Federal Register Vol. 83, No.219,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 219 (November 13, 2018)

Page Range56255-56697
FR Document

83_FR_219
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 56697 - Delegation of Authority Under Section 1244 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019PDF
83 FR 56325 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
83 FR 56399 - Sunshine Act Meeting Notice; Meeting No. 18-04PDF
83 FR 56365 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 56378 - Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency MeetingPDF
83 FR 56383 - Temporary Emergency Committee of the Board of Governors; Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
83 FR 56275 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
83 FR 56322 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board; MembershipPDF
83 FR 56255 - Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington; Increased Assessment Rate for Fresh PearsPDF
83 FR 56365 - Updated Collision Risk Model Priors for Estimating Eagle Fatalities at Wind Energy FacilitiesPDF
83 FR 56369 - Notice of Proposed Withdrawal Extension and Opportunity for Public Meeting for the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge; FloridaPDF
83 FR 56322 - Clean Air Act Advisory Committee; Notice of Charter RenewalPDF
83 FR 56364 - Next Generation First Responder (NGFR)PDF
83 FR 56317 - Notice of Filing; Southern California Edison Company, Appalachian Power Company, Arizona Public Service, Indiana Michigan Power Company, Kentucky Power Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, PNM Resources, Public Service Company of Colorado, Puget Sound Energy, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Southwestern Electric Power Company, Southwestern Public Service Company, Wheeling Power CompanyPDF
83 FR 56299 - Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products From the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty OrdersPDF
83 FR 56315 - Goodyear Lake Hydro, LLC; Notice of Availability of Environmental AssessmentPDF
83 FR 56316 - American Wind Energy Association, The Wind Coalition v. Southwest Power Pool, Inc.; Notice of ComplaintPDF
83 FR 56315 - T.A. Keck, III and H.S. Keck; Notice of Existing Licensee's Failure To File a Notice of Intent To File a Subsequent License Application, and Soliciting Notices of Intent To File a License Application and Pre-Application DocumentsPDF
83 FR 56327 - Barriers to Participation in the NIOSH Coal Workers Health Surveillance ProgramPDF
83 FR 56274 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 56383 - Notice of Receipt of and Availability for Public Comment on an Application for Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Site; The Presidio of San Francisco, CaliforniaPDF
83 FR 56313 - Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection for the Weatherization Assistance ProgramPDF
83 FR 56354 - National Practitioner Data Bank GuidebookPDF
83 FR 56364 - Minnesota; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 56269 - Suspension of Community EligibilityPDF
83 FR 56360 - Minnesota; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 56380 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
83 FR 56300 - Biodiesel From Argentina: Initiation of Changed Circumstances Reviews of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty OrdersPDF
83 FR 56325 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 56287 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; National Survey of Children's HealthPDF
83 FR 56324 - Next Meeting of the North American Numbering CouncilPDF
83 FR 56376 - Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public InterestPDF
83 FR 56361 - Virginia; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 56361 - Virginia; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 56360 - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Major Disaster and Related DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 56359 - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Emergency and Related DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 56361 - Wisconsin; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 56328 - Basic Health Program; Final Administrative OrderPDF
83 FR 56314 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 56316 - Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Carson Hybrid Energy Storage LLCPDF
83 FR 56314 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
83 FR 56378 - Request for Information on Update to the 2016 Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development Strategic PlanPDF
83 FR 56404 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 4255PDF
83 FR 56304 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Port of Kalama Expansion Project on the Lower Columbia RiverPDF
83 FR 56375 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Historic Westville, Inc., Columbus, GAPDF
83 FR 56370 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, KSPDF
83 FR 56258 - Sensient Colors, LLC; Filing of Color Additive PetitionPDF
83 FR 56374 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: University of California, Davis, Davis, CAPDF
83 FR 56371 - Notice of Inventory Completion: University of Arkansas Museum Collections, Fayetteville, ARPDF
83 FR 56353 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Comment Request; Information Collection Request Title: Maternal and Child Health Bureau Performance Measures for Discretionary Grant Information System (DGIS), OMB No. 0915-0298-RevisionPDF
83 FR 56347 - Drug Development Tool Process Under the 21st Century Cures Act and Prescription Drug User Fee Act VI; Public Meeting; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 56319 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Renewable Fuel Standard ProgramPDF
