 13, 2018. The service information describes maintenance instructions and airworthiness limitations, including updated inspections and intervals, to be incorporated into the maintenance or inspection program. 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
Delta Air Lines (DAL) contended that the language used in paragraph (j)(ii) of the proposed AD is inaccurate. DAL pointed out that the phrase “that require incorporation” in paragraph (j)(ii) of the proposed AD should be revised to “that allow incorporation,” on the basis that AMOCs do not require alternative actions, but instead allow them.
We agree with the commenter's request based on the reasons stated. We have revised paragraph (j)(ii) of this AD to use the word “allow” instead of “require.”
DAL proposed revising paragraph (j)(ii) of the proposed AD to add a provision that allows the use of corresponding later approved EASA revisions and variations of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 3, Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR).
We disagree with the commenters' requests. We cannot use the phrase, “or later approved revisions,” in an AD when referring to the service information because doing so violates Office of the Federal Register (OFR) regulations for approval of materials “incorporated by reference” in rules. In general terms, we are required by these OFR regulations to either publish the service document contents as part of the actual AD language; or submit the service document to the OFR for approval as “referenced” material, in which case we may only refer to such material in the text of an AD. The AD may refer to the service document only
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to incorporate new or revised airworthiness limitation requirements, as specified in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 3, Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR), Revision 06, dated June 13, 2018. The applicability of this proposed AD would also include Airbus SAS Model A321-251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX, -272N, and -272NX airplanes.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM.
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 1,250 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).
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.
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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by December 24, 2018.
This AD affects AD 2017-25-04, Amendment 39-19118 (82 FR 58098, December 11, 2017) (“AD 2017-25-04”).
This AD applies to the Airbus SAS airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category, with an original certificate of airworthiness or original export certificate of airworthiness issued on or before June 13, 2018.
(1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
(2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes.
(3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, and -271N airplanes.
(4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -251NX, -252N, -252NX, -253N, -253NX, -271N, -271NX, -272N, and -272NX airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks.
This AD was prompted by a revision of an airworthiness limitation item (ALI) document, which requires more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to address a safety-significant latent failure (that is not annunciated), which, in combination with one or more other specific failures or events, could result in a hazardous or catastrophic failure condition.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 3, Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR), Revision 06, dated June 13, 2018 (“ALS Part 3, CMR, R6”). The initial compliance time for accomplishing the tasks specified in ALS Part 3, CMR, R6, is at the applicable time specified in ALS Part 3, CMR, R6, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD terminates all of the requirements of AD 2017-25-04.
After the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(i) 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.
(ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2017-25-04, or AD 2014-22-08, Amendment 39-18013 (79 FR 67042, November 12, 2014), that allow incorporation of ALS Part 3, CMR, R6, are considered approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(2)
(3)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0180, dated August 27, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(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
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; and Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracks that were found after improperly performed magnetic particle inspections of the main landing gear (MLG) sliding tubes were done. This proposed AD would require instructions for repetitive general visual inspections of the affected parts for cracks and replacement if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 24, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus, 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
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0136, dated June 26, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; and Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes. The MCAI states:
During a walk-around inspection, prior to aeroplane dispatch, an A320 MLG was found collapsed. Investigation revealed that, following a magnetic particle inspection of the MLG sliding tube, performed improperly during overhaul, cracks were initiated, eventually leading to fatigue fracture. A limited number of MLG sliding tubes have been identified that may have been subject to the same improper inspection during the last overhaul.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to MLG sliding tube fracture, possibly resulting in MLG collapse, damage to the aeroplane, and injury to occupants.
To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the SB [Service Bulletin A320-32-1461], providing instructions for repetitive general visual inspections (GVI) of the affected parts until next overhaul.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive GVI of the affected parts [for cracks] and, depending on findings, replacement.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April 11, 2018. This service information describes procedures for repetitive general visual inspections of MLG sliding tubes for cracks and replacement of affected sliding tubes. 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
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.
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 817 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
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 $9,945, or $85 per product.
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required based on the results of any required actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:
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 $85 per product.
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.
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.
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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by December 24, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; and Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.
This AD was prompted by reports of cracks that were found after improperly performed magnetic particle inspections of the main landing gear (MLG) sliding tubes were done. We are issuing this AD to address this condition, which could result in fracture of the MLG sliding tube, possibly resulting in MLG collapse, damage to the airplane, and injury to occupants.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
For the purposes of this AD, the definitions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD apply.
(1) An affected part is any MLG sliding tube, having a part number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) listed in Figure 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, that has been last overhauled between October 27, 2003, and September 21, 2009, inclusive.
(2) Group 1 airplanes are those that have an affected part installed. Group 2 airplanes are those that do not have an affected part installed.
For Group 1 airplanes: Within 500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, and, thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 500 flight cycles, accomplish a general visual inspection for cracks of each affected part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April 11, 2018.
If any crack is found during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Before further flight, replace the affected part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April 11, 2018.
Accomplishment of an overhaul of an affected part after September 21, 2009, constitutes terminating action for the repetitive general visual inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD for that affected part.
Submit a report of findings (both positive and negative) of the inspections specified in paragraph (h) of this AD to Airbus, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1461, dated April 11, 2018, at the applicable time specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD. If operators have reported findings as part of obtaining any corrective actions approved by Airbus SAS's European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Design Organization Approval (DOA), operators are not required to report those findings as specified in this paragraph.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.
An airplane embodying Airbus Modification 161202 (Evolution (EV) MLG) is not affected by the requirements of paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, provided it is determined that no affected parts are installed on that airplane. A review of airplane delivery and/or maintenance records is acceptable to make this determination, provided those records can be relied upon for that purpose and the part number and serial
(1) For Group 1 airplanes: From the effective date of this AD, it is allowed to install on any airplane an affected part, or an MLG equipped with an affected part, provided that, within the last 500 flight cycles before installation, the part passed an inspection specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, and that, following installation, the part is inspected as required by this AD.
(2) For Group 2 airplanes: From the effective date of this AD, do not install on any airplane an affected part.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2018-0136, dated June 26, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(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, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.
EPA is announcing a reopening of the comment period for the proposed rule “Light-duty Vehicle GHG Program Technical Amendments,” to provide an additional 30 days for public comment. This document reopens the comment period and establishes a new comment period end date. This additional opportunity to submit comments is provided in response to a request for such an extension and to allow the public additional time to comment on the proposed rule.
The comment period for the proposed rule, published on October 1, 2018 (83 FR 49344), is reopened. Written comments must be received on or before November 30, 2018, in order to be considered timely.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0755, at
Christopher Lieske, Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ), Assessment and Standards Division (ASD), Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4584; email address:
In the EPA proposal “Light-duty Vehicle GHG Program Technical Amendments,” published in the
The proposal for which EPA is reopening the comment period was published in the
Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration (GSA).
Proposed rule.
The General Services Administration (GSA) is issuing a proposed rule amending the General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) to adopt an additional project delivery method for construction, construction manager as constructor (CMc). The private sector prevalently uses this type of construction project delivery method, which allows for early industry engagement by the construction contractor to provide reduced cost growth, reduced schedule growth and administrative savings. The current Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and GSAR lack detailed coverage differentiating various construction project delivery methods. GSA's policies on CMc have been previously issued through other means. By incorporating CMc into the GSAR and differentiating for various construction methods, the GSAR will provide centralized guidance that eases the burden for industry to understand and execute CMc construction contracts. Centralized guidance will also ensure consistent application of construction project principles across GSA. Additionally, integrating these requirements into the GSAR will allow industry to provide public comments through the rulemaking process.
Interested parties should submit written comments to the Regulatory Secretariat Division on or before January 7, 2019 to be considered in the formulation of a final rule.
Submit comments identified by GSAR Case 2015-G503 by any of the following methods:
•
•
For clarification about content, contact Mr. Tony O. Hubbard, General Services Acquisition Policy Division, GSA, by phone at 202-357-5810 or by email at
CMc refers to a project management and contracting technique that is one of three predominant methods used for acquiring construction services by GSA (
The General Services Administration (GSA) is amending the General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) to revise sections of GSAR Part 536, Construction and Architect-Engineer Contracts, and corresponding clauses in GSAR Part 552, Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses to incorporate CMc contracting, an industry best practice readily used in the private sector for construction. This rule will clarify, update and incorporate existing CMc guidance previously implemented through internal Public Building Service (PBS) policies.
Bringing existing policy into the GSAR will allow for greater transparency and an opportunity for the public to comment on these long-standing procedures. This rule has wide support from industry. In response to GSA's request for public input on acquisition regulatory reform (82 FR 24653), one leading construction industry association requested that GSA put forward GSAR guidance on the CMc project delivery method. In addition, bringing these policies into one location ensures currency and consistency that will make it easier for companies to do business with the Government and will provide better guidance to contracting officers. The proposed rule includes a total of two new agency unique clauses, three new alternatives to existing clauses, one new definition and one new agency unique subpart to prescribe policies and procedures for CMc contracting.
The CMc project delivery method models those used extensively in the
A GSAR rewrite initiative was undertaken by GSA to revise the GSAR starting in 2008. A proposed rule to update GSAR Part 536, Construction and Architect-Engineer Contracts was initially published as GSAR Case 2008-G509 in the
The changes to the GSAR included in this proposed rule are summarized below.
1. Two new clauses for construction contracts previously implemented through internal PBS policy and currently in solicitations and contracts will be incorporated into GSAR Parts 536 and 552. The new clauses and a brief description are as follows:
2. Three new alternates for existing clauses for construction contracts previously implemented through internal PBS policy and currently in solicitation and contracts will be incorporated into GSAR Parts 536 and 552. The clauses and a brief description of the changes are as follows:
3. A new definition is incorporated at GSAR Section 536.102 for the construction manager as constructor (CMc) project delivery method.
4. GSAR Subpart 536.71 is added to reflect current practices for construction contracting using the construction manager as constructor (CMc) project delivery method. The sections and a brief description are as follows:
GSA is seeking public comment on the applicability of Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) and the structure of incentives for CMc contracts. Feedback from industry and interested parties in Government on these issues will be used to help inform revisions to the proposed clauses, prescriptions, and other guidance to implement the rule.
All three predominant construction project delivery methods have merits (
1.
Early collaboration between the CMc and architect allow for (a) more efficient reviews of architect design submittals, (b) innovation during design that leads to fewer change orders during construction, and (c) identifications of conflicts or errors before work investments are made.
Early work packages under CMc allow for firm-fixed-price conversions and advanced execution of certain elements that provide cost and schedule savings, especially in a tight labor or material market.
As compared with D-B projects, CMc projects will reduce sunk costs and lower barriers to entry for industry to submit proposals and compete in this space.
Finally, codifying CMc requirements into one publicly-posted location, the GSAR, will ease the burden to industry and GSA to understand CMc requirements and execute CMc projects.
2.
3.
4.
To estimate the economic impacts of reduced schedule growth, cost to finalize the GMP proposal and regulation familiarization, data was analyzed for GSA construction contracts completed between 2009 and 2016 that used the three predominant construction delivery methods. The results of the analysis showed this rule will provide a net deregulatory savings of $238,535 annually. A 7 percent discount rate was used for the calculations.
Historic data was gathered and analyzed from GSA's Electronic Planning Module (ePM), an internal system which was mandated as a project management tool for construction starting in 2009. Historic data was also gathered and analyzed from the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), the authoritative source for government wide contract award data. Based on historic data, it is assumed that five new CMc projects will be performed each year.
A copy of the EIA may be obtained from the Regulatory Secretariat. GSA invites comments from industry and
The EIA recognizes that Government will have administrative savings from reduced schedule growth. CMc when compared with non-CMc project delivery methods historically saves on average 71 calendar days (or 60 business days). This allows for increased efficiency for a senior project manager (PM), senior CO, and journeyman CS. Based on subject matter expertise, the PM would save 6 hours per day, the CO would save 2.5 hours per day, and the CS would save 5 hours per day. From reduced schedule growth, the annual Government savings is 810 hours ($275,990).
The EIA also recognizes that Government will have an added burden to review revised proposal submissions from contractors for the final GMP. Based on subject matter expertise, a journeyman CS would spend 20 hours for each proposal review. For the final GMP proposal, the total annual burden to the Government is 100 hours ($5,430).
Finally, the EIA recognizes that Government will have an added burden to understand the minor policy changes in this rule from existing guidance. The analysis accounts for a senior contracting officer (CO) and journeyman contract specialist (CS) for each GSA CMc construction project. Based on subject matter expertise, a CO and CS would spend one hour annually reviewing the adjusted language for understanding. For regulation familiarization, the total annual burden to the Government is 10 hours ($653).
The total annual Government economic impact is a savings of 700 hours ($269,907), or ($252,250) when annualized at a 7 percent discount.
The EIA recognizes that contractors will have an added burden to prepare revised proposal submissions for the final GMP. It is assumed that large or small businesses would spend 40 hours for each proposal submission. For the final GMP proposal, the total annual burden to the public is 200 hours ($10,860).
Finally, the EIA recognizes that contractors will have an added burden to understand the minor policy changes in this rule from existing guidance. The analysis accounts for two hours for large or small business entities to review and understand the new language differences between existing policy. This also assumes that for each of the contracts an estimated five entities will spend time reviewing language during the solicitation phase in order to provide a representative offer. For regulation familiarization, the total annual burden to the public is 50 hours ($3,815).
The total annual public economic impact is a burden of 250 hours ($14,675), or ($13,715) when annualized at a 7 percent discount.
Executive Orders (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 supplements E.O. 12866 and emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
This proposed rule is expected to be an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic impact analysis detailed in Section IV of this proposed rule.
This rule has been identified by GSA's Regulatory Reform Task Force as a rule that improves efficiency by eliminating procedures with costs that exceed the benefits as described in Section IV of this proposed rule.
GSA does not expect this proposed rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, at 5 U.S.C. 601,
The proposed rule changes will apply to approximately 5 GSA construction contracts per year. Of these, approximately 1 (20 percent) contracts are held by small businesses. The proposed rule is unlikely to affect small businesses awarded GSA CMc construction contracts as it implements clauses currently in use in CMc solicitations and contracts. The proposed rule does not pose any new reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements. The rule does not duplicate or conflict with any other Federal rules. The agency determined that alternative language is necessary for four FAR clauses. The agency determined that supplemental language is necessary for two FAR clauses. No alternatives were determined that will accomplish the objectives of the rule. Bringing these regulations into the GSAR provides for transparency and allows for public comment. Bringing these regulations into the GSAR also consolidates policy into one area, allowing for more consistency and efficiency in contracting for both businesses and contracting officers.
The Regulatory Secretariat Division has submitted a copy of the IRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of the IRFA may be obtained from the Regulatory Secretariat. GSA invites comments from small business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small entities.
GSA will also consider comments from small entities concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 601,
The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) applies because the proposed rule contains information collection requirements. Accordingly, the Regulatory Secretariat Division has submitted a request for approval of a new information collection requirement concerning this rule to the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501,
The information collected is used by PBS to evaluate contractor's proposals and negotiate contract modifications during contract administration.
Total public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 200 total hours annually, including the time for reviewing
The new clause at GSAR 552.236-79, Construction-Contractor-as-Constructor, requires the contractor to submit proposals to establish the final estimated cost of the work, to convert the contract to a firm-fixed-price, and to determine the final settlement.
The new clause at GSAR 552.236-80, Accounting Records, contains a recordkeeping requirement that is subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501,
Submit comments, including suggestions for reducing this burden, no later than January 7, 2019. Submit comments to the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405.
Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary; whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection supporting statement from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405.
Please cite OMB Control No. 3090-XXXX, Construction Manager as Constructor; GSAR Case 2015-G506, in all correspondence.
Government procurement.
Therefore, GSA proposes to amend 48 CFR parts 501, 536, and 552 as set forth below:
40 U.S.C. 121(c).
“Construction-Manager-as-Constructor” (CMc) means the project delivery method where design and construction are contracted concurrently through two separate contracts and two separate contractors. Unlike the traditional design-bid-build delivery method, under the CMc delivery method, the Government awards a separate contract to a designer (
Insert the clause at 552.236-15, Schedules for Construction Contracts, in solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements is contemplated. Use the clause:
(a) With its Alternate I when the contract amount is expected to be above the simplified acquisition threshold and a design-bid-build project delivery method will be followed.
(b) With its Alternate II when the contract amount is expected to be above the simplified acquisition threshold and a design-build project delivery method will be followed.
(c) With its Alternate III when the contract amount is expected to be above the simplified acquisition threshold and a construction-manager-as-constructor project delivery method will be followed.
Insert the clause at 552.236-21, Specifications and Drawings for Construction, in solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements is contemplated. Use the clause—
(a) With its Alternate I when a design-build project delivery method will be followed; or
(b) With its Alternate II when a construction-manager-as-constructor project delivery method will be followed.
Insert the clause at 552.236-70, Authorities and Limitations, in solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements is contemplated.
Insert the clause at 552.236-71, Contractor Responsibilities, in solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements is contemplated. Use the clause—
(a) With its Alternate I when a design-build project delivery method will be followed; or
(b) With its Alternate II when a construction-manager-as-constructor project delivery method will be followed.
This subpart describes policies and procedures for the use of the CMc project delivery method.
As used in this subpart—
“CMc Contingency Allowance” (CCA) is an allowance for the exclusive use of the construction contractor to cover reimbursable costs during construction that are not the basis of a change order. These costs could include estimating and planning errors in the final Estimated Cost of the Work (ECW) or other contractor errors.
“Early Work Package” means a set of construction activities that can be clearly defined and separately performed from the remainder of the construction work. These packages are typically identified toward the beginning of the project. Demolition is an example of an early work package.
“Estimated Cost of the Work” (ECW) means the estimated direct cost of the construction work. The proposed ECW incorporated at construction contract award is the target ECW. The final ECW is negotiated during the design phase and is incorporated into the construction contract through modification.
“Fee for the Construction Work” is a fixed amount established in the construction contract for all of the contractor's indirect costs, including overhead and profit, for the construction work. The fee may be proposed per phase of construction if each phase is a separate option.
“Guaranteed Maximum Price” (GMP) is the ceiling price described in FAR 16.403-2. At construction contract award, the GMP for the construction contract is established as the sum of the target ECW, the CCA and the fee for the construction work.
(a)
(b)
(1)
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (ii) of this subsection, the solicitation shall provide that the technical evaluation factors, when combined, shall be considered significantly more important than cost or price.
(ii) Subject to the approval of the HCA, the weighting of the technical evaluation factors and cost or price may be different than that required under paragraph (i) of this subsection. Any such written approval shall be documented in the contract file.
(2)
(3)
(c)
In accordance with FAR 4.1001, the contracting officer shall use the SF 1442 to identify the services or items to be acquired as separately identified line items on a unit price or lump sum basis including the design phase services, the construction work GMP option(s), and any other work not included in the previously identified items.
(a) During all phases of the project, the architect-engineer contractor that is providing design services under a separate contract with GSA is contractually responsible for the design in the same manner as under a traditional, design-bid-build project delivery method.
(b) The design phase services provided by the construction contractor can include, but are not limited to, scheduling, systems analysis, subcontractor involvement, cost-estimating, constructability reviews, cost-reconciliation services, and market analysis.
(c) The scope of work should task the construction contractor with reviewing the design documents and providing pricing information at various defined milestones during the design phase.
(d) During the design phase, the architect-engineer contractor and the construction contractor should collaborate on the design and constructability issues. The goal of this collaboration is to establish a final ECW that does not exceed the original target ECW.
(e) No discussions between the architect-engineer contractor and the construction contractor shall be considered as a change to the construction contract or design contract unless incorporated by the contracting officer through a modification.
(a)
(1)
(ii) The GMP is subject to adjustment under various standard contract clauses, including the changes clause, differing site conditions clause, and suspensions clause.
(iii) The contract file shall contain all documents to support any scope changes including a separate analysis to document the rationale for any upward or downward adjustment to the GMP.
(2)
(ii) The contracting officer shall negotiate the final ECW and incorporate it into the construction contract through a bilateral modification prior to exercising the GMP option.
(3)
(ii) The CCA is adjusted to provide for a contingency relative to a fixed percentage of the ECW set at contract award, except for the requirements at paragraph (c)(2) of this subsection.
(iii) The CCA will cover design errors and omissions that do not form the basis of a change order. Design errors and omissions that do form the basis for a change order will be settled in accordance with GSAR 552.243-71 Equitable Adjustments.
(iv) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this subsection, the CCA should not exceed 3 percent.
(v) Subject to the approval of the HCA, the CCA may be different than that required under paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this subsection. Any such written approval shall be documented in the contract file.
(4)
(ii) The fee for the construction work associated with a scope change shall not be driven by a fixed percentage. The contracting officer should determine whether the profit included, if any, in a contractor's proposal is reasonable for the scope change work.
(b)
(2) The GMP shall be bilaterally modified downward during the design phase for deletions to the scope of work.
(c)
(2) If the sum of the final ECW, CCA, and fee for construction work is less than the GMP established at contract award, then the contracting officer shall adjust the GMP downward accordingly through a bilateral modification to exercise the GMP option.
(3) If the sum of the final ECW, CCA, and fee for the construction work is greater than the GMP established at contract award, then the contracting officer shall reduce the CCA while keeping the GMP amount fixed through a bilateral modification to exercise the GMP option.
(4) The GMP option shall not be exercised if the final ECW and fee for the construction work is greater than the GMP established at contract award.
(d)
(2) Any changes in scope after award of the GMP option shall be reflected by a written modification to the construction contract in accordance with FAR Part 43.