83 FR 56317 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Emission Guidelines for Existing Other Solid Waste Incineration Units (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 56323 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Engine Test Cells/Stands (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 56321 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Petroleum Refineries (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 56323 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 56320 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for the Secondary Lead Smelter Industry (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 56318 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Acid Rain Program (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 56259 - Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations; Consistency Update for MassachusettsPDF
83 FR 56276 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Georgia Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil RightsPDF
83 FR 56275 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Indiana Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil RightsPDF
83 FR 56276 - Notice of Public Meetings of the Mississippi Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil RightsPDF
83 FR 56312 - Notice of Availability of Government-Owned Inventions; Available for LicensingPDF
83 FR 56274 - Information Collection Request; Servicing Minor Program LoansPDF
83 FR 56311 - Department of Defense Military Family Readiness Council; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 56302 - National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 56387 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Rule 3400 SeriesPDF
83 FR 56384 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Section 303A.00 of the Manual To Change the Threshold for Qualifying as a Smaller Reporting Company To Qualify for Certain Exemptions From the Compensation Committee RequirementsPDF
83 FR 56385 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to New Derivative Securities ProductsPDF
83 FR 56391 - Stellus Capital Investment Corporation, et al.PDF
83 FR 56311 - Board of Regents, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 56313 - Meeting NoticePDF
83 FR 56359 - North Carolina; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 56362 - Florida; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
83 FR 56356 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 56362 - Proposed Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 56355 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 56258 - Safety Zone; Allegheny River, Miles 0.0-1.0, Pittsburgh, PAPDF
83 FR 56354 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 56354 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 56377 - Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin From Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan; DeterminationsPDF
83 FR 56271 - Tankers-Automatic Pilot Systems; CorrectionPDF
83 FR 56350 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Establishing and Maintaining Lists of U.S. Manufacturers/Processors With Interest in Exporting Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition-Regulated ProductsPDF
83 FR 56399 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Comment Request; Leveraged LendingPDF
83 FR 56402 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Request for Comment; Identity Theft Red Flags and Address Discrepancies Under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003PDF
83 FR 56303 - Caribbean Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
83 FR 56400 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Comment Request; Fiduciary ActivitiesPDF
83 FR 56304 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Capital Construction Fund Agreement, Certificate Family of Forms and Deposit/Withdrawal ReportPDF
83 FR 56310 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Application for Appointment in the NOAA Commissioned Officer CorpsPDF
83 FR 56347 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget ApprovalsPDF
83 FR 56349 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Surveys and Interviews With Investigational New Drug Sponsors To Assess Current Communication Practices With Food and Drug Administration Review Staff Under the Sixth Authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee ActPDF
83 FR 56366 - Endangered Species; Recovery Permit ApplicationsPDF
83 FR 56666 - De Minimis Exception to the Swap Dealer DefinitionPDF
83 FR 56290 - Census Designated Places (CDPs) for the 2020 Census-Final CriteriaPDF
83 FR 56293 - Block Groups for the 2020 Census-Final CriteriaPDF
83 FR 56277 - Census Tracts for the 2020 Census-Final CriteriaPDF
83 FR 56285 - Census County Divisions (CCDs) and Equivalent Entities for the 2020 Census-Final CriteriaPDF
83 FR 56257 - Regulation of NMS Stock Alternative Trading SystemsPDF
83 FR 56272 - Draft Merchant Mariner Medical ManualPDF
83 FR 56262 - Cyantraniliprole; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
83 FR 56379 - Exemption; Issuance: Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC; Medical Radioisotope Production FacilityPDF
83 FR 56640 - Federal Credit Union BylawsPDF
83 FR 56406 - Medicare and Medicaid Programs; CY 2019 Home Health Prospective Payment System Rate Update and CY 2020 Case-Mix Adjustment Methodology Refinements; Home Health Value-Based Purchasing Model; Home Health Quality Reporting Requirements; Home Infusion Therapy Requirements; and Training Requirements for Surveyors of National Accrediting OrganizationsPDF