(e)
(2) If any early work package exercised reduces the scope of the construction services under the GMP option, the ECW shall be reduced, and the CCA, fee for the construction work, and GMP shall be adjusted accordingly.
(f)
(2) Any modification that changes the GMP, including modifications for early work packages and fixed price conversions, must clearly state that it includes a change to the GMP and describe the changes to the individual parts of the GMP components in the modification.
(3) Any modification that changes the total GMP, or individual parts of the GMP, is subject to the requirement for a prenegotiation objectives memo and price negotiation memo, including fair and reasonable price determination, per FAR 15.406.
(4) The contracting officer should consult other members of the acquisition team, including the project manager, to analyze and justify any adjustments to the total GMP, or individual parts of the GMP.
(a)
(2) The contracting officer may request a CAS waiver in accordance with the requirements at FAR 30.201-5 and 530.201-5.
(3) If CAS applies, the contract clauses identified at FAR 30.201-4 shall be included in the contract.
(4) If a CAS waiver is granted or if CAS does not apply, the contract clause identified at 536.7107(b) shall be included in the contract.
(b)
(1)
(2)
(c)
In accordance with FAR 48.202, the clause at FAR 52.248-3 Value Engineering-Construction does not apply to incentive contracts. Accordingly, value engineering shall not apply to the CMc project delivery method described in this subpart.
(a)
(b)
(2) Subject to the approval of the HCA, the share ratio may be different than that required under paragraph (b)(1) of this subsection. Any such written approval shall be documented in the contract file.
(c)
(a) Establishing a separate allowance in addition to the CCA is only permitted pursuant to a written determination approved by the contracting director supporting the use of any such allowance.
(b) The written determination for a separate allowance in addition to the CCA shall consider—
(1) Alternative contracting structures, such as a separate GMP line item or performing the work as part of the GMP option, and
(2) Ensuring conformance with all applicable rules and procedures relating to allowances, including FAR 11.702.
(a) Construction services for an early work package must be within the scope of the overall contract.
(b) Early work packages may be part of the initial procurement as a separately priced line item, or the Government and the construction contractor may agree to develop an early work package after award.
(c) Early work packages shall be definitive firm-fixed-price line items in the contract.
(d)
(2) If any such early work package reduces the scope of the construction services under the GMP option, the ECW shall be reduced, and the CCA, fee for the construction work, and GMP shall be adjusted accordingly.
(3) Any modification to the contract for an early work package is subject to the requirement for a prenegotiation objectives memo and price negotiation memo, including fair and reasonable price determination, per FAR 15.406.
(e) Early work packages are no longer subject to open book accounting, a shared savings incentive, or the need for determination of final settlement.
(a) At any time after completion of 100 percent construction documents, the Government and the construction contractor may bilaterally convert the whole contract to firm-fixed-price.
(b) Conversion to firm-fixed-price may occur after the contingency risks, to be covered by the CCA, have been sufficiently reduced in the best interest of the Government. See FAR 16.103(b) for additional guidance for assessing risk management, profit motive, and timing considerations.
(c) Conversion to firm-fixed-price is only permitted pursuant to a written determination from the contracting officer to the contract file supporting the conversion. The contracting officer should consult other members of the acquisition team, including the project manager, to analyze and justify the conversion.
(d) The contracting officer shall not agree to a firm-fixed-price in excess of the GMP.
(e) In accordance with 536.7105-3(c), the contracting officer shall obtain an independent audit of the construction contractor's costs incurred in the performance of the contract to date.
(f) When evaluating the construction contractor's proposal for firm-fixed-price definitization, the contracting officer should compare the anticipated final cost to the firm-fixed-price being proposed. It may be reasonable for the construction contractor to include a contingency for assuming the risk associated with agreeing to the firm-fixed-price. The contracting officer should evaluate this contingency to ensure that the proposed amount reasonably reflects the remaining risks being assumed by the construction contractor. This evaluation may be informed by the history of the project, the balance of the CCA, and other factors.
(g) The modification to convert to a firm-fixed-price is subject to the requirement to obtain cost and pricing data unless one of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 applies.
(h) The modification to convert to a firm-fixed-price is subject to the requirement for a prenegotiation objectives memo and price negotiation memo, including fair and reasonable price determination, per FAR 15.406.
(i) Upon converting to a firm-fixed-price, the contract is no longer subject to open book accounting, a shared savings incentive, or the need for determination of final settlement.
Unless the contract has been converted to a standard firm-fixed-price contract (see 536.7105-8)—
(a) The contracting officer shall ensure that the construction contractor's proposal for final settlement is accurate and reliable in accordance with the open book accounting practices of the contract.
(b) In accordance with 536.7105-3(c), the contracting officer shall obtain an independent audit of the construction contractor's costs.
(a) Insert a clause substantially the same as the clause at 552.236-79, Construction-Manager-As-Constructor, in solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, or removal of improvements is contemplated when a CMc project delivery method will be followed. This clause is in lieu of the clause at FAR 52.216-17 Incentive Price Revision—Successive Targets.
(b) Insert a clause substantially the same as the clause at 552.236-80, Accounting Records and Progress Payments, in solicitations and contracts if construction, dismantling, or removal of improvements is contemplated when a CMc project delivery method will be followed and cost accounting standards do not apply. This clause is in lieu of the clauses at FAR 52.230-2 Cost Accounting Standards, FAR 52.230-3 Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices, and FAR 52.230-6 Administration of Cost Accounting Standards.
As prescribed in 536.515, insert the following clause:
The requirements, of the clause entitled “Schedules for Construction Contracts” at FAR 52.236-15, are supplemented as follows:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(2) Values must include all direct and indirect costs, although a separate value for bond costs may be established.
(3) The schedule of values must contain sufficient detail to enable the Contracting Officer to evaluate payment requests (see FAR 52.232-5 and GSAR 552.232-5).
(g)
(2) Within 30 calendar days of any such written notice, or such other time as may be specified, from the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall take one of the following actions—
(i) Revise the project schedule;
(ii) Adjust activity progress; or
(iii) Provide sufficient information demonstrating compliance.
(3) If the Contractor fails to sufficiently address the Contracting Officer's exceptions to the project schedule, the Contracting Officer may, in addition to any other remedies set forth in the contract—
(i) Withhold retainage until the project is substantially complete or until such time as the Contractor has complied with project schedule requirements; or
(ii) Terminate the contract for default.
(h)
(i)
(c)
(e)
(2) The project schedule shall depict all activities necessary to complete the work, including, as applicable, all submittal and submittal review activities, all procurement activities, and all field activities, including mobilization, construction, start-up, testing, balancing, commissioning, and punchlist.
(3) Activities shall be sufficiently detailed and limited in duration to enable proper planning and coordination of the work, effective evaluation of the reasonableness and realism of the project schedule, accurate monitoring of progress, and reliable analysis of schedule impacts.
(4) Activity durations shall be based upon reasonable and realistic allocation of the resources required to complete each activity, given physical and logistical constraints on the performance of the work. All logic shall validly reflect physical or logistical constraints on relationships between activities. Except for the first and last activities in the project schedule, each activity shall have at least one predecessor and one successor relationship to form a logically connected network plan from notice to proceed to the contract completion date.
(h)
(2) If the Contractor proposes a revision to the project schedule after initial approved submission, the Contractor shall provide in writing a narrative describing the substance of the revision, the rationale for the revision, and the impact of the revision on the projected substantial completion date and the available float for all activities.
(i)
(c)
(2) Within 30 calendar days of completion of final design documents, the Contractor shall submit a revised project schedule depicting all activities necessary to complete construction work activities, together with a written narrative describing the major work activities, activities on the critical path, and major constraints underlying the sequence and logic of the project schedule.
(e)
(2) Activities shall be sufficiently detailed and limited in duration to enable proper planning and coordination of the work, effective evaluation of the reasonableness and realism of the project schedule, accurate monitoring of progress, and reliable analysis of schedule impacts.
(3) Activity durations shall be based upon reasonable and realistic allocation of the resources required to complete each activity, given physical and logistical constraints on the performance of the work. All logic shall validly reflect physical or logistical constraints on relationships between activities. Except for the first and last activities in the project schedule, each activity shall have at least one predecessor and one successor relationship to form a logically connected network plan from notice to proceed to the contract completion date.
(i)
(c)
(2) Within 30 calendar days after establishing the final estimated cost of work, the Contractor shall submit the construction phase project schedule, together with a written narrative describing the major work activities, activities on the critical path, and major constraints underlying the sequence and logic of the project schedule.
(e)
(2) The Contractor shall use a critical path method project schedule to plan, coordinate, and perform the construction phase work.
(3) The construction phase project schedule shall depict all activities necessary to complete the construction work, including, as applicable, all submittal and submittal review activities, all procurement activities, and all field activities, including mobilization, construction, start-up, testing, balancing, commissioning, and punchlist.
(4) Activities shall be sufficiently detailed and limited in duration to enable proper planning and coordination of the work, effective evaluation of the reasonableness and realism of the project schedule, accurate monitoring of progress, and reliable analysis of schedule impacts.
(5) Activity durations shall be based upon reasonable and realistic allocation of the resources required to complete each activity, given physical and logistical constraints on the performance of the work. All logic shall validly reflect physical or logistical constraints on relationships between activities. Except for the first and last activities in the project schedule, each activity shall have at least one predecessor and one successor relationship to form a logically connected network plan from notice to proceed to the contract completion date.
(h)
(2) If the Contractor proposes a revision to the project schedule after initial approved submission, the Contractor shall provide in writing a narrative describing the substance of the revision, the rationale for the revision, and the impact of the revision on the projected substantial completion date and the available float for all activities.
(i)
As prescribed in 536.521, insert the following clause:
The requirements of the clause entitled “Specifications and Drawings for Construction” at FAR 52.236-21, are supplemented as follows:
(a) In case of difference between small and large-scale drawings, the large-scale drawings shall govern.
(b) Schedules on any contract drawing shall take precedence over conflicting information on that or any other contract drawing.
(c) On any of the drawings where a portion of the work is detailed or drawn out and the remainder is shown in outline, the parts detailed or drawn out shall apply also to all other like portions of the work.
(d) Where the word “similar” occurs on the drawings, it shall have a general meaning and not be interpreted as being identical, and all details shall be worked out in relation to their location and their connection with other parts of the work.
(e) Standard details or specification drawings are applicable when listed, bound with the specifications, noted on the drawings, or referenced elsewhere in the specifications.
(1) Where notes on the specification drawings indicate alterations, such alterations shall govern.
(2) In case of difference between standard details or specification drawings and the specifications, the specifications shall govern.
(3) In case of difference between the standard details or specification drawings and the drawings prepared specifically for this contract, the drawings prepared specifically for this contract shall govern.
(f) Different requirements within the contract documents shall be deemed inconsistent only if compliance with both cannot be achieved.
(g) Unless otherwise noted, the drawings shall be interpreted to provide for a complete construction, assembly, or installation of the work, without regard to the detail with which material components are shown in the drawings.
(h) For the purposes of this clause, specifications and drawings refer only to those included among the contract documents at time of contract award, and not to those produced by the Contractor pursuant to its responsibilities under the contract.
(h) For the purposes of this clause, specifications and drawings refer only to the construction documents, meaning the 100 percent complete specifications and construction drawings developed during the design phase.
As prescribed in 536.571, insert the following clause:
(a) The Contractor shall be responsible for compliance with applicable codes, standards and regulations pertaining to the health and safety of personnel during performance of the contract.
(b) Unless expressly stated otherwise in the contract, the Contractor shall be responsible for all means and methods employed in the performance of the contract.
(c) The Contractor shall immediately bring to the Contracting Officer's attention any hazardous materials or conditions not disclosed in the contract documents discovered by or made known to the Contractor during the performance of the contract.
(d) The Contractor shall be responsible for providing professional design services in connection with performance of the work or portions of the work only if this responsibility is expressly stated in the contract, and the contract documents provide the performance and design criteria that such services will be required to satisfy. In the performance of such work, the Contractor shall be responsible for retaining licensed design professionals, who shall sign and seal all drawings, calculations, specifications and other submittals that the licensed professional prepares. The Contractor shall be responsible for, and GSA shall be entitled to rely upon, the adequacy and completeness of all professional design services provided under the contract.
(e) Where installation of separate work components as shown in the contract will
(f) Where drawings show work without specific routing, dimensions, locations, or position relative to other work or existing conditions, and such information is not specifically defined by reference to specifications or other information supplied in the contract, the Contractor is responsible for routing, dimensioning, and locating such work in coordination with other work or existing conditions in a manner consistent with contract requirements.
(g) It is not the Contractor's responsibility to ensure that the contract documents comply with applicable laws, statutes, building codes and regulations. If it comes to the attention of the Contractor that any of the contract documents do not comply with such requirements, the Contractor shall promptly notify the Contracting Officer in writing. If the Contractor performs any of the work prior to notifying and receiving direction from the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall assume full responsibility for correction of such work, and any fees or penalties that may be assessed for non-compliance.
(d) The Contractor shall be responsible for providing professional design services unless this responsibility is expressly excluded from the contract. In the performance of such work, the Contractor shall be responsible for retaining licensed design professionals, who shall sign and seal all drawings, calculations, specifications and other submittals that the licensed professional prepares. The Contractor shall be responsible for, and GSA shall be entitled to rely upon, the adequacy and completeness of all professional design services provided under the contract.
(e) The Contractor's responsibilities include the responsibilities of the Architect-Engineer Contractor, as specified in FAR 52.236-23.
(f) The Contractor shall include in all subcontracts that require professional design services express terms establishing GSA as a third party beneficiary. No other person shall be deemed a third party beneficiary of the contract.
(g) The Contractor shall determine whether the information contained in the contract documents complies with applicable laws, statutes, building codes and regulations. If it comes to the attention of the Contractor that any of the contract documents do not comply with such requirements, the Contractor shall promptly notify the Contracting Officer in writing. If the Contractor performs any of the work prior to notifying and receiving direction from the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall assume full responsibility for correction of such work, and any fees or penalties that may be assessed for non-compliance.
(d) The Contractor shall be responsible for performing the design phase services in accordance with the statement of work. The Contractor shall submit all deliverables and reports in accordance with the statement of work.
(e) The Contractor shall be responsible to review all design information (
(f) Prior to establishment of the final estimated cost of work, the Contractor shall bring to the Contracting Officer's attention all instances that it has discovered or has been made aware of where omission of design information affects the Contractor's ability to accurately estimate the cost of the work.
(g) Where installation of separate work components as shown in the contract will result in conflict or interference between such components or with existing conditions, including allowable tolerances, it is the Contractor's responsibility to bring such conflict or interference to the attention of the Contracting Officer and seek direction before fabrication, construction, or installation of any affected work. If the Contractor fabricates, constructs, or installs any work prior to receiving such direction, the Contractor shall be responsible for all cost and time incurred to resolve or mitigate such conflict or interference.
(h) Where drawings show work without specific routing, dimensions, locations, or position relative to other work or existing conditions, and such information is not specifically defined by reference to specifications or other information supplied in the contract, the Contractor is responsible for routing, dimensioning, and locating such work in coordination with other work or existing conditions in a manner consistent with contract requirements.
(i) It is not the Contractor's responsibility to ensure that the contract documents comply with applicable laws, statutes, building codes and regulations. If it comes to the attention of the Contractor that any of the contract documents do not comply with such requirements, the Contractor shall promptly notify the Contracting Officer in writing. If the Contractor performs any of the work prior to notifying and receiving direction from the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall assume full responsibility for correction of such work, and any fees or penalties that may be assessed for non-compliance.
(j) The Contractor is responsible to construct the project in accordance with the drawings and specifications. The final Estimated Cost of the Construction Work (ECW) may be determined based upon incomplete design documents. In those instances in which the drawings and specifications are not complete at the time the final ECW is established, the Contractor shall exercise reasonable care and judgment to determine the intent of the design and shall calculate the final ECW on the basis of the quality of construction, materials, and finishes that can be reasonably inferred from the design documents or other specified sources.
As prescribed in 536.7107(a), insert the following clause:
(a)
(b)
“Construction-Manager-as-Constructor (CMc) Contingency Allowance” (CCA) means an allowance to cover reimbursable costs during construction that are not the basis of a change order.
“Costs” means allowable direct costs in accordance with FAR Part 31. Marked up costs paid to subcontractors shall be deemed direct costs of the Contractor.
“Cost of Performance” means the final sum of cost of the construction work and fee for the construction work.
“Estimated Cost of the Work” (ECW) means the estimated direct cost of the construction work.
“Fee for the Construction Work” means a fixed amount for all indirect costs, including overhead and profit.
“Guaranteed Maximum Price” (GMP) means the sum of the ECW, CCA, and the fee for the construction work.
(c)
(d)
(e)
(1)
(i) A detailed statement of all firm-fixed-price early work packages in the performance of the construction work to date.
(ii) A proposed final ECW.
(iii) Sufficient data to support the accuracy and reliability of the estimate.
(iv) An explanation of the difference between the proposed final ECW and the target ECW used to establish the GMP.
(v) The Contractor's affirmation that—
(A) The Contractor is satisfied that the project as described in the specifications and construction drawings is constructible using commercially practicable means and methods;
(B) The Contractor is satisfied that the construction work has been sufficiently described to enable it to estimate the cost of the work with reasonable accuracy;
(C) The Contractor has disclosed to the Contracting Officer all of its actual knowledge relating to omissions of design information that may affect the cost of the work; and
(D) The Contractor acknowledges that the final ECW and time established for completion shall not be adjusted on account of cost or time attributable to known design omissions disclosed by the Contractor pursuant to paragraph (e)(1)(v)(C) of this clause. Unknown design errors and omissions that form the basis for a change order may still be settled in accordance with GSAR 552.243-71 Equitable Adjustments.
(2)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j) Adjustment of the Fee for the Construction Work. The fee for the construction work may only be adjusted for scope changes that have an impact on schedule. The fee for the construction work associated with a scope change shall not be driven by a fixed percentage.
(k)
(1)
(i) A proposed firm-fixed-price proposal for the completion of the construction work, which shall include all markups, including profit.
(ii) A detailed statement of any costs incurred in the performance of the contract work to date.
(2)
(i)
(ii)
(iii) If any portion of the contract is converted to a firm-fixed-price, then that portion of the contract is no longer subject to open book accounting, a shared savings incentive, or the need for final settlement. If the contract is not converted to a firm-fixed-price contract, then the final settlement of the Contractor's compensation shall be determined in accordance with paragraph (l) of this clause.
(3)
(l)
(1)
(i) A detailed statement of all costs incurred by the Contractor in performing the construction work.
(ii) A firm-fixed-price proposal for the performance of the remaining work, if any, that may be necessary to complete performance of the construction work.
(iii) An executed release of claims, which shall describe any and all exceptions, including a description of any outstanding claims.
(iv) Any other relevant data that the Contracting Officer may reasonably require.
(2)
(3)
(m)
(n)
(2) After converting to firm-fixed-price, the Government maintains the right to examine records under GSAR Clause 552.215-70.
(o)
(p) The contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of this clause in all subcontracts under this contract.
As prescribed in 536.7107(b), insert the following clause:
(a) The Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this contract. The Contractor's accounting and control systems shall meet Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and provide for the following:
(1) There is proper segregation of direct costs and indirect costs.
(2) There is proper identification and accumulation of direct costs by contract.
(3) There is a labor time distribution system that charges direct and indirect labor appropriately.
(b) The Contractor shall afford access to and shall permit any authorized representatives of the Government to audit, examine and copy any records, documents, books, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda, and other data relating to this contract. Records subject to audit, examination, and copying shall include those records necessary to evaluate and verify all direct and indirect costs, including overhead and payroll tax and fringe benefit allocations, as they may apply to costs associated with the contract. The Contractor shall preserve these records for a period of three years after the final payment, or for such longer period as may be required by law.
(c) The records identified in paragraphs (b) of this clause shall be subject to inspection and audit by the Government or its authorized representative for, but limited to, evaluating and verifying the following:
(1) Contractor compliance with contract requirements.
(2) Compliance with pricing change orders, invoices, applications for payment, or claims submitted by the contractor or any of its subcontractors at any tier, including vendors and suppliers.
(d) If requested by the Government, the Contractor shall promptly deliver to the Government or its designee copies of all records related to the contract, in a form acceptable to the Government. The Contractor shall provide to the Government or its authorized representative such records maintained in an electronic format in a computer readable format on data disks or suitable alternative computer data exchange formats.
(e) The Government shall have access to the Contractor's facilities, shall be allowed to interview all current and former employees to discuss matters pertinent to the contract, and shall be provided adequate work space, in order to conduct audits and examinations.
(f) If any audit or examination of the Contractor's records discloses total findings resulting in overpricing or overcharges by the Contractor to the Government in excess of one-quarter percent of the total contract billings, the Contractor shall immediately reimburse the Government for the overcharges. The Contractor shall also reimburse the Government for the costs of the audit unless otherwise agreed to by the Government and the Contractor.
(g) The Government shall be entitled to audit all modifications, including lump-sum modifications, to determine whether the proposed costs, as represented by the Contractor and any of its subcontractors, are in compliance with the contract. If it is determined that the costs proposed under a modification, including lump-sum modifications, are not in compliance with the contract, the Government reserves the right to adjust the amount previously approved and included in the modification.
(h) If the Contractor fails to comply with any conditions in this clause, the Contracting Officer may retain a maximum of 10 percent of the amount of each payment request submitted until such deficiencies are corrected.
(i) These requirements regarding accounting records shall not mitigate, lessen nor change any other requirements in the contract regarding audits, payment submissions, records, or records retention.
(j) The contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of this clause in all subcontracts under this contract.
In proposed rule document 2018-23348, appearing on pages 54069 through 54079, in the issue of Friday, October 26, 2018, make the following corrections:
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request approval, from the Office of Management and Budget, for an extension of and revision to the currently approved information collection for Export Health Certificate Request Forms.
Comments on this notice must be received by January 7, 2019 to be assured of consideration.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments concerning this notice by using the electronic process available at
Camia R. Lane, Grading and Standardization Branch, Dairy Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 2968-South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-0230: Tel: (202) 720-1671, Fax: (202) 720-2643.
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Camia R. Lane, Grading and Standardization Branch, Dairy Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 2968-South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-0230: Tel: (202) 720-1671, Fax: (202) 720-2643, or via email at
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.
The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary
Comments regarding this information collection received by December 10, 2018 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Commerce.
Notice and request for comments.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is soliciting public comment on a proposed revision to Voluntary Product Standard (PS) 2-10, Performance Standard for Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels. The standard, prepared by the Standing Committee for PS 2, establishes requirements for those who choose to adhere to the standard, for the structural criteria to assess the acceptability of wood-based structural-use panels for construction sheathing and single-floor applications. It also provides a basis for common understanding among the producers, distributors, and the users of these products. Interested parties are invited to review the proposed standard and submit comments to NIST.
Written comments regarding the proposed revision to PS 2-10 should be submitted to the Standards Services Division, NIST, no later than December 10, 2018.
An electronic copy (an Adobe Acrobat File) of the proposed revision to the standard, PS 2-10, can be obtained at the following website:
David F. Alderman, Standards Coordination Office, National Institute of Standards and Technology, telephone (301) 975-4019; fax: (301) 975-4715, email:
The proposed revision of the standard has been developed and is being processed in accordance with Department of Commerce provisions in 15 CFR part 10,
Voluntary Product Standard PS 2-10 establishes structural criteria for assessing the acceptability of wood-based structural-use panels for construction sheathing and single-floor application and provides a basis for common understanding among the producers, distributors, and the users of these products. After conducting a review of the current standard, PS 2-10, the Standing Committee for PS 2 determined that updates were needed to reflect current industry practices and developed the proposed revision to the standard through meetings to review the standard and propose needed changes.
The proposed revision includes the following changes: Change of title, editorial corrections, new and revised definitions, updated references, and changes to Section 5 Requirements. A complete list of proposed changes can be found at
Attachments will be accepted in plain text, Microsoft Word, or Adobe PDF formats. Comments containing references, studies, research, and other empirical data that are not widely
All submissions, including attachments and other supporting materials, will become part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. NIST reserves the right to publish comments publicly, unedited and in their entirety. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, or names of other individuals, should not be included. Submissions will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information. Do not submit confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information. Comments that contain profanity, vulgarity, threats, or other inappropriate language or content will not be considered.
Written comments should be submitted in accordance with the
15 U.S.C. 272.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of a joint meeting of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC) and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC) Scientific and Statistical Committee's Scamp Assessment Plan Review subgroup (SSC).
The Councils will hold a meeting of a subgroup of their SSC's via webinar to review planning documents for the Scamp stock assessment. See
The SSC subgroup will meet from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m., Tuesday, November 27, 2018.
The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Those interested in participating should contact Mike Errigo at SAFMC or John Froeschke at GMFMC (see
Mike Errigo, SAFMC, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405;
The purpose of this meeting is to provide SSC review of planning documents for an assessment of Scamp in the Southeast US. This will be a joint assessment of the Gulf and South Atlantic management units conducted through the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review Program (SEDAR) Research Track Assessment Process. The GMFMC and SAFMC agreed to conduct this review of the Scamp assessment schedule and Terms of Reference using a sub-group of their SSC's through a joint meeting to efficiently develop recommendations of both SSCs.
1. Review and comment on the Scamp Research Track Terms of Reference.
2. Review and comment on the Scamp Research Track project schedule.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.
Written comment on SSC agenda topics is to be distributed to the Committee through the SAFMC office. Written comment to be considered by the SSC shall be provided to the SAFMC not later than 12:00 p.m. Tuesday, November 13, 2018.
This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SAFMC office (see
The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of public meeting.
The New England Fishery Management Council's is convening an ad-hoc sub-panel of its Scientific and Statistical Committee. Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.
The meeting will be held on Friday, November 30, 2018 at 9 a.m.
The meeting will be held at the Hotel Providence, 139 Mathewson Street, Providence, RI 02903;
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council;
The New England Fishery Management Council is convening an ad-hoc sub-panel of its Scientific and Statistical Committee to review a report from the Fishery Data for Stock Assessment Working Group. The panel will review the working group's work on the following tasks: Explain how fishery dependent and fishery
Although non-emergency issues not contained on the agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. The public also should be aware that the meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of public meeting (webinar).
The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Pacific Council) Ad Hoc Ecosystem Workgroup (EWG) will hold a webinar, which is open to the public.
The webinar meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 28, 2018, from 10:30 a.m. until 1:30 p.m.
The meeting will be held via webinar. A public listening station is available at the Pacific Council office (address below). To attend the webinar (1) join the meeting by visiting this link
Dr. Kit Dahl, Pacific Council; telephone: (503) 820-2422.
The purpose of this webinar is for the EWG to consult with members of the Council's Salmon Technical Team on (1) how policies in the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan can address climate change impacts and (2) potential revisions to the Fishery Ecosystem Plan, especially in relation to the Climate and Communities Initiative.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may be discussed, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any issues arising after publication of this document that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt, (503) 820-2411, at least 10 business days prior to the meeting date.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of SEDAR 61 Assessment Webinar I for Gulf of Mexico red grouper.
The SEDAR 61 stock assessment process for Gulf of Mexico red grouper will consist of an In-person Workshop, and a series of data and assessment webinars. See
The SEDAR 61 Assessment Webinar I will be held November 29, 2018, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Time.
The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Those interested
Julie A. Neer, SEDAR Coordinator; (843) 571-4366; email:
The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multi-step process including: (1) Data Workshop, (2) a series of assessment webinars, and (3) A Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a report that compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The assessment webinars produce a report that describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The product of the Review Workshop is an Assessment Summary documenting panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, HMS Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.
The items of discussion during the Data Webinar are as follows:
1. Using datasets and initial assessment analysis recommended from the in-person workshop, panelists will employ assessment models to evaluate stock status, estimate population benchmarks and management criteria, and project future conditions.
2. Participants will recommend the most appropriate methods and configurations for determining stock status and estimating population parameters.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.
The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see
The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.
16 U.S.C. 1801
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 18-36 with attached Policy Justification and Sensitivity of Technology.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested to buy three (3) SEAL Delivery Vehicles (SDV) MK 11 Shallow Water Combat Submersibles (SWCS). Also included are spares; handling equipment; test equipment; operator manuals and technical documentation; U.S. Government and contractor engineering, training, technical, and logistical support services; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The total estimated program cost is $90 million.
This proposed sale will support U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a NATO ally which has been, and continues to be, an important partner on critical foreign policy and defense issues.
The proposed sale of the SDV MK 11 SWCS will continue UK's maritime partnership, interoperability, and regional security capability. The UK has a proven track record of successfully deploying predecessor system. The UK will have no difficulty absorbing this system into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The prime contractor will be Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc. (TBE), Huntsville, Alabama. There are no known offset agreements expected to be proposed in connection with this potential sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips by USG and contractor representatives to participate in program and technical reviews, plus training and maintenance support in country as required.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
(vii)
1. The SEAL Delivery Vehicle (SDV) MK 11 Shallow Water Combat Submersibles (SWCS) is a free-flooding combat submersible mobility platform suitable for transporting and deploying forces and their payload for a variety of missions. The SDV MK 11 SWCS will provide increased volume, allowing for increased payload and personnel-carrying capacity. Additionally, performance in range, speed, maneuverability, and organic sensor capabilities will be enhanced over the existing SDV MK 8 Mod 1. The highest classification of the hardware in the proposed sale is SECRET. The highest classification of the technical documentation in the proposed sale is SECRET. The highest classification of the software to be exported is SECRET.
2. If a technologically advanced adversary obtains knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the information could be used to develop countermeasures or equivalent systems that might reduce weapon system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.
3. A determination has been made that the Government of the United Kingdom can provide substantially the same degree of protection for the sensitive technology being released as the U.S. Government. This proposed sale is necessary to the furtherance of the U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives outlined in the Policy Justification.
4. All defense articles and services listed in this transmittal are authorized for release and export to the Government of the United Kingdom.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(5)(c) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and Transmittal 18-0H with attached Policy Justification.
(i)
(ii)
Date: April 3, 2018
Military Department: Air Force
(iii)
This transmittal notifies the addition of:
1. Two (2) F110 General Electric or F100 Pratt & Whitney engines (MDE);
2. Four (4) Improved Programmable Display Generators (iPDG) (MDE);
3. Four (4) Modular Mission Computers (MDE);
4. Four (4) Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System-JTRS (MDE);
5. Ninety-six (96) MXU-650C/B Airfoil Groups (MDE);
6. Ninety-six (96) MAU-209C/B or MAU-169D Computer Control Groups (MDE);
7. Twelve (12) Guidance Units for AIM-9X-2 Tactical Missiles (MDE);
8. Twelve (12) Guidance Units for AIM-9X-2 CATM (MDE);
9. Thirty (30) Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM)-120C (non-MDE);
10. Twelve (12) Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System II (JHMCS II) (non-MDE);
11. Twenty (20) Aviator Night Vision Device (NVD) AN/AVS-9 (non-MDE)
The additional MDE items are valued at $30.6 million but will not result in a change to the notified total MDE value of the case. The total case value remains $2.91 billion.
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
AIM-120 CATMS are non-functioning, inert missile rounds that simulate the correct weight and balance of live missiles; they are used for armament loading and unloading training as well as flown captive carry on training sorties.
The Sensitivity of Technology statement contained in the original AECA 36(b)(1) transmittal applies to all other MDE items reported here.
(vii)
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 18-37 with attached Policy Justification and Sensitivity of Technology.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested to buy fifty (50) MK 15 Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) Block IB Baseline 2 Upgrade Kits. Also included are support equipment, test equipment, initial spare parts, technical documentation, training, and engineering technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The total estimated program cost is $75 million.
This proposed sale will support U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a NATO ally which has been, and continues to be, an important partner on critical foreign policy and defense issues.
The proposed sale of the Phalanx Baseline 2 Radar Upgrade Kits will be used for close-in ship self-defense against air and surface threats onboard the UK's naval combatants and auxiliaries. The UK, which already has earlier versions of the MK 15 Phalanx in its inventory, will have no difficulty absorbing these upgrades and support into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The prime contractor will be Raytheon Missile Systems, Tucson, AZ. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips by U.S. Government and contractor representatives to participate in program and technical reviews, plus training and maintenance support in country as required.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
(vii)
1. The MK15 Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS) consists of a rapid-fire, computer-controlled radar and gun system mounted on a turret designed to defeat anti-ship missiles; small surface craft; low, slow aircraft; rockets; and mortars. The weapon system automatically carries out search, detection, target threat evaluation, tracking, firing, and kill loop fire control that uses advanced radar and computer technology to locate, identify, and direct a system of armor piercing projectiles to the target. The Phalanx Block IB Baseline 2 Radar Upgrade Kits converts the system's radar from an analog to digital suite, significantly improving obsolescence of hardware. Some performance in range, speed, maneuverability, and organic sensor capabilities will be enhanced over the existing UK Phalanx system. These kits will allow for the UK to upgrade its current Block IB Baseline 1 systems via approved in-country Depot-Level Maintenance Facility (DLMF) capability. The highest classification of the hardware in the proposed sale is SECRET. The highest classification of the technical documentation in the proposed sale is SECRET. The highest classification of the operational software to be exported is SECRET.
2. If a technologically advanced adversary obtains knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the information could be used to develop countermeasures or equivalent systems that might reduce weapon system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.
3. A determination has been made that the Government of the United Kingdom can provide substantially the same degree of protection for the sensitive technology being released as the U.S. Government. This proposed sale is necessary to the furtherance of the U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives outlined in the Policy Justification.
4. All defense articles and services listed in this transmittal are authorized for release and export to the Government of the United Kingdom.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 18-22 with attached Policy Justification and Sensitivity of Technology.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
The Kingdom of Bahrain has requested to buy one hundred twenty (120) Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) M31 Unitary Rocket Pods (six (6) rockets per pod for a total of seven hundred twenty (720); and one hundred ten (110) Army Tactical Missiles System (ATACMS) M57 T2K Unitary missiles. Also included are publications, personnel training and training equipment, software development, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistical and program support. The overall total estimated value is $300 million.
This proposed sale will enhance the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by helping to improve the security of a Major Non-NATO Ally that has been, and continues to be an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East. The proposed sale of the M31 GMLRS Unitary Rocket Pods and ATACMS T2K Unitary Missile will improve Bahrain's capability to meet current and future threats and provide greater security for its critical oil and natural gas infrastructure, and significant national events. Bahrain will use the enhanced capabilities to strengthen its homeland defense and deter regional threats. Bahrain will have no difficulty absorbing these rocket pods into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The prime contractor will be Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Grand Prairie, TX. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will not require the assignment of any additional U.S. or contractor representatives in Bahrain.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
(vii)
1. The GMLRS M31 Unitary is the Army's primary munition for units fielding the High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and Multiple Launcher Rocket Systems (MLRS) M270A1 Rocket and Missile Launcher platforms. The M31 Unitary is a solid propellant artillery rocket that uses Global Positioning System (GPS)-aided inertial guidance to accurately and quickly deliver a single high-explosive blast fragmentation warhead onto point targets at ranges from 15-70 kilometers. The rockets are fired from a launch pod container that also serves as the storage and transportation container for the rockets. Each rocket pod holds six (6) total rockets.
2. The GMLRS Unitary employs a multi-mode fuze consisting of an Electronic Safe and Arm Fuze (ESAF) and a Frequency-Modulating Continuous Wave—Directional Doppler Ranging (FMCW-DDR) height of burst sensor. The weapon has three fuzing modes—point detonating, post-impact time delay, and proximity height of burst—which are all accomplished automatically via a launcher/fire control system electrical interface prior to launch. The height of burst sensor is not integrated with the fuze, but provides fire pulse input and interfaces with a mechanical fuze.
3. GMLRS hardware and operational software are UNCLASSIFIED. System performance characteristics are classified CONFIDENTIAL. Components of the GMLRS system are considered highly resistant to reverse engineering and the impact of loss or diversion of the end item hardware would have minimum adverse impact.
4. The M57 ATACMS Unitary is a conventional, semi-ballistic missile which utilizes a 500-lb high explosive unitary warhead. It has a range of 70-270km and increased accuracy and lethality due to a GPS/PPS-aided guidance system. The ATACMS T2K is an upgraded missile variant which redesigned previous variants' components to compensate for obsolescence issues and lowered per-unit cost. Critical technologies on the M57 include the GPS antenna, laser-ring gyroscopes production processes involved in the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), and lithium thermal batteries used in missile guidance and control. ATACMS missile hardware and operational software are UNCLASSIFIED. Data table and mission critical data generator special applications software are classified CONFIDENTIAL. Performance and accuracy/lethality data are classified up to the SECRET level. System response time and trajectory data are classified CONFIDENTIAL.
5. The Army's FMCW-DDR height of burst technology is comprised of components and software requiring special production skills and is deemed state of the art. The sensitive aspects of the technology reside primarily the design, development, production, and manufacturing data for the related components (integrated circuits and flex cable assembly) and in the methodology required to integrate those components onto the flex cable assembly to process embedded data (the software, algorithm, and operating parameters). The sole technology aspect of the FMCW-DDR present in the M31 proximity height of burst sensor is the signal processing algorithm (i.e. processing techniques) modified specifically for use in the M31. The disclosure of know-how, software, and other associated documentation for this sensitive technology is not authorized under this sale.
6. If a technologically advanced adversary were to obtain knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the information could be used to develop countermeasures that might reduce weapon system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.
7. A determination has been made that Bahrain can provide substantially the same degree of protection of this technology as the U.S. Government. This proposed sale is necessary in furtherance of the U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives outlined in the Policy Justification. Moreover, the benefits to be derived from this sale, as outlined in the Policy Justification, outweigh the potential damage that could result if the sensitive technology were revealed to unauthorized persons.
8. All defense articles and services listed in this transmittal are authorized for release and export to the Government of Bahrain.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 18-42 with attached Policy Justification and Sensitivity of Technology.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
The Government of Canada has requested to buy three (3) King Air 350ER (extended range) aircraft with customer unique post-modifications for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) operations; three (3) WESCAM MX-15D Electro-Optical & Infrared Imaging Sensors; three (3) AN/AAR-47B(V)2 Missile and Laser Warning System (MWS); three (3) AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser Systems (CMDS); three (3) VORTEX® Dual RF Ku LOS Transceivers; three (3) COMSEC Modules (KGV-135A); two (2) APM-424(V)5 Transponder Test Sets; five (5) KIV-77 Mode 4/5 crypto applique computers for IFF; three (3) AN/APX-119 IFF Digital Civil and Military Transponders; six (6) ARC-210 Multi-mode Voice and Data Transceivers; three (3) KG-250X NSA-Certified Type 1 Inline Network Encryptors (INE); technical data; mission equipment, communication and navigation equipment, special tools and test equipment, ground support equipment, airframe and engine spare parts, publications, MWO/ECPs, technical assistance, repair and return, training; and transportation of aircraft, and other related elements of logistics and program support. Total estimated program cost is $300 million.
This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by helping to improve the military capability of Canada, a NATO ally that is an important force for ensuring political stability and economic progress and a contributor to military, peacekeeping and humanitarian operations around the world.
The proposed sale improves Canada's capability to meet current and future threats; strengthen its homeland defense and the combined defense of North America; and support coalition partners overseas. This proposed sale will improve interoperability with U.S. forces and other regional allies. Canada will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractor will be Beechcraft (Textron Aviation), Wichita, Kansas. The Government of Canada is expected to negotiate an offset agreement with Beechcraft, in accordance with Canada's Industrial and Technological Benefits (ITB) Policy, before signing the Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA).
Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of contractor representatives to Canada on an intermittent basis over two years to provide in service contractor support.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
(vii)
1. The King Air 350ER (extended range) fixed-wing aircraft has been identified as Non-SME (Significant Military Equipment). It is a pressurized, twin-engine turboprop commercial aircraft configured as a cantilever low-wing monoplane with a T-tail and aft ventral fin. It has retractable tricycle landing gear with dual wheels on each main unit. The 350 series incorporates a 34-inch stretch of the King Air 300 fuselage and has one additional window per side. The wingspan has been increased by 3 feet over that of the model 300, and 24-inch graphite composite winglets have been added to the wingtips to reduce drag at higher angles of attack as in takeoff and climb out. The 350ER will feature the enhanced PT6A-67A engines and a Rockwell-Collins Proline Fusion cockpit. This aircraft (before modification) is generally offered to the public with no special restrictions.