Issue

83 219 Tuesday, November 13, 2018 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service RULES Increased Assessment Rates: Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington, 56255-56257 2018-24728 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Farm Service Agency

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 56274 2018-24699
Broadcasting Broadcasting Board of Governors NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 56275 2018-24827 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Survey of Children's Health, 56287-56290 2018-24681 Final Criteria: Block Groups for the 2020 Census, 56293-56298 2018-24570 Census County Divisions and Equivalent Entities for the 2020 Census, 56285-56287 2018-24566 Census Designated Places for the 2020 Census, 56290-56293 2018-24571 Census Tracts for the 2020 Census, 56277-56284 2018-24567 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Requests for Information: Barriers to Participation in the NIOSH Coal Workers Health Surveillance Program, 56327-56328 2018-24700 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Medicare and Medicaid Programs: CY 2019 Home Health Prospective Payment System Rate Update and CY 2020 Case-Mix Adjustment Methodology Refinements; Home Health Value-Based Purchasing Model; Home Health Quality Reporting Requirements; Home Infusion Therapy Requirements; and Training Requirements for Surveyors of National Accrediting Organizations, 56406-56638 2018-24145 NOTICES Basic Health Program; Final Administrative Order, 56328-56347 2018-24673 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Georgia Advisory Committee, 56276-56277 2018-24647 Indiana Advisory Committee, 56275-56276 2018-24646 Mississippi Advisory Committee, 56276 2018-24645 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zones: Allegheny River, Miles 0.0-1.0, Pittsburgh, PA, 56258 2018-24624 Tankers—Automatic Pilot Systems; Correction, 56271 2018-24619 PROPOSED RULES Draft Merchant Mariner Medical Manual, 56272-56273 2018-24502 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Institute of Standards and Technology

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission RULES De Minimis Exception to the Swap Dealer Definition, 56666-56693 2018-24579 Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Fiduciary Activities, 56400-56402 2018-24612 Identity Theft Red Flags and Address Discrepancies under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 56402-56404 2018-24615 Leveraged Lending, 56399-56400 2018-24616 Defense Department Defense Department See