2. Mission equipment:
a. The WESCAM MX-15D Electro-Optical & Infrared Imaging Sensor is a small Multi-Sensor, Multi-Spectral Imaging System with Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) and Embedded with Global Positioning Systems (GPS) Standard Positioning Service (SPS). The WESCAM MX-15 camera system contains an LN-200 IMU manufactured by Northrop Grumman in the U.S., which is captured under (Missile Technology Control Regime) MTCR Annex, Category II—Item 9.A.6. The IMU is also ITAR controlled under USML Category XII(d), and in Canada it is controlled under Canada's Export Control List (ECL) under 6-9.A.6. WESCAM MX-15 is embedded with GPS SPS. SPS is a three-dimensional position and time determination capability provided to a user equipped with a minimum capability GPS SPS receiver in accordance with GPS national policy. Options requested include: high definition (HD) IR sensor,
b. The AN/AAR-47B(V)2 Missile and Laser Warning System (MWS) is designed to protect helicopters and “low-slow” aircraft from infrared homing missiles. It passively detects attacking missiles while minimizing false alarms. When an attacking missile is detected, the AN/AAR-47B(V)2 displays a threat quadrant alert, sounds a warning tone to the aircrew, and can be configured to automatically actuate an installed countermeasures dispenser. In addition to the missile warning capability of the original AN/AAR-47B, the -(V)2 incorporates laser detecting and warning capability. The version offered includes the Smart Dispense capability. The AN/AAR-47B(V)2 hardware highest classification is UNCLASSIFIED. The AN/AAR-47B(V)2 is Significant Military Equipment.
c. The AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser System (CMDS) provides an integrated, threat-adaptive, reprogrammable, computer controlled capability for dispensing expendable decoys. These include chaff, flares, Radio Frequency (RF) expendables and others. The AN/ALE-47 system enhances aircraft survivability in sophisticated threat environments. The system is designed to provide the capability of automatic or pilot commanded response, and works alone or in coordination with other countermeasures defensive systems to defeat Air Interceptor (AI), Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA), and Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs). The AN/ALE-47 is Significant Military Equipment.
d. The VORTEX® Dual RF Ku LOS Transceiver provides real-time, full-motion video and other data for situational awareness, targeting, Battle Damage Assessment (BDA), surveillance, relay, and other situations where eyes-on-target are required. VORTEX® can transmit and receive analog and/or digital data simultaneously. VORTEX® is interoperable with ROVER®, CDL, virtually all UAVs, targeting pods and other waveforms. VORTEX® can simultaneously transmit common data to multiple platforms using two different channels in one or two different bands. VORTEX® is able to receive on two different channels in one or two different bands from a single source. This band and channel diversity provides link redundancy, better reception and resiliency to platform shading, multipath interference, line-of-sight blockages and RF interference. VORTEX® is STANAG 7085 certified.
e. The KGV-135A is a high-speed, general purpose encryptor/decryptor module. It is used for wide-band data encryption embedded into high performance systems such as the VORTEX®. It has increased bandwidth and COMSEC operating modes in a compact multi-chip module. The KGV-135 operates at speeds of 2 Kbps to 700 Mbps and uses standard interface logic levels and key protocols. It is an NSA-certified INFOSEC product.
f. The APM-424(V)5 Transponder Test Set is used to test the transponder and interrogator performance of the AN/APX-119 IFF Digital Civil and Military Transponder. The Transponder Test Modes are 1,2,3/A, C, S (EHS/ELS), 4, and Mode 5 (Level 1 and 2). The Interrogator Test Modes are 1, 2, 3/A, C, S, 4, Mode 5, TCAS, ETCAS (Level 1 and 2). The APM-424(V)5 supports the KIV-77 Mode 4/5 crypto applique computer for IFF.
g. The KIV-77 Mode 4/5 crypto applique computer for IFF is Type 1 certified by the National Security Agency and provides information assurance for both legacy Mode 4 and new Mode 5 IFF equipment. The KIV-77 is used to store the classified keys and is also used with the APM-424(V)5 Transponder Test Set to support flight-line testing of the AN/APX-119 IFF Digital Civil and Military Transponder.
h. The AN/APX-119, Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) Digital Civil and Military Transponder, is a small transponder installed on more than 50 different military platforms for the U.S. Department of Defense and multiple international users. This transponder enables aircraft to operate seamlessly throughout international, civil, and military airspace, meeting all IFF and ATC requirements. When installed in conjunction with platform antennas and the RCU (or other appropriate control unit), the transponder provides identification, altitude and surveillance reporting in response to interrogations from airborne, ground-based and/or surface interrogators. The transponder provides operational capabilities for Mark XII Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) capabilities of Modes 1, 2, 3/A, C and 4&5 and Mode S (levels 1, 2, and 3 capable). Additionally, the AN/APX-119 also provides automated ID, position and latitude of the aircraft, and is compatible with the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) II equipment. The AN/APX-119 is designed to provide military aircraft with a secure combat identification capability to help reduce fratricide and enhance battlespace awareness, while providing safe access to civilian airspace. The AN/APX-119 is Significant Military Equipment.
i. The AN/ARC-210 Gen 5 is a secure communication system that provides Line-of-Sight (LOS) communications and Beyond Line-of-Sight (BLOS) satellite communications (SATCOM), as well Voice and data communications capabilities. In addition to Satellite Communications, the AN/ARC-231(V)(C) provides Secure/Electronic Counter-Counter Measures (ECCM) communications in the following waveform, The Single Channel Ground and Airborne System (SINCGARS) and the HAVE QUICK (HQ) I and II. The AN/ARC-210 functions by transmitting and receiving the Radio Frequency (RF) in the 30 MHz-941 MHz range. The Receiver Transmitter provides communication in Frequency Modulation (FM), Very High Frequency—Amplitude Modulation Air Traffic Control Band (VHF AM ATC), Very High Frequency—Frequency Modulation Public Service & Maritime Band, Ultra High Frequency—Amplitude Modulation (UHF AM) HAVEQUICK/Ground-Air Band, Ultra high Frequency Satellite (UHF SATCOM) Band and Ultra High Frequency—Frequency Modulation (UHF FM) Public Service Band. The ARC-210 is used on over 180 platforms worldwide for the transfer of networked or point-to-point data, voice and imagery. The ARC-210 military airborne transceivers provides an embedded, fully programmable INFOSEC capability under the National Security Agency's (NSA) Cryptographic Modernization Initiative. The ARC-210 is Significant Military Equipment.
j. The KG-250X NSA-Certified Type 1 Inline Network Encryptor (INE) provides high-speed HAIPE IP network encryption for advanced network security for coalition allies and Department of Homeland Security. It is MIL-STD-810G Rugged for Tactical and Mobile Applications. It is particularly useful at high altitudes to deliver reliable network encryption, (200 Mbps Aggregate), for airborne missions. The KG-250X is remotely rekeyable from a physically secure location with HAIPE-to-HAIPE over-the-air/net keying. The KGV-250X also improves performance over high-latency links with embedded TCP/IP acceleration and is software upgradeable. The KG-250X is NSA certified for TS/SCI and below.
k. The Technical Data to support the operations, maintenance, and Training for all aircraft communications, ASE, COMSEC, and ISR related equipment will be detailed enough (e.g., minimum Level II Engineering drawings) to allow support contractors and operators to independently conduct all ILS activities, implement obsolescence management, and support required Airworthiness activities. All aircraft operations and maintenance manuals are available to the public and have no ITAR restrictions. Technical Data for the mission equipment outlined above will be provided only to the level required to support operation, maintenance, and training. Maintenance is limited to the level required to provide immediate diagnostics and replacement or limited repair. No Technical Data or intellectual property sufficient in detail to support depot repair operations will be provided. The Technical Data for the mission equipment is Significant Military Equipment.
3. If a technologically advanced adversary were to obtain knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the information could be used to develop countermeasures that might reduce weapon system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.
4. A determination has been made that Canada can provide substantially the same degree of protection of this technology as the U.S. Government. This proposed sale is necessary in furtherance of the U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives outlined in the Policy Justification. Moreover, the benefits to be derived from this sale, as outlined in the Policy Justification, outweigh the potential damage that could result if the sensitive technology were revealed to unauthorized persons.
5. All defense articles and services listed in this transmittal are authorized for release and export to the Government of Canada.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 18-09 with attached Policy Justification.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
TECRO has requested a Foreign Military Sales Order (FMSO) II to provide funds for blanket order requisitions, under a Cooperative Logistics Supply Support Arrangement for stock replenishment supply of standard spare parts, and repair/replace of spare parts in support of the F-16, C-130, F-5, Indigenous Defense Fighter (IDF), all other aircraft systems and subsystems, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The total estimated program cost is $330 million.
This proposed sale is consistent with U.S. law and policy as expressed in Public Law 96-8.
This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security and defensive capability of the recipient, which has been and continues to be an important force for political stability, military balance, and economic progress in the region.
The proposed sale of spare and repair parts is required to maintain the recipient's defensive and transport aerial fleet. The recipient has been operating these fleets since 1996 and will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment and support into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
There are no principal contractors involved with this potential sale. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will not require the permanent assignment of any U.S. Government or contractor representatives.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(5)(c) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and Transmittal 18-0G with attached Policy Justification.
(i)
(ii)
Date: January 5, 2018
Military Department: Air Force
(iii)
This transmittal reports the inclusion of thirty-three (33) Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System—Joint Tactical Radio Systems (MIDS-JTRS) (MDE); additional above-the-line transportation costs; and hardware and software integration costs for the Royal Air Force of Oman's F-16s aircraft upgrade program. The addition of the MDE equipment will raise the value of MDE on the sale from $0 to $15 million. Additional above-the-line transportation and integration costs increase the non-MDE value by $22 million. The total case value will increase to $99 million.
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vi)
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(5)(c) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and Transmittal 18-0C with attached Policy Justification.
(i)
(ii)
Date: September 8, 2017
Military Department: U.S. Air Force
(iii)
This sale also included one (1) Joint Mission Planning System, one (1) F-16V
This transmittal reports:
1. The inclusion of twenty-three (23) Multifunction Information Distribution System Joint Tactical Radio System (MIDS-JTRS) Concurrent Multi-Networking-4 (CMN-4) which are MDE;
2. The inclusion of an additional nineteen (19) AN/ALQ-211 Advanced Integrated Defensive Electronic Warfare Suite (AIDEWS) Systems (non-MDE), which will increase the number from twenty (20) to thirty-nine (39). These additional nineteen (19) were not included in the total value of the AIDEWS systems previously notified. This change was due to a change in system requirements and a desire to prioritize system components with long lead procurement timelines; and
3. The inclusion of additional test weapons quantities and MDE designations outlined below:
These changes are due to unit pack minimum required quantities, items not properly identified as MDE on the original notification, and errors in requirements identification by the procuring office.
The inclusion of these MDE items will not increase the value of MDE beyond what was originally notified. The inclusion of AIDEWS will cause the total case value to rise from $1.082 billion to $1.292 billion.
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
1. Multifunctional Information Distribution System Joint Tactical Radio Systems Concurrent Multi-Netting 4 (MIDS JTRS CMN-4) is classified CONFIDENTIAL. MIDS JTRS CMN-4 is a secure data and voice communication network using the Link-16 architecture. The system provides enhanced situational awareness, positive identification of participants within the network, secure fighter-to-fighter connectivity, and secure voice capability. It provides three major functions: Air Control, Wide Area Surveillance, and Fighter-to-Fighter. The MIDS JTRS CMN-4 can be used to transfer data in Air-to-Air, Air-to-Surface, and Air-to-Ground scenarios.
2. The Sensitivity of Technology statement contained in the original transmittal applies to the other items notified here.
(vii)
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 18-41 with attached Policy Justification and Sensitivity of Technology.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
The Government of Iraq has requested to buy five (5) Armed Bell 407GX helicopters configured with five (5) M240 7.62mm Machine Guns. Also included are five (5) RF-7850A Secure Communications Radios, five (5) AN/AAR-60 MILDS Automatic Plume Detectors, five (5) AN/ALE-47 Airborne Countermeasure Dispensing Systems, five (5) M3P .50 Caliber Machine Guns, five (5) M260 Rocket Launchers (APKWS Configuration), five (5) MX-15Di EO/IR Sensors, five (5) GAU-19 .50 Caliber Machine Guns, five (5) Pathfinder Mission Management Systems, five (5) ARES Weapon Management Systems, five (5) Mission Configurable Armament Systems (MCAS), night vision compatible lighting systems, aircraft intercommunications systems (ICS), cockpit and seat armor kits, and bifurcated exhaust infrared suppressor systems, operating manuals, spare parts, maintenance and operator training for radio systems, technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support. The total estimated program cost is $82.5 million.
This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a strategic partner. The addition of five Bell 407GX helicopters will help compensate for the combat loss of seven IA407 helicopters in recent years and increase the Iraqi Security Forces' combat effectiveness against ISIS and other terrorist elements in Iraq. The 407GX variant—an upgrade from the current IA407 configuration—includes Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) launchers. Providing Iraq with this capability supports U.S. security goals by furthering the Iraqi Army Aviation Command's ability to counter terrorism and protect critical infrastructure. Iraq will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractors will be Bell, Fort Worth, TX; L3 WESCAM, Burlington, Ontario, Canada; Dillon, Scottsdale, AZ; Tekfusion Global, Williamsburg, VA; Harris, Melbourne, FL; and Fulcrum Concepts, Mattaponi, VA. There are no known offset agreements associated with this proposed sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require approximately 17 contractor representatives to travel to Iraq in support of this effort. The GOI desires Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) presence in country.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
(vii)
1. The Bell 407GX Multi-Role Helicopter weapon system contains communications and target identification equipment, navigation equipment, aircraft survivability equipment, displays, and sensors. The airframe itself does not contain sensitive technology, however the pertinent equipment listed below will be either installed on the aircraft or included in the sale:
a. The Harris Falcon III RF-7850A Secure Communication Radio is a Multi-Channel Airborne Networking Radio that offers multi-channel and multiband capabilities. It integrates into a wide variety of platforms to support multiple missions, waveforms and modes of operation and provides two wideband channels. The Harris Multi-channel Airborne Radio extends battlefield networks Beyond-Line-Of-Sight through tactical VHF/UHF networks to provide extended range and secure air-to-air and air-to-ground communications. The Harris Falcon III hardware is a commercial variant radio and the highest level of information that would be released in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
b. The AN/AAR-60 MILDS Automatic Plume Detector is a Missile Launch Detection System (MILDS)/Airborne Missile Protection System (AMPS) or AMPS-M and is based on the off-the-shelf product MILDS AN/AAR-60 UV-Sensor Units and features a MILDS Control and Display Unit (MCDU), an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) and Smart Dispensers (SD). The MILDS AMPS represents a complete Missile Protection System and will be used for stand alone installation and operation of an integrated missile warning and Counter Measures dispensing in helicopters. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
c. The M3P .50 Cal machine gun is a fully automatic .50 Cal (12.7x99mm NATO) machine gun specifically designed to be axially or coaxially mounted in pod or open-air gun configurations for airborne, land or sea weapon system applications. The M3P is a world exclusivity by FN Herstal and offers high firing rate for short time on target: 1,025 ± 75 RPM. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
d. The M260 Rocket Launcher with APKWS capability is a seven tube rocket launcher with a remote fuze setting function. Once the target is located, single or multiple pairs of the Hydra 70 APKWS folding-fin rockets can be launched toward the target when a predetermined time signal is sent to the electronic time fuze. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
e. The M240 is a general-purpose machine gun that uses 7.62 mm NATO ammunition. It can be mounted on a bipod, tripod, aircraft, or vehicle. The M240 is a belt-fed, air-cooled, gas- operated, fully automatic machine gun that fires from the open bolt position. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
f. The MX-15Di EO/IR sensor is a multi-sensor imaging/lasing that can provide medium-altitude; Covert Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance (ISR), Armed Reconnaissance, CSAR and Target Designation missions. MX-15Di has HD imaging resolution from Electro-Optical (EO) and Infrared (IR) cameras, Short-wave IR imaging, Laser rangefinder/designator 3 laser illuminator. The highest level of information release in
g. The GAU-19 machine is a low-cost weapon system that is designed to accept standard NATO .50 caliber M9-linked ammunition with a rate of fire of 1300 rounds per minute. The weapon provides highly effective firepower against area suppression and point targets, as well as being ideally suited for utility, scout and attack helicopters. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
h. The Pathfinder Mission Management System (MMS) is a modular customizable system that provides command and control of onboard navigation, communication, and peripheral electronic equipment. During target engagements, locations and range to target is passed from Pathfinder to the weapons management system. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
i. The ARES Weapons Management System (WMS) is a modular weapons management system that uses the aircraft's EO/IR monitor as the WMS interface using a touchscreen graphical user interface (GUI). The system is fully integrated with the MX-15Di sensors critical EO/IR functions that can be controlled through the user interface. The system provides aircraft steering commands and targeting overlays to guide the pilot into the proper launch constraints by consolidating mission execution tasks. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
j. The Mission Configurable Armament System (MCAS) is a plank type weapons mounting system. The MCAS was developed as a lightweight, high strength, multi-purpose, multi-airframe weapons platform utilizing up to 6 weapon stations. The highest level of information release in support of this transfer is at the UNCLASSIFIED level.
k. The AN/ALE-47 is a software reprogrammable dispenser for chaff and flares. It provides for either automatic or aircrew commanded response dispense capabilities. Specific dispense routines are sensitive and are specifically withheld from Iraq. The export version uses a country unique “look-up decision tree” for determining dispense routines. This software when loaded into the AN/ALE-47 is classified CONFIDENTIAL. Increased risk of exploitation is significantly reduced given that the software is in executable form only (i.e. binary code) and the actual dispense routines can be gained through visual observation, which is true for all coalition platforms flying in Iraq.
2. If a technologically advanced adversary obtained knowledge of the specific hardware or software in the proposed sale, the information could be used to develop counter-measures which might reduce weapons system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.
3. A determination has been made that the recipient government can provide substantially the same degree of protection for the technology being released as the U.S. Government. This sale supports the U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives as outlined in the Policy Justification.
4. All defense articles and services listed in this transmittal have been authorized for release and export to the Government of Iraq.
Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.
Arms sales notice.
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
DSCA at
This 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated July 21, 1996. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and Transmittal 18-40 with attached Policy Justification.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.
The Government of United Kingdom has requested a possible sale of sixteen (16) H-47 Chinook (Extended Range) helicopters; thirty-six (36) T-55-GA-714A engines (32 installed, 4 spares); forty-eight (48) embedded GPS inertial navigation units (32 installed, 16 spares); twenty (20) common missile warning systems (16 installed, 4 spares); twenty-two (22) radio-frequency countermeasures (16 installed, 6 spares); nineteen (19) multi-mode radars (16 installed, 3 spares); nineteen (19) electro-optical sensor systems (16 installed, 3 spares); forty (40) M-134D-T mini guns, plus mounts and tools (32 installed, 8 spares); and forty (40) M240H machine guns, plus mounts and tools (32 installed, 8 spares). This sale also includes communications equipment; navigation equipment; aircraft survivability equipment; initial training equipment and services; synthetic training equipment; support package including spares and repair parts; special tools and test equipment; aviation ground support equipment; safety and air worthiness certification; technical support; maintenance support; technical and aircrew publications; mission planning system equipment and support; and, project management and governance; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistic and program support. Total estimated cost is $3.5 billion.
The United Kingdom is a close NATO ally and an important partner on critical foreign policy and defense issues. The proposed sale will enhance U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives by enhancing the United Kingdom's capabilities to provide national defense and contribute to NATO and coalition operations.
The proposed sale will improve the United Kingdom's ability to meet current and future threats by providing a heavy lift rotary wing capability able to execute missions in extreme environments across a full range of military operations. The United Kingdom will have no difficulty absorbing these helicopters into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractor of this sale will be Boeing Defense and Space, Ridley Park, PA.
There is no known offset agreement associated with this proposed sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require approximately 29-32 U.S. Government personnel and 26 contractors assigned to the United Kingdom plus 3 equivalent man years TDY to support fielding and initial sustainment for a duration of 3-5 years.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE), Department of Education (ED).
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 7, 2019.
To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use
For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Braden Goetz, 202-245-7405.
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.
Take notice that on October 19, 2018, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC (Tennessee), filed an application pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations for authorization to construct, install, modify, operate, and maintain certain pipeline and compression facilities located in Massachusetts and Connecticut that will increase natural gas capacity on its pipeline system by approximately 72,400 dekatherms per day (Dth/day) (261 Upgrade Projects). The projects consist of the following: (1) The construction, installation, operation, and maintenance of approximately 2.1 miles of pipeline loop, and (2) the abandonment and replacement of two compressor units with a new compressor unit at an existing compressor station, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open for public inspection.
The filing may also be viewed on the web at
Any questions regarding the proposed project should be directed to Ben J. Carranza, Director, Regulatory, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, 1001 Louisiana Street, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas 77002, or by calling (713) 420-5535, by fax (713) 420-1605, or by email at
Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 3 copies of filings made with the Commission and must provide a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will be notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
As of the February 27, 2018 date of the Commission's order in Docket No. CP16-4-001, the Commission will apply its revised practice concerning out-of-time motions to intervene in any new Natural Gas Act section 3 or section 7 proceeding.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h. Potential
i.
j. Ampersand Christine Falls Hydro, LLC filed its request to use the Traditional Licensing Process on September 20, 2018. Ampersand Christine Falls Hydro, LLC provided public notice of its request on September 24, 2018. In a letter dated November 1, 2018, the Director of the Division of Hydropower Licensing approved Ampersand Christine Falls Hydro, LLC's request to use the Traditional Licensing Process.
k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, Part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating consultation with the New York State Historic Preservation Office, as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
l. With this notice, we are designating Ampersand Christine Falls Hydro, LLC as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; and consultation pursuant to section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
m. Ampersand Christine Falls Hydro, LLC 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 (
o. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an application for a new license for Project No. 4639. Pursuant to 18 CFR 16.8, 16.9, and 16.10 each application for a new license and any competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All applications for license for this project must be filed by September 30, 2021.
p. Register online at
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Freeport LNG Train 4 Project (Project). Freeport LNG Development, L.P. and FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC (collectively referred to as Freeport LNG), request authorization (FERC Docket No. CP17-470-000) to site, construct, and operate pipeline, natural gas liquefaction and export facilities near Freeport in Brazoria County, Texas. The Project would be constructed as an expansion of Freeport LNG's existing Quintana Island Terminal (Terminal), as well as associated pretreatment and pipeline facilities, for the purpose of liquefying domestic natural gas for export.
The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the 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, U.S. Department of Energy, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency participated as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EA. A cooperating agency has jurisdiction by law or special expertise regarding environmental impacts involved with the proposal, and is involved in the NEPA analysis.
The EA addresses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the following project facilities:
• One LNG train;
• one natural gas pretreatment unit;
• minor modifications to existing facilities, and
• 10.6 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline.
The Commission mailed a copy of the
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 on or before December 3, 2018.
For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-3676 or
(1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's website (
(2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling feature on the Commission's website (
(3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the Project docket numbers (CP17-470-000) 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
Additional information about the Projects is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC (
In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription that 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
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives notice that members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings related to the transmission planning activities of the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO):
The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.
The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
Further information may be found at:
The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.
The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
Further information may be found at:
The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.
The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
Further information may be found at:
The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.
The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
Further information may be found at:
The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.
The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
Further information may be found at:
The above-referenced meeting will be via web conference and teleconference.
The above-referenced meeting is open to stakeholders.
Further information may be found at:
The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters at issue in the following proceedings:
For more information, contact James Eason, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (202) 502-8622 or
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l. With this notice, we are designating the City of River Falls as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
m. The City of River Falls filed with the Commission a Pre-Application Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule), 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 (
Register online at
o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and Commission's staff Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests. All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file all documents using the Commission's eFiling system at
All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading: Comments on Pre-Application Document, Study Requests, Comments on Scoping Document 1, Request for Cooperating Agency Status, or Communications to and from Commission Staff. Any individual or entity interested in submitting study requests, commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating status must do so by December 28, 2018.
p. Although our current intent is to prepare an environmental assessment (EA), there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required. Nevertheless, the meetings listed below will satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is issued by the Commission.
Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of the project at the times and places noted below. The daytime meeting will focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for receiving input from the public. We invite all interested
Date and Time: Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.
Date and Time: Friday, November 16, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.
SD1, which outlines the subject areas to be addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at
The potential applicant and Commission staff will conduct an Environmental Site Review of the project on Thursday, November 15, 2018, starting at 1:00 p.m. All participants should meet at the Old Power Plant at Junction Falls dam, 401 S. Winter Street, River Falls, WI 54022. If you plan to attend the environmental site review, please contact Mr. Kevin Westhuis, Utility Director of the City of River Falls Municipal Utilities, at
At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and (5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an environmental document.
Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are included in paragraph n of this document.
The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed in the public records of the project.
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will discuss the environmental impacts of the Del-Mar Energy Pathway Project involving construction and operation of facilities by Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company (Eastern Shore) in Kent and Sussex Counties, Delaware, and Wicomico and Somerset Counties, Maryland. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested agencies about issues regarding the project. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from its action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires the Commission to discover concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as “scoping.” The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before 5:00 pm Eastern Time on December 3, 2018.
You can make a difference by submitting your specific comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. Commission staff will consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
If you sent comments on this project to the Commission before the opening of this docket on September 14, 2018, you will need to file those comments in Docket No. CP18-548-000 to ensure they are considered as part of this proceeding.
This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental mailing list for this project. State and local government representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable easement agreement. You are not required to enter into an agreement. However, if the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if you and the company do not reach an easement agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings in court. In such instances, compensation would be determined by a judge in accordance with state law.
Eastern Shore provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need
The Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which makes it easy to stay informed of all issuances and submittals regarding the dockets/projects to which you subscribe. These instant email notifications are the fastest way to receive notification and provide a link to the document files which can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings. To sign up go to
For your convenience, there are four methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-3676 or
(1) You can file your comments electronically using the
(2) You can file your comments electronically by using the
(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 (CP18-548-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
(4) In lieu of sending written comments, the Commission invites you to attend the public scoping session its staff will conduct in the project area, scheduled as follows:
The primary goal of this scoping session is to have you identify the specific environmental issues and concerns that should be considered in the EA. Individual verbal comments will be taken on a one-on-one basis with a court reporter. This format is designed to receive the maximum amount of verbal comments, in a convenient way during the timeframe allotted.
The scoping session is scheduled from 4:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time. You may arrive at any time after 4:00 p.m. There will not be a formal presentation by Commission staff when the session opens. If you wish to speak, the Commission staff will hand out numbers in the order of your arrival. Comments will be taken until 7:30 p.m. However, if no additional numbers have been handed out and all individuals who wish to provide comments have had an opportunity to do so, staff may conclude the session at 7:00 p.m. Please see appendix 1 for additional information on the session format and conduct.
Your scoping comments will be recorded by a court reporter (with FERC staff or representative present) and become part of the public record for this proceeding. Transcripts will be publicly available on FERC's eLibrary system (see below for instructions on using eLibrary). If a significant number of people are interested in providing verbal comments in the one-on-one settings, a time limit of 5 minutes may be implemented for each commenter.
It is important to note that the Commission provides equal consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form or provided verbally at a scoping session. Although there will not be a formal presentation, Commission staff will be available throughout the scoping session to answer your questions about the environmental review process. Representatives from Eastern Shore will also be present to answer project-specific questions.
Eastern Shore proposes to construct and operate new natural gas pipelines and meter and delivery stations in Kent and Sussex Counties, Delaware and Wicomico and Somerset Counties, Maryland. The Del-Mar Energy Project would provide about 11.8 million cubic feet per day of additional natural gas firm transportation and 2.5 million cubic feet per day of off-peak transportation service to three local distribution companies and one industrial shipper.
The Del-Mar Energy Pathway Project would consist of the construction of the following facilities:
Woodside Loop
• 4.9 miles of new 16-inch-diameter pipeline looping the existing Hockessin Line, Canterbury Loop.
East Sussex Extension: Sussex County, Delaware
• 7.39 miles of new 8-inch-diameter mainline extension to the existing Milford Line;
• one aboveground pig launcher and one receiver,
• one new delivery metering and regulation (M&R) station at the East Sussex Extension terminus.
Millsboro Pressure Control Station Upgrade: Millsboro, Sussex County, Delaware
• 0.35 mile of 10-inch-diameter pipeline extension between the existing Millsboro Pressure Control Station and the existing Milford Line; and
• a dual run pressure control addition to the existing Millsboro pressure control station with modifications to the existing piping, valves, and associated electronic transmitters.
Somerset Extension: Wicomico and Somerset Counties, Maryland
• 6.83 miles of new 10-inch-diameter pipeline extension to the existing Parkesburg Line;
• one aboveground pig launcher and one receiver, and aboveground mainline valve; and
• one new delivery M&R station at the Somerset Extension terminus. The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix 2.
Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 223.6 acres of land for the aboveground facilities and the pipeline. Of this, Eastern Shore would maintain about 29 acres for permanent operation of the project's facilities following construction. The remaining acreage would be restored and revert to former uses. About 89.6 percent of the proposed pipeline routes parallel existing pipeline, utility, or road rights-of-way.
The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed project under these general headings:
• Geology and soils;
• water resources and wetlands;
• vegetation and wildlife;
• threatened and endangered species;
• cultural resources;
• land use;
• air quality and noise;
• public safety; and
• cumulative impacts.
Commission staff will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
The EA will present Commission staffs' independent analysis of the issues. The EA will be available in electronic format in the public record through eLibrary
With this notice, the Commission is asking agencies with jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of this project to formally cooperate in the preparation of the EA.
In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Commission is are using this notice to initiate consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO), and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on historic properties.
The environmental mailing list includes: Federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits comments on the project. Commission staff will update the environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that Commission notices related to this environmental review are sent to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed project.
If the Commission issues the EA for an allotted public comment period, a
On November 14 and 15, 2018, the Office of Energy Projects staff will gather data related to the environmental analysis of the proposed Del-Mar Energy Pathway Project. Staff will review the proposed pipeline routes and associated facilities locations. This will assist staff in completing its comparative evaluation of environmental impacts of the proposed project. Viewing of this area is anticipated to be from public access points and Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company right-of-way.
All interested parties planning to attend must provide their own transportation. Those attending should meet at the following location:
• November 14, 2018, 1:30 p.m., Fire Marshal Office, 22705 Park Ave, Georgetown, DE 19947.
• November 15, 2018, 9:30 a.m., Wicomico Public Library, 122 S Division St., Salisbury, MD 21801.
Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at
Public sessions or site visits will be posted on the Commission's calendar located at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of delegation of authority.
On September 25, 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sent the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) a letter acknowledging that Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) 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 letter to Virginia through this notice.
On September 25, 2018, EPA sent Virginia a letter acknowledging that Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce Federal NESHAPs had been updated.
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 Virginia's submittal are also available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 1111 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
Riley Burger, (215) 814-2217, or by email at
On February 22, 2018, Virginia notified EPA that Virginia had updated its incorporation by reference of Federal NESHAPs to include many such standards, as they were published in final form in the Code of Federal Regulations dated July 1, 2017. On September 25, 2018, EPA sent Virginia a letter acknowledging that Virginia now has the authority to implement and enforce the NESHAPs as specified by 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 NESHAPs must be submitted to both the EPA, Region III and to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 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 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. A copy of EPA's letter to Virginia follows:
Dear Mr. Dowd: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously delegated to the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) the authority to implement and enforce various federal New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories (MACT standards) which are found at 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63, respectively. In those actions, EPA also delegated to Virginia the authority to implement and enforce any future federal NSPS, NESHAP or MACT Standards on the condition that Virginia legally adopt the future standards, make only allowed wording changes, and provide specified notice to EPA.
In a letter dated February 22, 2018, Virginia submitted to EPA revised versions of Virginia's regulations which incorporate by reference specified federal NSPS, NESHAP and MACT standards, as those federal standards had been published in final form in the Code of Federal Regulations dated July 1, 2016. Virginia committed to enforcing the federal standards in conformance with the terms of EPA's previous delegations of authority and made only allowed wording changes.
Virginia stated that it had submitted the revisions “to retain its authority to enforce the NSPSs and NESHAPs under the delegation of authority granted by EPA on August 27, 1981 (46 FR 43300) and to enforce the MACT standards under the delegation of authority granted by EPA on January 26, 1999 (64 FR 3938) and January 8, 2002 (67 FR 825).”
Virginia provided copies of its revised regulations which specify the NSPS, NESHAP and MACT Standards which it had adopted by reference. Virginia's revised regulations are entitled 9 VAC 5-50 “New and Modified Stationary Sources,” and 9 VAC 5-60 “Hazardous Air Pollutant Sources.” These revised regulations have an effective date of February 21, 2018.
Based on Virginia's submittal, EPA acknowledges that EPA's delegations to Virginia of the authority implement and enforce EPA's NSPS, NESHAP, and MACT Standards have been updated, as provided for under the terms of EPA's previous delegation of authority actions, to allow the Virginia to implement and enforce the federal NSPS, NESHAP and MACT standards which Virginia has adopted by reference as specified in Virginia's revised regulations 9 VAC 5-50 and 9 VAC 5-60, both effective on February 21, 2018.
Please note that on December 19, 2008, in
Accordingly, EPA no longer allows sources the SSM exemption as provided for in the vacated provisions at 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1), even though EPA has not yet formally removed these SSM exemption provisions from the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63. Because Virginia incorporated 40 CFR part 63 by reference, 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
EPA appreciates Virginia's continuing NSPS, NESHAP and MACT standards enforcement efforts, and also Virginia's decision to take automatic delegation of additional or updated NSPS, NESHAP and MACT standards by adopting them by reference.
This notice acknowledges the update of Virginia's delegation of authority to implement and enforce NESHAP, NSPS, and MACT.
Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC); November 15, 2018, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST, and November 16, 2018, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., EST which was published in the
The call-in number and passcode should read as follows: call-in number, 866-803-2146, passcode: 80256461.
Erin Stone, M.A., HICPAC, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCEZID, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop A-07, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4027; Email:
The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Notice.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is seeking nominations for membership on the CLIAC. The CLIAC, consists of 20 experts including the Chair in the fields associated with microbiology (including bacteriology, mycobacteriology, mycology, parasitology, and virology), immunology (including histocompatibility), chemistry, hematology, pathology (including histopathology and cytology), genetic testing (including cytogenetics); from representatives in the fields of medical technology, public health, and clinical practice; and from consumer representatives.
Nominations are being sought for individuals who have expertise and qualifications necessary to contribute to the accomplishments of the committee's objectives. Nominees will be selected based on expertise in the fields of microbiology (including bacteriology, mycobacteriology, mycology, parasitology, and virology), immunology (including histocompatibility), chemistry, hematology, pathology (including histopathology and cytology), or genetic testing (including cytogenetics); from representatives in the fields of medical technology, public health, and clinical practice; and from consumer representatives. Members may be invited to serve for up to four-year terms.
Selection of members is based on candidates' qualifications to contribute to the accomplishment of CLIAC objectives (
Nominations for membership on the CLIAC must be received no later than May 1, 2019. Packages received after this time will not be considered for the current membership cycle.
All nominations should be mailed to Nancy Anderson, MMSc, MT(ASCP), CLIAC Secretary, Senior Advisor for Clinical Laboratories, Division of Laboratory Systems, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services, Office of Public Health Scientific Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop V24-3, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4018; telephone (404) 498-2741; or via email at
Heather Stang, MS, Deputy Branch Chief, Quality and Safety Systems Branch, Division of Laboratory Systems, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services, Office of Public Health Scientific Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop V24-3, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4018; telephone (404) 498-2769;
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services policy stipulates that committee membership be balanced in terms of points of view represented, and the committee's function. Appointments shall be made without discrimination on the basis of age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, HIV status, disability, and cultural, religious, or socioeconomic status. Nominees must be U.S. citizens. Current participation on federal workgroups or prior experience serving on a federal advisory committee does not disqualify a candidate; however, HHS policy is to avoid excessive individual service on advisory committees and multiple committee memberships. Committee members are Special Government Employees (SGEs), requiring the filing of financial disclosure reports at the beginning and annually during their terms. CDC reviews potential candidates for CLIAC membership each year, and provides a slate of nominees for consideration to the Secretary of HHS for final selection. HHS notifies selected candidates of their appointment near the start of the term in July, or as soon as the HHS selection process is completed. Note that the need for different expertise varies from year to year and a candidate who is not selected in one year may be reconsidered in a subsequent year. SGE Nominees must be U.S. citizens. Candidates should submit the following items:
Current curriculum vitae, including complete contact information (telephone numbers, mailing address, email address)
At least one letter of recommendation from person(s) not employed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (Candidates may submit letter(s) from current HHS employees if they wish, but at least one letter must be submitted by a person not employed by an HHS agency (
Nominations may be submitted by the candidate him- or herself, or by the person/organization recommending the candidate.
The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Request for comment.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announces the availability of
Electronic or written comments must be received by January 7, 2019.
You may submit comments, identified by CDC-2018-0103 and docket number NIOSH-322, by any of the following methods:
•
•
Emily Novicki (
The National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) is a partnership program created to stimulate innovative research and improved workplace practices. The national agenda is developed and implemented through the NORA sector and cross-sector councils. Each council develops and maintains an agenda for its sector or cross-sector.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of meeting.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the CDC announces the following meeting for the Board of Scientific Counselors, Office of Infectious Diseases (BSC, OID). This meeting is open to the public, limited only by the space available; the meeting room will accommodate up to 100 people. The public is also welcome to listen to the meeting by telephone, limited only by the number of ports available (50); the toll-free dial-in number is 1-877-951-7311, with a pass code of 4123441.
The meeting will be held on December 5, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST, and December 6, 2018, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m., EST.
CDC, Global Communications Center, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Building 19, Auditorium B3, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4027; also 1-877-951-7311, with a pass code of 4123441.
Sarah Wiley, MPH, Designated Federal Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop H24-12, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4027, Telephone (404) 639-4840;
The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of availability.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announces the availability of the final
The final document was published on October 26, 2018 on the CDC website.
The document may be obtained at the following link:
Emily Novicki, M.A., M.P.H., (
On March 22, 2018, NIOSH published a request for public review in the
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of a New Matching Program.
In accordance with subsection (e)(12) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is providing notice of a new matching program between CMS and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), “Verification of Eligibility for Minimum Essential Coverage Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Through an Office of Personnel Management Health Benefit Plan.”
The deadline for comments on this notice is December 10, 2018. The re-established matching program will commence not sooner than 30 days after publication of this notice, provided no comments are received that warrant a change to this notice. The matching program will be conducted for an initial term of 18 months (from approximately January 2019 to July 2020) and within three months of expiration may be renewed for one additional year if the parties make no change to the matching program and certify that the program has been conducted in compliance with the matching agreement.
Interested parties may submit written comments on this notice, by mail or email, to the CMS Privacy Officer, Division of Security, Privacy Policy & Governance, Information Security & Privacy Group, Office of Information Technology, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Location: N1-14-56, 7500 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21244-1850,
If you have questions about the matching program, you may contact Jack Lavelle, Senior Advisor, Marketplace Eligibility and Enrollment Group, Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, CMS, 7501 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814, (410) 786-0639, or by email at
The Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a) provides certain protections for individuals applying for and receiving federal benefits. The law governs the use of computer matching by federal agencies when records in a system of records (meaning, federal agency records about individuals retrieved by name or other personal identifier) are matched with records of other federal or non-federal agencies. The Privacy Act requires agencies involved in a matching program to:
1. Enter into a written agreement, which must be prepared in accordance with the Privacy Act, approved by the Data Integrity Board of each source and recipient federal agency, provided to Congress and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and made available to the public, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(o), (u)(3)(A), and (u)(4).
2. Notify the individuals whose information will be used in the matching program that the information they provide is subject to verification through matching, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(o)(1)(D).
3. Verify match findings before suspending, terminating, reducing, or making a final denial of an individual's benefits or payments or taking other adverse action against the individual, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(p).
4. Report the matching program to Congress and the OMB, in advance and annually, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(o) (2)(A)(i), (r), and (u)(3)(D).
5. Publish advance notice of the matching program in the
This matching program meets these requirements.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is the recipient agency, and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is the source agency.
The matching program is authorized under 42 U.S.C. 18001,
The purpose of the matching program is to assist CMS in determining individuals' eligibility for financial assistance in paying for private health insurance coverage. In this matching program, OPM provides CMS with data, on a monthly basis, verifying each active federal employee's status as enrolled in or eligible for coverage under an OPM Health Benefit Plan, and an annual premium spread index file identifying the lowest premium available to a federal employee in each of 32 premium localities. CMS and state administering entities will use the OPM data to verify whether an applicant for or enrollee in private health insurance coverage under a qualified health plan through a federally-facilitated or state-
The categories of individuals whose information is involved in the matching program are:
• Active federal employees; and
• consumers who apply for or are enrolled in a qualified health plan through an exchange established under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and receive determinations of eligibility for insurance affordability programs.
The categories of records which OPM will provide to CMS are monthly status files consisting of identity records and minimum essential coverage period records, and an annual premium spread index file containing premium information based on locality. The data elements are as follows:
• Monthly status file:
a. Record type;
b. record number;
c. unique person ID;
d. social security number;
e. last name;
f. middle name;
g. first name;
h. last name suffix;
i. gender;
j. date of birth; and
k. health plan code.
• Annual Premium Spread Index File:
a. State;
b. plan;
c. option;
d. enrollment code;
e. current total bi-weekly premium;
f. future total bi-weekly premium;
g. future government pays bi-weekly premium;
h. future employee pays bi-weekly premium
i. future change in employee payment bi-weekly premium;
j. current total monthly premium;
k. future total monthly premium;
l. future government pays monthly premium;
m. future employee pays monthly premium; and
n. future change in employee payment monthly premium.
CMS will not send any data about individual applicants/enrollees to OPM in order to receive this data from OPM about active federal employees.
The records used in this matching program will be disclosed to CMS from the OPM system of records identified below, and will be matched against applicant/enrollee records in the CMS system of records identified below:
• CMS Health Insurance Exchanges System (HIX), System No. 09-70-0560, last published in full at 78 FR 63211 (Oct. 23, 2013), as amended at 83 FR 6591 (Feb. 14, 2018).
• General Personnel Records (OPM/GOVT-1), 77 FR 73694 (Dec. 11, 2012). The disclosures to CMS will be made in accordance with routine use “rr.”
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by December 10, 2018.
When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806
Email:
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' website address at
2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to
3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.
William Parham at (410) 786-4669.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the
1.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services.
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments must be received by January 7, 2019.
When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:
1.
2.
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' website address at website address at
2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to
3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.
William Parham at (410) 786-4669.
This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the
1.
The NCQA and CMS will use information collected in the Renewal Submission section of the HPMS MOC module to review and approve the MOC narrative in order for the SNP to receive a new approval period and operate in the upcoming calendar year(s). Results of the Initial and Renewal MOC review will be made publically available. NCQA and CMS will use information in
The Bipartisan Budget Act (BBA) of 2018 Section 50311 modified the MOC requirements for C-SNPs in section 1859(b)(6)(B)(iii) of the Act. Specifically, section (B)(iv) requires that beginning in 2020 and subsequent years, C-SNPs will submit MOCs annually for evaluation and approval. SNPs are a specific type of Medicare Advantage coordinated care plan that provide targeted care to individuals with unique special needs.
2.
Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services.
Announcement of meeting and call for best practices.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act, that a meeting of the National Advisory Committee (NAC) on the Sex Trafficking of Children and Youth in the United States (Committee) will be held on December 10, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is for the Committee to discuss its duties and information for a draft outline on recommended best practices for States to follow in combating the sex trafficking of children and youth based on multidisciplinary research and promising, evidence-based models and programs. The Committee members will remain in Washington, DC, on December 11, 2018, to conduct internal subcommittee meetings and a fact-finding site visit.
The meeting will be held on Monday, December 10, 2018, from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET.
The meeting will be held at 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC, 20201. Space is limited. Identification will be required at the entrance of the facility (
To attend the meeting virtually, please register for this event online:
Katherine Chon, Director, Office on Trafficking in Persons, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at
The formation and operation of the NAC are governed by the provisions of Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of federal advisory committees.
To submit written statements or RSVP to attend in-person or make verbal statements, email
Administration for Native Americans, Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services.
Notice for public comment.
Pursuant to the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (NAPA), as amended, the Administration for Native Americans (ANA) is required to provide members of the public an opportunity to comment on proposed changes in interpretive rules and general statements of policy and to give notice of the final adoption of such changes no less than 30 days before such changes become effective. In accordance with notice requirements of NAPA, ANA herein describes proposed interpretive rules and general statements of policy that relate to ANA's funding opportunities beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019. Changes to FY 2019 Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOAs) will be based on the following previously published programs: Environmental Regulatory Enhancement (ERE), HHS-2018-ACF-ANA-NR-1344; Native American Language Preservation and Maintenance-Esther Martinez Immersion (EMI), HHS-2018-ACF-ANA-NB-1343; Native American Language Preservation and Maintenance (P&M), HHS-2018-ACF-ANA-NL-1342; Social and Economic Development Strategies (SEDS), HHS-2018-ACF-ANA-NA-1339; Social and Economic Development Strategies-Alaska (SEDS-AK), HHS-2018-ACF-ANA-NK-1340; and Native Youth Initiative for Leadership, Empowerment, and Development (ILEAD), HHS-2018-ACF-ANA-NC-1341.