Navy Department

NOTICES Meetings: Board of Regents, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 56311-56312 2018-24634 Military Family Readiness Council, 56311 2018-24640
Election Election Assistance Commission NOTICES Meetings: Board of Advisors; Conference Call, 56313 2018-24631 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Weatherization Assistance Program, 56313-56314 2018-24695
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations: Consistency Update for Massachusetts, 56259-56262 2018-24648 Pesticide Tolerances: Cyantraniliprole, 56262-56269 2018-24379 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Acid Rain Program, 56318-56319 2018-24649 Emission Guidelines for Existing Other Solid Waste Incineration Units, 56317-56318 2018-24654 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Engine Test Cells/Stands, 56323 2018-24653 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting, 56323-56324 2018-24651 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Secondary Lead Smelter Industry, 56320-56321 2018-24650 New Source Performance Standards for Petroleum Refineries, 56321-56322 2018-24652 Renewable Fuel Standard Program, 56319-56320 2018-24655 Charter Renewals: Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, 56322-56323 2018-24710 Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board Membership, 56322 2018-24741 Farm Service Farm Service Agency NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Servicing Minor Program Loans, 56274-56275 2018-24641 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Meetings: North American Numbering Council, 56324-56325 2018-24680 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 56325 2018-24864 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency RULES Suspension of Community Eligibility, 56269-56271 2018-24692 NOTICES Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations, 56356-56358 2018-24628 Emergency and Related Determinations: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 56359 2018-24675 Flood Hazard Determinations; Proposals, 56362-56364 2018-24627 Major Disaster and Related Determinations: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 56360 2018-24676 Virginia, 56361-56362 2018-24677 Major Disaster Declarations: Florida; Amendment No. 6, 56362 2018-24629 Minnesota; Amendment No. 1, 56364 2018-24693 Minnesota; Amendment No. 2, 56360 2018-24691 North Carolina; Amendment No. 9, 56359 2018-24630 Virginia; Amendment No. 1, 56361 2018-24678 Wisconsin; Amendment No. 1, 56361 2018-24674 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 56314-56315 2018-24669 2018-24671 Complaints: American Wind Energy Association, The Wind Coalition v. Southwest Power Pool, Inc., 56316-56317 2018-24702 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Goodyear Lake Hydro, LLC, 56315 2018-24703 Filings: Southern California Edison Co., Appalachian Power Co., Arizona Public Service, et al., 56317 2018-24706 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Carson Hybrid Energy Storage LLC, 56316 2018-24670 License Applications: T.A. Keck, III and H.S. Keck, 56315-56316 2018-24701 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 56325-56327 2018-24682 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Collision Risk Model Priors for Estimating Eagle Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities, 56365-56366 2018-24718 Endangered Species Recovery Permits; Applications, 56366-56369 2018-24607 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Color Additive Petitions: Sensient Colors, LLC, 56258 2018-24662 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Announcement of Office of Management and Budget Approvals, 56347 2018-24609 Establishing and Maintaining Lists of U.S. Manufacturers/Processors With Interest in Exporting Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition-Regulated Products, 56350-56353 2018-24618 Surveys and Interviews with Investigational New Drug Sponsors to Assess Current Communication Practices with Food and Drug Administration Review Staff Under the Sixth Authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, 56349-56350 2018-24608 Meetings: Drug Development Tool Process under the 21st Century Cures Act and Prescription Drug User Fee Act VI, 56347-56349 2018-24656 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Health Resources and Services Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Health Resources Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Maternal and Child Health Bureau Performance Measures for Discretionary Grant Information System, 56353-56354 2018-24659 National Practitioner Data Bank Guidebook, 56354 2018-24694 Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Next Generation First Responder, 56364-56365 2018-24707
Inter-American Inter-American Foundation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 56365 2018-24837 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 56404 2018-24666 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Biodiesel from Argentina, 56300-56302 2018-24689 Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products from the People's Republic of China, 56299-56300 2018-24705 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Complaints: Certain Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and Components Thereof, 56376-56377 2018-24679 Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan, 56377-56378 2018-24621 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge, FL; Proposed Withdrawal Extension, 56369-56370 2018-24717 National Credit National Credit Union Administration PROPOSED RULES Federal Credit Union Bylaws, 56640-56664 2018-24169 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 56378 2018-24836 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Meetings: National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee, 56302-56303 2018-24639 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 56355-56356 2018-24625 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 56354 2018-24622 National Institute of Mental Health, 56354-56355 2018-24623 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Appointment in the NOAA Commissioned Officer Corps, 56310-56311 2018-24610 Capital Construction Fund Agreement, Certificate Family of Forms and Deposit/Withdrawal Report, 56304 2018-24611 Meetings: Caribbean Fishery Management Council, 56303-56304 2018-24614 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Port of Kalama Expansion Project on the Lower Columbia River, 56304-56310 2018-24665 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Inventory Completions: Historic Westville, Inc., Columbus, GA, 56375-56376 2018-24664 Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, KS, 56370-56371 2018-24663 University of Arkansas Museum Collections, Fayetteville, AR, 56371-56374 2018-24660 Repatriation of Cultural Items: University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, 56374-56375 2018-24661 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Requests for Information: Update to the 2016 Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development Strategic Plan, 56378-56379 2018-24668 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Government-Owned Inventions; Available for Licensing, 56312-56313 2018-24644 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Exemptions: Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC; Medical Radioisotope Production Facility, 56379-56380 2018-24312 Occupational Safety Health Rev Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission NOTICES Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 56380-56383 2018-24690 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 56383 2018-24835 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Defense and National Security: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019; Delegation of Authority (Memorandum of October 29, 2018), 56695-56697 2018-24897 Presidio Presidio Trust NOTICES Application: Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Site; The Presidio of San Francisco, CA, 56383-56384 2018-24698 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission RULES Regulation of National Market System Stock Alternative Trading Systems, 56257-56258 2018-24549 NOTICES Applications: Stellus Capital Investment Corp., et al., 56391-56399 2018-24635 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, 56385-56391 2018-24636 2018-24638 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 56384-56385 2018-24637 Tennessee Tennessee Valley Authority NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 56399 2018-24842 Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

See

Internal Revenue Service

Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 56406-56638 2018-24145 Part III National Credit Union Administration, 56640-56664 2018-24169 Part IV Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 56666-56693 2018-24579 Part V Presidential Documents, 56695-56697 2018-24897 Reader Aids

Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.

83 219 Tuesday, November 13, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 927 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-18-0048; SC18-927-1 FR] Pears Grown in Oregon and Washington; Increased Assessment Rate for Fresh Pears AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule implements a recommendation from the Fresh Pear Committee (Committee) to increase the assessment rate established for the 2018-2019 and subsequent fiscal periods. The assessment rate will remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.

DATES:

Effective December 13, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barry Broadbent, Marketing Specialist, or Gary Olson, Regional Director, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (503) 326-2724, Fax: (503) 326-7440, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, amends regulations issued to carry out a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 927, as amended (7 CFR part 927), regulating the handling of pears grown in Oregon and Washington. Part 927, (referred to as “the Order”) is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.” The Committee locally administers the Order and is comprised of growers and handlers operating within the area of production, and a public member.

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this final rule in conformance with Executive Orders 13563 and 13175. This rule falls within a category of regulatory actions that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 12866 review. Additionally, because this rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory action, it does not trigger the requirements contained in Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017, titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the Order now in effect, Oregon