Comments are due by December 10, 2018.
Comments in response to this notice should be addressed to Carmelia Strickland, Director of Program Operations, Administration for Native Americans, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Delays may occur in mail delivery to federal offices; therefore, a copy of comments should be emailed to
Carmelia Strickland, Director, Division of Program Operations, Administration for Native Americans, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Telephone: (877) 922-9262; Email:
Section 814 of NAPA, as amended, incorporates provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act that require ANA to provide notice of its proposed interpretive rules and statements of policy and to seek public comment on such proposals. This notice serves to fulfill the statutory notice and public comment requirement. ANA has also chosen to provide notice of its proposed rules of agency practice and procedure. The proposed interpretive rules, statements of policy, and rules of ANA practice and procedure reflected in clarifications, modifications, and new text will appear in the five FY 2019 FOAs: ERE, EMI, P&M, SEDS, and SEDS-AK. This notice also reflects ANA's elimination of the ILEAD FOA.
ANA's current FOAs can be accessed at:
A. Interpretive rules, statements of policy, procedures, and practice. The proposals below reflect ANA's proposed changes in rules, policy, or procedure which will take effect in the FY 2019 FOAs.
1. Elimination of the ILEAD FOA. In FY 2019, ANA will no longer publish a FOA for the ILEAD program. ILEAD was established in FY 2015 as a demonstration project with a focus on identifying best practices and effective strategies for working with, and developing leadership among Native American youth. In the first year, ANA funded five cooperative agreements under the program. Due to an overwhelming response to the initiative, ANA published subsequent ILEAD FOAs in FY 2016 and FY 2017, and funded an additional 19 grants. The purpose of the ILEAD program was to work with a cohort of recipients to identify best practices and youth-driven solutions to enhance the development of future leaders for Native communities. In addition, the ILEAD program limited the targeted beneficiaries of the youth between 14 and 24 years of age. ANA proposes to discontinue publication of the ILEAD FOA for FY 2019 to ensure that all projects previously funded under the initiative have the benefit of working as a cohort, which was established and is led by the initial 5 cooperative agreements. Currently, all funded ILEAD projects have project periods that end on or before September 29, 2021. Youth projects previously eligible for funding under the ILEAD program are still eligible for funding under ANA's SEDS program, which has a higher funding ceiling of up to $400,000 instead of $300,000 per budget period.
2. Assurance of Community Representation on Board of Directors. ANA has a long-standing policy to require that applicants, other than tribes or Alaska Native villages, must show that a majority of board members are representative of a Native American community to be served. Applicants
3. Only One Active Award Per CFDA Number. ANA has a long-standing policy that organizations can have no more than one active award per Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for an ANA program at any given time. SEDS, SEDS-AK, Native Assets Building Initiative (NABI), and ILEAD have the same CFDA number 93.612. From FY 2016 to FY 2018, ANA allowed an exception for organizations that were applying for the ILEAD FOA to also have an award for SEDS, SEDS-AK, or NABI even though they had the same CFDA number as ILEAD. For FY 2019, this exception will not be available to any currently funded ILEAD grantees; therefore, the policy will remain effective to limit the number of awards an organization can have under a single CFDA number. This policy change will allow other Native communities without current ANA funding to receive an award and therefore increase the impact of funding in more communities.
4. Evaluation Criteria. In FY 2018, ANA made substantial revisions to the application requirements and evaluation criteria included in our FOAs. The purpose of these revisions were to shift from a deficit-based, to strengths-based approach for application planning and development, as well as to emphasize a community-based approach to project planning and implementation. ANA stands behind the revisions made in FY 2018 and does not plan to change the information being requested. However, during the panel review process, ANA received feedback that the revised evaluation criteria was difficult to understand and apply. In FY 2019, ANA will reorder the evaluation criteria and include sub-criteria with smaller point allotments. We will also remove duplications and clarify language. ANA proposes the following Evaluation criteria scores for FY 2019:
Expected Outcomes for a maximum of 35 points, to consist of: Long Term Community Goal (2 points), Current Community Condition (5 points); Project Goal (4 points); Objectives (7 points); Outcomes and Indicators (7 points); Outputs (5 points); Outcome Tracking Strategy (4 points); and Outcome Tracker (1 point).
Approach for a maximum of 50 points, to consist of: Planning, Readiness and Implementation Strategy (20 points); Community-Based Strategy (8 points); Personnel, Partnerships and Organizational Capacity (12 points); and the Objective Work Plan (OWP) (10 points).
Budget and Budget Justification for a maximum of 15 points, to consist of: Line Item Budget (5 points) and Budget Justification (10 points).
These changes are meant to reorganize the information into smaller point allotments in order to make ANA's evaluation criterion more approachable, and to build consistency in the number of points being allocated for specific application information. As a result of the changes to criteria scoring, ANA will not use a Scoring Guide in its FY 2019 FOAs.
5. Changes to SEDS-AK FOA. ANA plans to modify the description of program purpose for the SEDS-AK FOA to provide an area of interest for economic growth. In addition, ANA wants to provide a competitive advantage for smaller Alaska Native villages or organizations that have never received ANA funding. Therefore, the FOA will state that reviewers may add up to 5 bonus points in the scoring criteria if an eligible entity that has never received an ANA award. ANA staff will confirm during the objective review process whether or not an applicant organization for SEDS-AK has received a past ANA award.
Section 814 of the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (NAPA), as amended.
Office of Planning, Research & Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Request for comments.
A series of statutory changes
Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the
Interested persons may submit written comments by any of the following methods:
• Email:
• Mail or Courier Delivery: c/o Chris Traver, Senior Advisor, Division of Data & Improvement, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201.
Chris Traver, Senior Advisor, Division of Data & Improvement, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201; (202) 401-4835.
The purpose of the statutory requirements and corresponding regulation is to ensure that state human service programs are able to effectively share data, both at the state level and with the federal government. For instance, states find significant value in the ability to share or link case level data from one information system to another on the same individuals receiving benefits and/or services in order to support a holistic, wrap-around services approach for individuals and families. To achieve this in an efficient manner, each agency must agree to describe the shared data in a common way. As a simple example, if an agency records in its information system a client's birthdate as 12/11/10, it could be interpreted by another agency's information system as December 11, 2010, and by another agency as November 12, 2010, or something else entirely. Those agencies must also agree on the mechanisms for sharing the data, such as secure interfaces (including APIs)
In human services, data sharing is increasingly relied upon to enable coordination across programs and information/system silos, especially for effective integrated case management and prevention of improper payments. For example, if a single mother of two children is receiving a TANF benefit but the two children are subsequently removed and placed into foster care, data sharing across information systems would allow the TANF agency to know that the children are no longer living in the household and the mother may no longer be eligible for the same level of benefit.
Data sharing also improves the quality of service delivery. For example, a child welfare caseworker might be able to retrieve a family's current address from child support data to locate the family for an in-person visit or locate the absent parent for possible placement of the children. Additionally, a data exchange between a child welfare agency with care and custody of a child and a child-placing agency with physical custody would ensure both agencies have the most current information on the child in care.
The importance of data sharing may be well understood. However, the preferred implementation method may vary by agency. The greater the degree of standardization, the easier it is to share data across organizations. While more effective and cost effective in the long run, this approach requires a standardized format, structure, and methods for sharing the data prior to implementation and may initially introduce additional considerations that influence time and cost. Therefore, the final regulation will seek the appropriate balance between the benefits of standardization and ease of implementation.
The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) will lead the drafting of the regulation with subject matter expertise from the ACF Children's Bureau (CB), Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), and Office of Family Assistance (OFA). Additionally, OPRE will consult with other agencies that may be impacted by the regulation through existing or future data exchange relationships, such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
Data Exchange should refer to any sharing of information, whether through transfer of data, expanded access to data, or any other mechanism that increases the utilization of information. Data exchange could include sharing for the purposes of case management, program administration, data reporting, analytics, etc. It is generally thought to refer to exchange of data across program, organizational, or jurisdictional boundaries, but this is not strictly necessary to be considered an exchange of information. In this context, data exchange typically refers to the electronic exchange of data via automated data systems, rather than through more traditional, often paper-based, means.
Standards should refer to any documented, consistent, and repeatable method for exchanging data, either through technical or non-technical means. There are technical standards for the electronic exchange of data (such as through tools including the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM),
ACF is committed to providing state agencies with flexibility to implement standards for economical, efficient, and effective information systems that support policy and practice. Therefore, we are soliciting comments from interested parties on setting standards for data exchanges that affect the SSA Title IV programs for child welfare and foster care (title IV-B and IV-E), child support (title IV-D), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF, title IV-A). But we are also interested in receiving input affecting additional programs. Please comment on any aspects of the planned Data Exchange Standards Regulation that you wish.
We are particularly interested in obtaining responses to the following questions:
1. The ability to share data is often impacted by state or federal law, policies, or other governing frameworks. Are there individual programs or agencies that are particularly impacted by their existence or absence? What are the key enablers and/or barriers to automated data exchange in your program or agency?
2. To what degree, if any, are data exchange efforts negatively impacted by a lack of standardization? In other words, where would greater consistency of data (definitions, format, and structure) help improve existing or planned data exchanges?
3. Have you considered adopting a standards-based approach to data exchange? If so, were any existing standards frameworks (such as the National Information Exchange Model) considered, and what influenced the decision for or against? What are some of the benefits (planned or achieved) of adopting a standards-based approach?
4. What factors should be considered before committing to a standards-based
5. If a more standards-based approach to data exchange were adopted, what kinds of technical assistance or training would you anticipate needing, if any?
ACF appreciates any and all comments on the above questions, or related recommendations. Comments will be considered carefully and used to inform the development of a planned Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which is anticipated to be published in the spring of 2019.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 7, 2019.
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 January 7, 2019. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• 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”).
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.”
• 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
Domini Bean, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-5733,
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party.
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
In the past 40 years, the cosmetics industry, as well as consumer behaviors and expectations related to cosmetics, have evolved. Technological and scientific advances have been made in cosmetics production, manufacturing, marketing, and usage, while consumer access to information about cosmetic products and ingredients has expanded, because of the internet and social media influences. Most notably, multiple cosmetic products such as lotions, perfume, body wash, hand wash, shampoo, deodorant, hair spray, baby wipes, nail polish, etc. are used daily by nearly everyone in the United States, including infants, children, adults, geriatric populations, healthy people, and individuals with medical conditions.
Evidence indicates that the prevalence of allergies in the U.S. population is increasing (Ref. 1). However, no publicly available data has been collected on the prevalence of adverse reactions to cosmetic products since 1975 (Ref. 2). FDA proposes a pilot study to collect the data needed for a current and detailed understanding of the impact of allergens on consumer use of cosmetics. In addition to updating our knowledge about cosmetics, this new information collection is consistent with FDA's efforts to improve public awareness of adverse events associated with FDA-regulated products. In December 2016, FDA decided to make public the adverse event data in the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) Adverse Events Reporting System (CAERS). CAERS (and its imminent successor the CFSAN Adverse Events Management System or CAEMS) provides the public with transparent access to all food and cosmetic related adverse events reported to FDA. However, the information that we have collected and which will be collected through CAERS is an underestimate of adverse events to cosmetics in the United States, as not every adverse event is reported by consumers through CAERS because some consumers are not aware of CAERS or some choose not to report.
To obtain additional relevant data, FDA proposes to conduct a pilot study. “Web-based Pilot Survey to Assess Allergy to Cosmetics in the United States.” The objective of the current effort is to collect information needed for a more current understanding of the prevalence of adverse reactions to cosmetics. FDA proposes to conduct an exploratory consumer web-based survey to collect data on consumer use of cosmetic products, the frequency of adverse events believed to be caused by allergens in cosmetics, consumer awareness of the problem, and actions (if any) taken to avoid the allergens.
The proposed survey will use a 20-minute web-based questionnaire to collect information from 1,000 English-speaking adult members of a probability-based web-enabled research panel maintained by a contractor. Selected panel members will be sent an email invitation to participate in the survey. After clicking on the link in the email invitation, panelists will be directed to the online instrument. On the first screen, panelists will provide disclosure information which includes informed consent and be asked if they would like to proceed with the survey. Consenting respondents will be prompted to complete the survey. After OMB approval of this collection and prior to the full-scale survey, a pretest will be conducted with 100 respondents randomly selected from the panel.
The web-based panel is designed to be representative of the U.S. adult population. This representation is achieved through address-based sampling where every U.S. adult with an address (including those who do not have a landline phone number) has an equal probability of being selected for participation.
This pilot study is part of the Agency's continuing effort to understand the impact of allergens on cosmetics.
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:
The following references are on display with the Dockets Management Staff (see
1. Peiser, M., T. Traulau, J. Heidler, et al., “Allergic Contact Dermatitis: Epidemiology, Molecular Mechanisms, In Vitro Methods and Regulatory Aspects. Current Knowledge Assembled at an International Workshop at BfR, Germany.”
2. Westat, Inc. “An Investigation of Consumers' Perceptions of Adverse Reactions to Cosmetic Products.” Final report submitted to U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Food and Drug Administration. June 1975.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
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.
Fax written comments on the collection of information by December 10, 2018.
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
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,
In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.
This information collection supports FDA's drug establishment registration and listing regulations and associated guidance intended to assist respondents in this regard. Requirements for drug establishment registration and drug listing are set forth in section 510 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360), and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262). Section 224 of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-85) amended section 510(p) of the FD&C Act to require electronic drug establishment registration and drug listing. Regulations implementing these provisions are established under part 207 (21 CFR part 207). Except as provided in § 207.65, all information submitted must be transmitted to FDA in electronic format by using our electronic drug registration and listing system, in a form that we can process, review, and archive. Establishment registration information helps FDA identify who is manufacturing, repacking, relabeling, and salvaging drugs and where those operations are performed. Drug listing information gives FDA a current inventory of drugs manufactured, repacked, relabeled, or salvaged for commercial distribution. Both types of information facilitate implementation and enforcement of the FD&C Act and are used for many important public health purposes.
Unless otherwise exempt under section 510(g) of the FD&C Act or § 207.13, all manufacturers, repackers, relabelers, and salvagers must register each domestic establishment that manufactures, repacks, relabels, or salvages a drug, or an animal feed bearing or containing a new animal drug, and each foreign establishment that manufactures, repacks, relabels, or salvages a drug, or an animal feed bearing or containing a new animal drug, that is imported or offered for import into the United States. When operations are conducted at more than one establishment and common ownership and control among all the establishments exists, the parent, subsidiary, or affiliate company may submit registration information for all establishments.
Private label distributors who do not also manufacture, repack, relabel, or salvage drugs are not required to register under part 207. FDA will accept registration or listing information submitted by a private label distributor only if it is acting as an authorized agent for and submitting information that pertains to an establishment that manufactures, repacks, relabels, or salvages drugs.
Under § 207.21, domestic manufacturers, domestic repackers, domestic relabelers, and domestic drug product salvagers must complete initial registration of each establishment no later than 5 calendar days after beginning to manufacture, repack, relabel, or salvage a drug. In addition, foreign manufacturers, foreign repackers, foreign relabelers, and foreign drug product salvagers must register each establishment before the drug is imported or offered for import into the United States.
The information that must be provided to FDA for registration is described in § 207.25 and includes the following: (1) Name of the owner or operator of each establishment; if a partnership, the name of each partner; if a corporation, the name of each corporate officer and director, and the place of incorporation; (2) each establishment's name, physical address, and telephone number(s); (3) all name(s) of the establishment, including names under which the establishment conducts business or names by which the establishment is known; (4) registration number of each establishment, if previously assigned by FDA; (5) a Unique Facility Identifier in accordance with the system specified under section 510 of the FD&C Act; (6) all types of operations performed at each establishment; (7) name, mailing address, telephone number, and email address of the official contact for the establishment, as provided in § 207.69(a); and (8) additionally, with respect to foreign establishments subject to registration, the name, mailing address, telephone number, and email address must be provided for: (a) The U.S. agent, as provided in § 207.69(b); (b) each importer in the United States of drugs manufactured, repacked,
Registrants must update their registration information as prescribed under § 207.29.
The NDC for a drug is a numeric code. Each finished drug product or unfinished drug subject to the listing requirements of part 207 must have a unique NDC to identify its labeler, product, and package size and type. The format of an NDC is described under § 207.33.
Under § 207.35, registrants must notify us of a change in any of the drug characteristics (except certain identifying information) for an NDC in § 207.33, and assign a new product code and package code for that drug.
Under § 207.41, registrants must list each drug that it manufactures, repacks, relabels, or salvages for commercial distribution. Each domestic registrant must list each such drug regardless of whether the drug enters interstate commerce. When operations are conducted at more than one establishment, and common ownership and control exists among all the establishments, the parent, subsidiary, or affiliate company may submit listing information for any drug manufactured, repacked, relabeled, or salvaged at any such establishment. A drug manufactured, repacked, or relabeled for private label distribution must be listed in accordance with the requirements.
Registrants must provide listing information for each drug in accordance with the listing requirements described in §§ 207.49, 207.53, and 207.54 that correspond to the activity or activities they engage in for that drug. For both animal and human drugs, each registrant must list each drug it manufactures, repacks, or relabels for commercial distribution under the trade name or label of a private label distributor using an NDC that includes such private label distributor's labeler code.
Additionally, in the case of human drugs, each registrant must list each human drug it manufactures, repacks, or relabels using an NDC that includes the registrant's own labeler code, regardless of whether the drug is commercially distributed under the registrant's own label or trade name or under the label or trade name of a private label distributor.
Under § 207.45, for each drug being manufactured, repacked, relabeled, or salvaged for commercial distribution at an establishment at the time of initial registration, drug listing information must be submitted no later than 3 calendar days after the initial registration of the establishment.
Each registrant must provide the listing information described under § 207.49 for each drug it manufactures for commercial distribution. Each registrant must also provide the listing information for each drug it repacks or relabels under § 207.53. A registrant who also relabels or repacks a drug that it salvages must list the drug it relabels or repacks in accordance with § 207.53. Registrants who perform only salvaging with respect to a drug must provide the listing information for that drug as required under § 207.54. Additional information may be requested for a listed drug as described in § 207.55.
Under § 207.57, registrants must update drug listing information submitted previously (either when the change is made or, at a minimum, each June and December). Registrants must also notify FDA if any listed drug has been discontinued from marketing or if any discontinued drug has been reintroduced and provide listing information for any drug not yet listed (at the time of annual establishment registration if not sooner).
In the
FDA estimates the burden of this information collection as follows:
Based on FDA data, we estimate that 1,480 respondents will submit 2,960 new establishment registrations annually. Based on the number of registered establishments in our database, we estimate 10,000 registrants will provide 10,000 annual reviews and updates of registration information (including expedited updates) or reviews and certifications that no changes have occurred. The estimates include the registration of establishments for both domestic and foreign manufacturers, repackers, relabelers, and drug product salvagers, and registration information submitted by anyone acting as an authorized agent for an establishment that manufactures, repacks, relabels, or salvages drugs. The estimates include an additional 80 positron emission tomography (PET) drug producers who are not exempt from registration and approximately 30 manufacturers of plasma derivatives.
We estimate that it will take 1 hour for registrants to submit initial registration information electronically for each new establishment. We also estimate that it will take approximately 30 minutes for each annual review and update of registration information (including any expedited updates) or each review and certification that no changes have occurred. The burden hour estimates above are based on our familiarity with the amount of time it takes registrants to input registration information electronically since June 2009. The estimates are an average of the time it would take to register a domestic or foreign establishment and an average of the time it would take to review registration information and update several registration items in the database or review registration information and only certify that no changes have occurred.
Based on the number of drugs listed annually since June 2009, we estimate that approximately 1,713 registrants will report 12,469 new listings annually (including the information submitted to obtain a labeler code and to reserve an NDC for future use).
Based on the number of drugs in our listing database and the current number of changes to listing information submitted, we estimate 5,300 registrants will each report 20 reviews and updates (including the information submitted to revise an NDC) for a total of 106,000 annually.
The estimates for the number of drug listings include both domestic and foreign listings, listings submitted by registrants for products sold under their own names as well as products intended for private label distribution, and information submitted related to an NDC and to obtain a labeler code. The estimate for the number of drugs subject to the listing requirements includes PET drugs and approximately 30 plasma derivatives. The estimates for the number of June and December reviews and updates of listing information include the number of changes to drug characteristics pertaining to the drug product code to obtain a new NDC and the reports of the withdrawal of an approved drug from sale under § 314.81(b)(3)(iii) (21 CFR 314.81(b)(3)(iii)).
Based on our familiarity with the time required to input listing information electronically since June 2009, we estimate that it will take registrants 1 hour and 30 minutes to submit information electronically for each drug they list for the first time (for both foreign and domestic registrant listings). These estimates are an average of the time it will take manufacturers, repackers, relabelers, and drug product salvagers, with drug product salvagers taking considerably less time than manufacturers. The estimates include the time for submitting the content of labeling and other labeling in electronic format. (For drugs subject to an approved marketing application, the electronic submission of the content of labeling under § 314.50(
In 2009, to help respondents transition to the current electronic reporting requirements, FDA issued the guidance for industry entitled “Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format—Drug Establishment Registration and Drug Listing.” The document provides guidance to industry on the statutory requirement to submit electronically drug establishment registration and drug listing information. The guidance describes the types of information to include for purposes of drug establishment registration and drug listing and how to prepare and submit the information in an electronic format (Structured Product Labeling (SPL) files) that FDA can process, review, and archive. The burden attributed to the guidance includes the preparation of an SOP for creating and uploading the SPL file. Although most firms will already have prepared an SOP for the electronic submission of drug establishment registration and drug listing information, each year additional firms will need to create an SOP. As reflected in table 2, FDA estimates that approximately 1,000 firms will expend 40 hours to prepare, review, and approve an SOP, for a total of 40,000 hours annually.
Cumulatively, the information collection reflects a decrease of 3,295 in both annual responses and burden hours. This adjustment results from eliminating burden previously attributable to guidance recommendations for creating drug establishment registration and drug listing files for electronic submission. Because electronic registration and listing is now mandatory, we believe respondents have since developed and implemented SOPs consistent with meeting the technical format specifications set forth in the regulations and we no longer attribute burden to this activity.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
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.
Fax written comments on the collection of information by December 10, 2018.
To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of
Domini Bean, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-5733,
In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.
Sections 201, 502, 505, and 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 352, 355, and 371) (FD&C Act) require that marketed drugs be safe and effective. To monitor the safety and efficacy of drugs that are on the market, FDA must be promptly informed of adverse experiences associated with the use of marketed drugs. We have issued regulations at §§ 310.305 and 314.80 (21 CFR 310.305 and 314.80) to implement reporting and recordkeeping requirements that enable us to take necessary action to protect the public health from adverse drug experiences.
All applicants who have received marketing approval of drug products are required to report serious, unexpected adverse drug experiences (15-day “Alert reports”), as well as follow-up reports (§ 314.80(c)(1)). This includes reports of all foreign or domestic adverse experiences as well as those based on information from applicable scientific literature and certain reports from postmarketing studies. Section 314.80(c)(1)(iii) pertains to such reports submitted by nonapplicants.
Under § 314.80(c)(2), applicants must provide periodic reports of adverse drug experiences. A periodic report includes, for the reporting interval, reports of serious, expected adverse drug experiences and all nonserious adverse drug experiences and an index of these reports, a narrative summary and analysis of adverse drug experiences, an analysis of the 15-day Alert reports submitted during the reporting interval, and a history of actions taken because of adverse drug experiences. Under § 314.80(j), applicants must keep for 10 years records of all adverse drug experience reports known to the applicant.
For marketed prescription drug products without approved new drug applications or abbreviated new drug applications, manufacturers, packers, and distributors are required to report to FDA serious, unexpected adverse drug experiences as well as follow-up reports (§ 310.305(c)). Section 310.305(c)(5) pertains to the submission of follow-up reports to reports forwarded to the manufacturers, packers, and distributors by FDA. Under § 310.305(g), each manufacturer, packer, and distributor shall maintain for 10 years records of all adverse drug experiences required to be reported.
Section 760 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 379aa), also provides for mandatory safety reporting for over-the-counter (OTC) human drug products not subject to applications approved under section 505 of the Act (new drug applications or abbreviated new drug applications). These requirements apply to all OTC) drug products marketed without an approved application, including those marketed under the OTC Drug Monograph Review process (whether or not subject to a final monograph), those marketed outside the monograph system, and including those that have been discontinued from marketing but for which a report of an adverse event was received. Under 21 CFR part 329.100 respondents must submit section 760 reports in an electronic format.
To assist respondents with implementation of section 760 we developed the guidance document entitled “Postmarketing Adverse Event Reporting for Nonprescription Human Drug Products Marketed Without an Approved Application.” The guidance document discusses what should be included in a serious adverse drug event report submitted under section 760(b)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379aa(b)(1)), including follow-up reports under 760(c)(2) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379aa(c)(2)), and how to submit these reports.
Section 760(e) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379aa(e)) also requires that responsible persons maintain records of nonprescription adverse event reports, whether or not the event is serious, for a period of 6 years. The guidance recommends that respondents maintain records of efforts to obtain the minimum data elements for a report of a serious adverse drug event and any follow-up reports. The information collection associated with the guidance is currently approved under OMB Control No. 0910-0636, however we are now consolidating it into this collection.
The primary purpose of FDA's adverse drug experience reporting system is to enable identification of signals for potentially serious safety problems with marketed drugs. Although premarket testing discloses a general safety profile of a new drug's comparatively common adverse effects, the larger and more diverse patient populations exposed to the marketed drug provide the opportunity to collect information on rare, latent, and long-term effects. Signals are obtained from a variety of sources, including reports from patients, treating physicians, foreign regulatory agencies, and clinical investigators. Information derived from the adverse drug experience reporting system contributes directly to increased public health protection because the information enables us to make important changes to the product's labeling (such as adding a new warning), to make decisions about risk evaluation and mitigation strategies or the need for postmarketing studies or clinical trials, and when necessary, to initiate removal of a drug from the market.
In the
Respondents to the collection of information are manufacturers, packers, distributors, and applicants of FDA-regulated drug and biological products. The following estimates are based on our knowledge of adverse drug experience reporting, including the time needed to prepare the reports and the number of reports submitted to the Agency.
We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:
Based on submissions received we have increased our burden estimate for reporting under part 314.80(c)(2) and recordkeeping under part 314.80(j). Additionally, and as previously stated, we are consolidating burden associated with reporting and recordkeeping under section 760 of the FD&C Act. Based on our records, we received 194,449 total annual reports from approximately 283 respondents for nonprescription drugs marketed without an approved application. We estimate each submission takes approximately 6 hours to prepare and submit. We estimate that there are 265,700 records per year maintained by approximately 300 respondents, and that it takes 8 hours to maintain each record.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
This notice announces the next meeting of the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Board of Scientific Counselors (BSC). The BSC, a federally chartered, external advisory group composed of scientists from the public and private sectors, will review and provide advice on programmatic activities. The meeting is open to the public and registration is requested for both attendance and oral comment and required to access the webcast. Information about the meeting and registration are available at
Written Public Comment Submissions: Deadline is December 3, 2018.
Registration for Oral Comments: Deadline is December 3, 2018.
Registration to Attend Meeting In-person or to View Webcast: Deadline is December 12, 2018.
Registration to view the meeting via the webcast is required.
Webcast: The URL for viewing the meeting webcast will be provided to registrants.
Dr. Mary Wolfe, Designated Federal Official for the BSC, Office of Liaison, Policy and Review, Division of NTP, NIEHS, P.O. Box 12233, K2-03, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Phone: 984-287-3209, Fax: 301-451-5759, email:
The BSC will provide input to the NTP on programmatic activities and issues. The agenda on December 11 will recognize NTP's 40th anniversary with the theme “Celebrate the Past, and Embrace the Future,” and on December 12, several talks will focus on translation as a scientific framework. Please see the preliminary agenda for information about the specific presentations. The preliminary agenda, roster of BSC members, background materials, public comments, and any additional information, when available, will be posted on the BSC meeting website (
Meeting Attendance Registration: The meeting is open to the public with time set aside for oral public comment; in-person attendance at the NIEHS is limited by the space available (~100 attendees). Registration for in-person attendance is on a first-come, first-served basis, and registrants will be assigned a number in their confirmation email. After the first 100 registrants, persons will be placed on a wait list and notified should an opening become available. Registration to attend the meeting in-in person or view the webcast is by December 12, 2018 at
Written Public Comments: NTP invites written public comments. Guidelines for public comments are available at
The deadline for submission of written comments is December 3, 2018. Written public comments should be submitted through the meeting website. Persons submitting written comments should include name, affiliation, mailing address, phone, email, and sponsoring organization (if any). Written comments received in response to this notice will be posted on the NTP website, and the submitter will be identified by name, affiliation, and sponsoring organization (if any).
If possible, oral public commenters should send a copy of their slides and/or statement or talking points to
Meeting Materials: The preliminary meeting agenda is available on the meeting web page (
Background Information on the BSC: The BSC is a technical advisory body comprised of scientists from the public and private sectors that provides primary scientific oversight to the NTP. Specifically, the BSC advises the NTP on matters of scientific program content, both present and future, and conducts periodic review of the program for the purpose of determining and advising on the scientific merit of its activities and their overall scientific quality. Its members are selected from recognized authorities knowledgeable in fields such as toxicology, pharmacology, pathology, biochemistry, epidemiology, risk assessment, carcinogenesis, mutagenesis, molecular biology, behavioral toxicology, neurotoxicology, immunotoxicology, reproductive toxicology or teratology, and biostatistics. Members serve overlapping terms of up to four years. The BSC usually meets biannually. The authority for the BSC is provided by 42 U.S.C. 217a, section 222 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS), as amended.
The BSC is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app.), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
The invention listed below is owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and is available for licensing to achieve expeditious commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development. Foreign patent applications are filed on selected inventions to extend market coverage for companies and may also be available for licensing.
Dr. Jenish Patel, Ph.D., 240-669-2894;
Technology description follows.
This technology is a set of influenza virus enrichment probes developed to increase the sensitivity of sequence-based, universal detection of all influenza viruses. This universal influenza enrichment probe set contains a unique set of 46,953 biotin-labeled, RNA probes, each 120 base-pairs long, that can be used to enrich for any influenza sequences without prior knowledge of type or subtype. This probe set can capture and enrich influenza viral sequences selectively and effectively in a variety of samples, such as clinical samples with degraded nucleotides or samples containing very low amounts of influenza virus, thus making it a valuable tool for influenza virus diagnoses and surveillance.
This technology is available for licensing for commercial development in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404, as well as for further development and evaluation under a research collaboration.
• Influenza diagnostics; influenza surveillance
• Highly sensitive detection of influenza viruses
• Detection of any influenza viruses in a variety of samples
• In vitro Testing
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
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
Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.
To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Jack Moye, Jr., MD, Bldg. 6710B Rm. 2130 MSC 7002, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD, 20892-7002, or call non-toll-free number (301) 594-8624 or Email your request, including your address to:
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.
OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 109.
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.
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.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
The invention listed below is owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and is available for licensing to achieve expeditious commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development. Foreign patent applications are filed on selected inventions to extend market coverage for companies and may also be available for licensing.
James M. Robinson, 301-761-7542;
Technology description follows.
Methods for diagnosing and treating
NIAID researchers have discovered that the expression of TNF superfamily molecule CD153 (TNSF8) is required for control of the pulmonary Mtb infection by CD4 T cells. The results have shown that, in Mtb infected mice, CD153 expression is highest on Ag-specific Th1 cells in the lung tissue parenchyma. On the contrary, CD153 deficient mice have developed high pulmonary bacterial loads and succumb early to Mtb infection. In Mtb infected non-human primates, CD153 expression is much higher on Ag-specific CD4 T cells in the
This technology is available for licensing for commercial development in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404, as well as for further development and evaluation under a research collaboration.
•
• A companion diagnostic can be used to determine the effectiveness of a vaccine against a
• Therapeutic use to treat
• Ability to be used as a target for Mtb diagnostics and therapeutics
• Proof of concept in animal models and human subject.
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.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITF) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines).
A notice listing all currently HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs is published in the
If any laboratory or IITF has withdrawn from the HHS National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) during the past month, it will be listed at the end and will be omitted from the monthly listing thereafter.
This notice is also available on the internet at
Charles LoDico, Division of Workplace Programs, SAMHSA/CSAP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02C, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 240-276-2600 (voice).
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITF) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines). The Mandatory Guidelines were first published in the
The Mandatory Guidelines were initially developed in accordance with Executive Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Law 100-71. The “Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs,” as amended in the revisions listed above, requires strict standards that laboratories and IITFs must meet in order to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens for federal agencies.
To become certified, an applicant laboratory or IITF must undergo three rounds of performance testing plus an on-site inspection. To maintain that certification, a laboratory or IITF must participate in a quarterly performance testing program plus undergo periodic, on-site inspections.
Laboratories and IITFs in the applicant stage of certification are not to be considered as meeting the minimum requirements described in the HHS Mandatory Guidelines. A HHS-certified laboratory or IITF must have its letter of certification from HHS/SAMHSA (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests that it has met minimum standards.
In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines dated January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920), the following HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens
* The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) voted to end its Laboratory Accreditation Program for Substance Abuse (LAPSA) effective May 12, 1998. Laboratories certified through that program were accredited to conduct forensic urine drug testing as required by U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations. As of that date, the certification of those accredited Canadian laboratories will continue under DOT authority. The responsibility for conducting quarterly performance testing plus periodic on-site inspections of those LAPSA-accredited laboratories was transferred to the U.S. HHS, with the HHS' NLCP contractor continuing to have an active role in the performance testing and laboratory inspection processes. Other Canadian laboratories wishing to be considered for the NLCP may apply directly to the NLCP contractor just as U.S. laboratories do.
Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to be qualified, HHS will recommend that DOT certify the laboratory (
Coast Guard, DHS.
Thirty-day notice requesting comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR), abstracted below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval for reinstatement, without change, of the following collection of information: 1625-0096, Report of Oil or Hazardous Substance Discharge; and Report of Suspicious Maritime Activity. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.
Comments must reach the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before December 10, 2018.
You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket number [USCG-2018-0282] to the Coast Guard using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
(1)
(2)
A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet at
Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of Information Management, telephone 202-475-3532, or fax 202-372-8405, for questions on these documents.
This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection, and other important information describing the Collection. There is one ICR for each Collection.
The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. These comments will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICR referred to in this Notice.
We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number of this request, [USCG-2018-0282], and must be received by December 10, 2018.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to
OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at
This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (83 FR 29563, June 25, 2018) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no comments. Accordingly, no changes have been made to the Collection.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended.
On the basis of the record
Pursuant to section 207.18 of the Commission's rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigation. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the
On September 18, 2018, Corsicana Mattress Company, Dallas, Texas; Elite Comfort Solutions, Newnan, Georgia; Future Foam Inc., Council Bluffs, Iowa; FXI, Inc., Media, Pennsylvania; Innocor, Inc., Red Bank, New Jersey; Kolcraft Enterprises Inc., Chicago, Illinois; Leggett & Platt, Incorporated, Carthage, Missouri; Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC, Atlanta, Georgia; and Tempur Sealy International, Inc., Lexington, Kentucky filed a petition with the Commission and Commerce, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with material injury by reason of LTFV imports of mattresses from China. Accordingly, effective September 18, 2018, the Commission, pursuant to section 733(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)), instituted antidumping duty investigation No. 731-TA-1424 (Preliminary).
Notice of the institution of the Commission's investigation and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the
The Commission made this determination pursuant to section 733(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)). It completed and filed its determination in this investigation on November 2, 2018. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4842 (November 2018), entitled
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
November 16, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.
Room 101, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.
Open to the public.
1. Agendas for future meetings: None.
2. Minutes.
3. Ratification List.
4. Vote on Inv. No. 731-TA-739 (Fourth Review) (Clad Steel Plate from Japan). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determination and views of the Commission by December 6, 2018.
5. Outstanding action jackets: None.
In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.
By order of the Commission.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.
60-Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until January 7, 2019.
If you have additional comments, regarding the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information, please contact: Shawn Stevens, Federal Explosives Licensing Center, either by mail at 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, by email at
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Notice is hereby given that, on November 1, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties to the venture are: Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI; General Motors LLC, Detroit, MI; Hyundai America Technical Center, Inc., Superior Township, MI; Nissan Technical Center N.A., Farmington Hills, MI; and Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA. The general area of Cellular V2X D2D Consortium's planned activity is to fund and conduct a program called Cellular V2X Performance Assessment, which will consist of multiple research projects limited to specific areas in which the members believe common solutions to specifically defined technical goals will speed the development and ultimate
On November 1, 2019, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio in the lawsuit entitled
The United States filed this lawsuit against MPLX and eleven of its subsidiaries for violations of the Clean Air Act at twenty natural gas processing facilities in six states. The complaint alleges, among other things, that MPLX violated Leak Detection and Repair requirements of the Clean Air Act's New Source Performance Standards. The proposed Consent Decree requires MPLX and its subsidiaries to take specified actions to come into compliance with the Clean Air Act, pay a civil penalty of $925,000, and undertake Supplemental Environmental Projects at a cost of $2,575,000. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the States of West Virginia and Oklahoma have joined us in this action.
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the consent decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website:
Please enclose a check or money order for $52.75 for the consent decree and appendices (25 cents per page reproduction cost) or $31.50 for the consent decree without appendices, payable to the United States Treasury.
Justice Department.
Meeting notice.
The purpose of this notice is to announce the meeting of the Department of Justice's National Domestic Communications Assistance Center's (NDCAC) Executive Advisory Board (EAB). The meeting is being called to address the items identified in the Agenda detailed below. The NDCAC EAB is a federal advisory committee established pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).
The NDCAC EAB meeting is open to the public, subject to the registration requirements detailed below. The EAB will meet in open session from 10:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. on December 4, 2018.
The meeting will take place at 5000 Seminary Rd, Alexandria, VA 22311. Entry into the meeting room will begin at 9:00 a.m.
Inquiries may be addressed to Ms. Alice Bardney-Boose, Designated Federal Officer, National Domestic Communications Assistance Center, Department of Justice, by email at
The purpose of the EAB is to provide advice and recommendations to the Attorney General or designee, and to the Director of the NDCAC that promote public safety and national security by advancing the NDCAC's core functions: law enforcement coordination with respect to technical capabilities and solutions, technology sharing, industry relations, and implementation of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). The EAB consists of 15 voting members from Federal, State, local and tribal law enforcement agencies. Additionally, there are two non-voting members as follows: a federally-employed attorney assigned full time to the NDCAC to serve as a legal advisor to the EAB, and the DOJ Chief Privacy Officer or designee to ensure that privacy and civil rights and civil liberties issues are fully considered in the EAB's recommendations. The EAB is composed of eight State, local, and/or tribal representatives and seven federal representatives.
In accordance with the FACA, all comments shall be made available for public inspection. Commenters are not required to submit personally identifiable information (such as name, address, etc.). Nevertheless, if commenters submit personally identifiable information as part of the comments, but do not want it made available for public inspection, the phrase “Personally Identifiable Information” must be included in the first paragraph of the comment. Commenters must place all personally identifiable information not to be made available for public inspection in the first paragraph and identify what
Online registration for the meeting must be completed on or before 5:00 p.m. (EST) November 20, 2018. Anyone requiring special accommodations should notify Ms. Bardney-Boose at least seven (7) days in advance of the meeting or indicate your requirements on the online registration form.
Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.
60-Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until January 7, 2019.
If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Benjamin Adams, Social Science Analyst, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 810 Seventh Street NW, Washington, DC 20531 (email:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The National Science Board's Committee on Strategy (CS), pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:
Tuesday, November 13, 2018, from noon-1:00 p.m. EST.
This meeting will be held by teleconference at the National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314. An audio link will be available for the public. Members of the public must contact the Board Office to request the public audio link by sending an email to
Open.
Chair's opening remarks; discussion of proposed NSB Vision project.
Point of contact for this meeting is: Kathy Jacquart, 703/292-7000,
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub., L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the following meeting:
Please contact Alexis Patullo at
National Transportation Safety Board.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given of the appointment of members of the National Transportation Safety Board, Performance Review Board (PRB).
Emily T. Carroll, Chief, Human Resources Division, Office of Administration, National Transportation Safety Board, 490 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20594-0001, (202) 314-6233.
Section 4314(c)(1) through (5) of Title 5, United States Code requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more SES Performance Review Boards. The board reviews and evaluates the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor and considers recommendations to the appointing authority regarding the performance of the senior executive.
The following have been designated as members of the 2018 Performance Review Board of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB):
The Honorable Bruce Landsberg, Vice Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board, PRB Chair.
The Honorable Earl F. Weener, Member, National Transportation Safety Board.
Mr. Edward Benthall, Chief Financial Officer, National Transportation Safety Board.
Mr. Jerold Gidner, Principal Deputy Special Trustee, Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians, Department of Interior.
Ms. Katherine Herrera, Deputy Technical Director, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
Mr. Robert Huttenlocker, Assistant Inspector General for Management, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Agriculture (alternate).
Ms. Susan A. Kantrowitz, Director, Office of Administration, National Transportation Safety Board(alternate).
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
Notice of Approval.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation received a request from Marlins Holdings LLC for an exemption from the bond/escrow requirement relating to a sale of assets with respect to the Major League Baseball Players Pension Plan. PBGC published a notice of the request for exemption from the requirement. PBGC is now advising the public that the agency has granted the exemption request.
Bruce Perlin, Assistant General Counsel (
Section 4204 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (“ERISA” or “the Act”), provides that a bona fide arm's-length sale of assets of a contributing employer to an unrelated party will not be considered a withdrawal if three conditions are met. These conditions, enumerated in section 4204(a)(1)(A)-(C), are that:
(A) The purchaser has an obligation to contribute to the plan with respect to the operations for substantially the same number of contribution base units for which the seller was obligated to contribute;
(B) the purchaser obtains a bond or places an amount in escrow, for a period of five plan years after the sale, in an amount equal to the greater of the seller's average required annual contribution to the plan for the three plan years preceding the year in which the sale occurred or the seller's required annual contribution for the plan year
(C) the contract of sale provides that if the purchaser withdraws from the plan within the first five plan years beginning after the sale and fails to pay any of its liability to the plan, the seller shall be secondarily liable for the liability it (the seller) would have had but for section 4204.
The bond or escrow described above would be paid to the plan if the purchaser withdraws from the plan or fails to make any required contributions to the plan within the first five plan years beginning after the sale. Additionally, section 4204(b)(1) provides that if a sale of assets is covered by section 4204, the purchaser assumes by operation of law the contribution record of the seller for the plan year in which the sale occurred and the preceding four plan years.
Section 4204(c) of ERISA authorizes the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”) to grant individual or class variances or exemptions from the purchaser's bond/escrow requirement of section 4204(a)(1)(B) when warranted. The legislative history of section 4204 indicates a Congressional intent that the sales rules be administered in a manner that assures protection of the plan with the least practicable intrusion into normal business transactions. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, 96th Cong., 2nd Sess., S. 1076, The Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980: Summary and Analysis of Considerations 16 (Comm. Print, April 1980); 128 Cong. Rec. S10117 (July 29, 1980). The granting of an exemption or variance from the bond/escrow requirement does not constitute a finding by PBGC that a particular transaction satisfies the other requirements of section 4204(a)(1).
Under PBGC's regulation on variances for sales of assets (29 CFR part 4204), a request for a variance or waiver of the bond/escrow requirement under any of the tests established in the regulation (§§ 4204.12 & 4204.13) is to be made to the plan in question. PBGC will consider waiver requests only when the request is not based on satisfaction of one of the three regulatory tests or when the parties assert that the financial information necessary to show satisfaction of one of the regulatory tests is privileged or confidential financial information within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) of the Freedom of Information Act.
Under § 4204.22 of the regulation, PBGC shall approve a request for a variance or exemption if it determines that approval of the request is warranted, in that it: (1) Would more effectively or equitably carry out the purposes of Title IV of the Act; and (2) would not significantly increase the risk of financial loss to the plan.
Section 4204(c) of ERISA and § 4204.22(b) of the regulation require PBGC to publish a notice of the pendency of a request for a variance or exemption in the
On June 6, 2018, PBGC published a notice of the pendency of a request by Marlins Holdings LLC (the “Purchaser”) for an exemption from the bond/escrow requirement of section 4204(a)(1)(B) with respect to its purchase of the Miami Marlins Major League Baseball franchise from Miami Marlins, L.P., LLC (the “Seller”). According to the request, the Purchaser represents among other things that:
1. The Seller was obligated to contribute to the Major League Baseball Players Benefit Plan (the “Plan”) for certain employees of the sold operations.
2. The Purchaser has agreed to assume the obligation to contribute to the Plan for substantially the same number of contribution base units as the Seller.
3. The Seller has agreed to be secondarily liable for any withdrawal liability it would have had with respect to the sold operations (if not for section 4204) should the Purchaser withdraw from the Plan and fail to pay its withdrawal liability.
4. The estimated amount of the withdrawal liability of the Seller with respect to the operations subject to the sale is $19,169,342.
5. The amount of the bond/escrow established under section 4204(a)(1)(B) is $4,781,000.
6. Major League Baseball has a unique structure in which the Plan is funded from the Major League Central Fund (the “Central Fund”), maintained and administered by the Commissioner of Baseball. Under this structure, contributions to the Plan for all participating employers are paid by the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball from the Central Fund on behalf of each participating employer in satisfaction of the employer's pension liability under the Plan's funding agreement. The monies in the Central Fund are derived directly from common revenues related to the All-Star Game, post-season games, certain media rights and other common revenues (collectively, the “Revenues”).
7. In support of the exemption request, the requester asserts that, “the Plan is funded from the Central Fund that is maintained and administered by the Commissioner of Baseball.” Major League Baseball pays contributions directly to the Plan from the Central Fund. Further, the requester asserts that, “the Plan enjoys a substantial degree of security with respect to contributions on behalf of the Clubs. A change in ownership of a Club does not affect the obligation of the Central Fund to fund the Plan. As such, approval of this exemption request would not increase the risk of financial loss to the Plan.”
8. A complete copy of the request was sent to the Plan and to the Major League Baseball Players Association by certified mail, return receipt requested.
Based on the facts of this case and the representations and statements made in connection with the request for an exemption, PBGC has determined that an exemption from the bond/escrow requirement is warranted, in that it would more effectively carry out the purposes of title IV of ERISA and would not significantly increase the risk of financial loss to the Plan. Therefore, PBGC hereby grants the request for an exemption for the bond/escrow requirement. The granting of an exemption or variance from the bond/escrow requirement of section 4204(a)(1)(B) does not constitute a finding by PBGC that the transaction satisfies the other requirements of section 4204(a)(1). The determination of whether the transaction satisfies such other requirements is a determination to be made by the Plan sponsor.
Issued in Washington, DC.
December 17, 2018, at 11 a.m.
Commission hearing room, 901 New York Avenue NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001.
The Postal Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting to discuss the agenda items outlined below. Part of the meeting will be open to the public as well as live audio cast
The agenda for the Commission's December 17, 2018 meeting includes the items identified below.
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, 901 New York Avenue NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001, at 202-789-6820 (for agenda-related inquiries) and Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary of the Commission, at 202-789-6800 or
By direction of the Commission.
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing for the Commission's consideration concerning a negotiated service agreement. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
The Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition or removal of a negotiated service agreement from the market dominant or the competitive product list, or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the market dominant or the competitive product list.
Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, the title of each Postal Service request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each request.
The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's website (
The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) in the captioned docket(s) are consistent with the policies of title 39. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern market dominant product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) that the Postal Service states concern competitive product(s), applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment deadline(s) for each request appear in section II.
1.
This Notice will be published in the
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is revising the comment due date.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
In Order No. 2480, the Commission approved the Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 18 negotiated service agreement (Existing Agreement).
The Commission set the deadline for comments as November 6, 2018. Notice Initiating Dockets at 2. However, the Existing Agreement expires November 8, 2018,
To permit the Commission time to review the comments and issue an order on the Amendment at least two days before the Existing Agreement expires, the deadline for comments is revised to November 5, 2018.
1. The deadline to submit comments is revised to November 5, 2018.
2. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the
By the Commission.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act” or “Act”),
The proposed rule change is filed in connection with proposed changes to enhance OCC's model for incorporating variations in implied volatility within OCC's margin methodology (“Implied Volatility Model”), the System for Theoretical Analysis and Numerical Simulations (“STANS”).
In its filing with the Commission, OCC included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.
STANS is OCC's proprietary risk management system for calculating Clearing Member margin requirements.
The econometric models underlying STANS currently incorporate a number of risk factors. A “risk factor” within OCC's margin system is defined as a product or attribute whose historical data is used to estimate and simulate the risk for an associated product. The majority of risk factors utilized in the
Generally speaking, the implied volatility of an option is a measure of the expected future volatility of the option's underlying security at expiration, which is reflected in the current option premium in the market. Using the Black-Scholes options pricing model, the implied volatility is the standard deviation of the underlying asset price necessary to arrive at the market price of an option of a given strike, time to maturity, underlying asset price and the current risk-free rate. In effect, the implied volatility is responsible for that portion of the premium that cannot be explained by the then-current intrinsic value of the option (
OCC models the variations in implied volatility used to re-price options within STANS for substantially all option contracts
OCC performed a number of analyses of its current Implied Volatility Model and to support development of the proposed model changes, including backtesting and impact analysis of the proposed model enhancements as well as comparison of OCC's current model performance against certain industry benchmarks.
For example, on February 5, 2018, the market experienced extreme levels of volatility, with the Cboe Volatility Index (“VIX”)
In addition, volatility tends to be mean reverting; that is, volatility will quickly return to its long-run mean or average from an elevated level, so it is unlikely that volatility would continue to make big jumps immediately following a drastic increase. For example, based on the VIX history from 1990-2018, VIX levels jumped above 35 (about the level observed on February 5,
OCC also performed backtesting of the current model and proposed model enhancements to evaluate and compare the performance of each model from a margin coverage perspective. OCC's backtesting demonstrated that exceedance counts
OCC believes that the sudden, extreme and unreasonable increases in margin requirements that may be experienced under its current Implied Volatility Model may stress certain Clearing Members' ability to obtain sufficient liquidity to meet these significantly increased margin requirements, particularly in periods of sudden, extreme volatility. OCC therefore is proposing changes to its Implied Volatility Model to limit procyclicality and produce margin requirements that OCC believes are more reasonable and are also commensurate with the risks presented by its cleared options products.
OCC proposes to modify its Implied Volatility Model by introducing an exponentially weighted moving average
The proposed change is intended to reduce the oversensitivity of the current Implied Volatility Model to large, sudden shocks in market volatility and therefore result in margin requirements that are more stable and that remain commensurate with the risks presented during periods of sudden, extreme volatility.
OCC expects to implement the proposed changes within thirty (30) days after the date that OCC receives all necessary regulatory approvals for the proposed changes. OCC will announce the implementation date of the proposed change by an Information Memorandum posted to its public website at least 2 weeks prior to implementation.
OCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A of the Act
Rules 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (v)
The proposed rule changes are not inconsistent with the existing rules of OCC, including any other rules proposed to be amended.
Section 17A(b)(3)(I) requires that the rules of a clearing agency do not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of Act.
(C)
Written comments on the proposed rule change were not and are not intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change and none have been received.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
(A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2018-014 and should be submitted on or before November 29, 2018.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
The Exchange proposes to amend Section 805(c)(5) of the NYSE American Company Guide (the “Company Guide”) to change the threshold for listed companies to benefit from the exemptions from the Exchange's compensation committee requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies so that all companies that qualify for smaller reporting company status under the revised SEC definition will qualify for those exemptions. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The SEC recently adopted
Section 805(c)(1) of the Company Guide requires a heightened standard of independence for compensation committee members.
• One member of its compensation committee that meets the independence standard of Section 805(c)(1) within six months of that date;
• a majority of directors on its compensation committee meeting those requirements within nine months of that date; and
• a compensation committee comprised solely of members that meet those requirements within twelve months of that date.
Any such company that does not have a compensation committee must comply with this transition requirement with respect to all of its independent directors as a group.
The Exchange also proposes to delete from Section 805(c)(5) text referencing the transition period for companies to comply with the enhanced compensation committee provisions at the time of their original adoption, as the transition period ended on October 31, 2014 and the text is therefore no longer relevant.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
As noted above, the effect of the proposed change to the definition in Section 805(c)(5) of the definition of a smaller reporting company is to change the threshold for listed companies to benefit from the exemptions from the compensation committee independence requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies so that all companies that qualify for smaller reporting company status under the revised SEC definition will qualify for those exemptions. Listed smaller reporting companies must comply with all other applicable Exchange corporate governance requirements, including all other applicable compensation committee requirements. The Commission has already determined through its own rulemaking that the revised thresholds for smaller reporting company status proposed in this rule proposal are consistent with the goal of the Act to further the protection of investors and the public interest
The deletion from Section 805(c)(5) of the text referencing the transition period for companies to comply with the enhanced compensation committee provisions at the time of their original adoption is consistent with Section 6(b)(5), as the transition period ended on October 31, 2014 and the text is therefore no longer relevant.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change to the definition of smaller reporting company in Section 805(c)(5) will not impose any burden competition as its sole purpose is to change the threshold for listed companies to benefit from the exemptions from the Exchange's compensation committee independence requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies so that all companies that qualify for smaller reporting company status under the revised SEC definition will qualify for those exemptions. The deletion from Section 805(c)(5) of the text referencing the transition period for companies to comply with the enhanced compensation committee provisions at the time of their original adoption will not impose any burden on competition, as the transition period ended on October 31, 2014 and the text is therefore no longer relevant.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B)
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 7.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of North Carolina (FEMA-4393-DR), dated 09/14/2018.
Issued on 10/31/2018.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of North Carolina, dated 09/14/2018, is hereby amended to extend the deadline for filing applications for physical damages as a result of this disaster to 12/13/2018.
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice.
This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (FEMA-4404-DR), dated 10/31/2018.
Issued on 10/31/2018.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 10/31/2018, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.
The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:
The Interest Rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 157868 and for economic injury is 157870.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 1.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of the
Issued on 10/31/2018.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, dated 10/26/2018, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 10/24/2018 and continuing through 10/26/2018.
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 1.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Wisconsin (FEMA-4402-DR), dated 10/18/2018.
Issued on 11/01/2018.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of WISCONSIN, dated 10/18/2018, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice.
This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Montana (FEMA-4405-DR), dated 10/31/2018.
Issued on 10/31/2018.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 10/31/2018, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.
The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:
The Interest Rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 157846 and for economic injury is 157850.
On June 1, 2018, Secretary Pompeo authorized the convening of an Accountability Review Board (ARB) to review a January 2017 attack on a U.S. government employee in Guadalajara, Mexico. Pursuant to Section 304 of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986, as amended (22 U.S.C. 4834), the ARB will examine the facts and circumstances, and report findings and recommendations as it deems appropriate, in keeping with its mandate.
The Secretary has appointed Lisa Kubiske, a retired U.S. Ambassador, as Chair of the Board. The other Board
The Board will submit its conclusions and recommendations to Secretary Pompeo within 60 days of its first meeting, unless the Chair determines a need for additional time. Within the timeframes required by statute following receipt of the report, the Department will report to Congress on recommendations made by the Board and action taken with respect to those recommendations.
Anyone with information relevant to the Board's examination of these incidents should contact the Board promptly at (202) 647-6427 or send a fax to the Board at (202) 647-5792.
Eyal Shapira (Shapira), an individual, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2) to continue in control of Iowa & Middletown Railway LLC (I&M) and Wolf Creek Railroad LLC (Wolf Creek) upon I&M's and Wolf Creek's becoming Class III rail carriers.
This transaction is related to a verified notice of exemption filed concurrently in
The earliest this transaction may be consummated is November 22, 2018, the effective date of the exemption (30 days after the verified notice of exemption was filed).
According to the verified notice of exemption, Shapira currently controls, through equity ownership, two Class III carriers (Pennsylvania & Southern Railway (PSRR) and Raritan Central Railway, LLC (Raritan Central)). Shapira is filing this verified notice to enable his continuance in control of I&M and Wolf Creek when they become carriers.
Shapira represents that: (1) The rail lines to be operated by I&M and Wolf Creek do not connect with each other or with the other railroads currently controlled by Shapira; (2) the continuance in control is not part of a series of anticipated transactions that would connect I&M and Wolf Creek with each other or the rail lines of the other railroads currently controlled by Shapira; and (3) the transaction does not involve a Class I carrier. The proposed transaction is therefore exempt from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11323 pursuant to 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2).
Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board may not use its exemption authority to relieve a rail carrier of its statutory obligation to protect the interests of its employees. Section 11326(c), however, does not provide for labor protection for transactions under sections 11324 and 11325 that involve only Class III rail carriers. Accordingly, the Board may not impose labor protective conditions here because all the carriers involved are Class III carriers.
If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically stay the effectiveness of the exemption. Petitions for stay must be filed no later than November 15, 2018 (at least seven days before the exemption becomes effective).
An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD 36232, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one copy of each pleading must be served on Eric M. Hocky, Clark Hill PLC, One Commerce Square, 2005 Market Street, Suite 1000, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
According to Shapira, this action is categorically excluded from environmental review under 49 CFR 1105.6(c).
Board decisions and notices are available on our website at
By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.
Wolf Creek Railroad LLC (Wolf Creek), a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to lease from American Ordnance LLC (AO), as owner's representative for the U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command (JMC), and to operate, approximately ten miles of track (the Line)
Wolf Creek states that, upon consummation of the transaction and the commencement of operations, Wolf Creek will be a Class III carrier. Wolf Creek states that it is leasing the Line in order to provide common carrier rail service to transload customers and other rail customers that may locate in the planned business park. Wolf Creek states it that will originate and terminate freight traffic and conduct loading and unloading operations and that it will also offer rail car storage and car repair services within the Plant. According to Wolf Creek, the Line connects with CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), and West Tennessee Railroad (WTNN) at Milan, Tenn., and Wolf Creek will seek to
This transaction is related to a concurrently filed verified notice of exemption in
Wolf Creek certifies that its projected annual revenues as a result of this transaction will not exceed $5 million or result in the creation of a Class II or Class I rail carrier. Wolf Creek also certifies that the lease does not impose or include an interchange commitment.
The earliest this transaction may be consummated is November 22, 2018, the effective date of the exemption (30 days after the verified notice was filed). Wolf Creek states that it expects to commence common carrier operations on January 1, 2019.
If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically stay the effectiveness of the exemption. Petitions to stay must be filed by November 15, 2018 (at least seven days before the exemption becomes effective).
An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD 36236, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one copy of each pleading must be served on Eric M. Hocky, Clark Hill PLC, One Commerce Square, 2005 Market Street, Suite 1000, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
According to Wolf Creek, this action is exempt from environmental review under 49 CFR 1105.6(c) and exempt from historic review under 49 CFR 1105.8(b).
Board decisions and notices are available on our website at
By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.
On October 12, 2018, Iowa & Middletown Railway LLC (I&M), a noncarrier, filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to lease from American Ordnance LLC (AO), as owner's representative for the U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command (JMC), and operate, approximately four miles of track (the Line)
Notice of I&M's lease and operation exemption was served and published on October 26, 2018 (83 FR 54162), but the effective date of the exemption was held in abeyance pending review of a related verified notice of exemption filed on October 23, 2018, in
1. I&M's exemption will become effective on November 22, 2018. Petitions for stay of the exemption are due by November 15, 2018.
2. This decision is effective on its date of service.
By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice.
The FAA is considering a proposal to change approximately 1.24 acres of airport land from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use and to authorize the lease of airport property located at Capital Region International Airport, Lansing, Michigan. The aforementioned land is not needed for aeronautical use.
The subject property is located at 2824 East Circle Drive, Lansing, Michigan. This property is on the southeast side of the street, south of the Capital Region International Airport's terminal. This property was the location of the former Federal Aviation Administration Automated Flight Service Station. The FAA departed the facility in 2012. The property is currently identified as aeronautical use, however, there is no airside access from the property. The Michigan State Police will purchase the building and lease the land for the Michigan State Police Canine Special Operations Unit.
Comments must be received on or before December 10, 2018.
Documents are available for review by appointment at the FAA Detroit Airports District Office, Katherine Delaney, Community Planner, 11677 South Wayne Road, Suite 107, Romulus, Michigan 48174, Telephone: (734) 229-2900, Fax: (734) 229-2950 and Capital Region Airport Authority, Capital Region International Airport, Jonathon Vrabel, Senior Vice-President, 4100 Capital City Boulevard, Lansing, Michigan, Telephone: (517) 321-6121.
Written comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or mailed to: Katherine Delaney, Community Planner, Federal Aviation Administration, Detroit Airports District Office, 11677 South Wayne Road, Suite 107, Romulus, Michigan 48174, Telephone Number: (734) 229-2900, Fax Number: (734) 229-2950.
Katherine Delaney, Community Planner, Federal Aviation Administration, Detroit Airports District Office, 11677 South Wayne Road, Suite 107, Romulus, Michigan 48174. Telephone Number: (734) 229-2900/FAX Number: (734) 229-2950.
In accordance with section 47107(h) of Title 49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the
The property does not currently have an aeronautical use. It was the location of the previous Federal Aviation Administration Automated Flight Service Station until 2012. The land was acquired by the airport through a Quit Claim Deed with the State of Michigan. The sponsor is proposing to sell the building and lease the land for a non-aeronautical use. The proposed use is for the State of Michigan Police to use the parcel for the Canine Special Operations Unit. The CRAA will sell the building for fair market value and lease the land for fair market value rates.
The disposition of proceeds from the sale of the building and the lease of airport property will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the
This notice announces that the FAA is considering the release of the subject airport property at the Capital Region International Airport, Lansing, Michigan from its obligations to be maintained for aeronautical purposes. Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the change in use of the subject airport property nor a determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from the FAA.
Commencing at the south
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury.
Notice.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons who have been removed from the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List). Their property and interests in property are no longer blocked, and U.S. persons are no longer generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.
See
OFAC: Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; 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 General Counsel: Office of the Chief Counsel (Foreign Assets Control), tel.: 202-622-2410.
The Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website (
OFAC previously determined on August 1, 2018 that the individuals listed below met one or more of the criteria under Executive Order 13818 of December 20, 2017, “Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption,” (the “Order”). On November 2, 2018, the Director of OFAC, in consultation with the Secretary of State, determined that circumstances no longer warrant the inclusion of the following individuals on the SDN List under this authority. These individuals are no longer subject to the blocking provisions of Section 1(a) of the Order.
1. GUL, Abdulhamit; DOB 12 Mar 1977; POB Nizip, Gaziantep, Turkey; nationality Turkey; Gender Male (individual) [GLOMAG].
2. SOYLU, Suleyman; DOB 21 Nov 1969; POB Istanbul, Turkey; nationality Turkey; Gender Male (individual) [GLOMAG].
Internal Revenue Service, Department of Treasury.
Notice of charter renewal.
The Charter for the Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council (IRSAC), has been renewed for two years beginning October 17, 2018, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2.
Anna Millikan at (202) 317-6564, or send an email to
Notice is hereby given that the charter for the Internal Revenue Service Advisory Council (IRSAC) has been renewed for two years beginning October 17, 2018, in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2.
The purpose of the IRSAC is to provide an organized public forum for discussion of relevant tax administration issues between Internal Revenue Service (IRS) officials and representatives of the public. Beginning in 2019, the IRSAC will incorporate the Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities (ACT) and the Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee IRPAC), which will cease to function as separate committees at the end of 2018.
The IRSAC proposes enhancements to IRS operations, recommends administrative and policy changes to improve taxpayer service, compliance and tax administration, discusses relevant information reporting issues, addresses matters concerning tax-exempt and government entities and
Conveying the public's perception of IRS activities to Internal Revenue Service officials, the IRSAC is comprised of individuals representing a cross-section of the taxpaying public with substantial, disparate experience in: Tax preparation for individuals, small businesses and/or large, multi-national corporations; information reporting; tax-exempt and government entities; digital services; and professional standards of tax professionals.
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration |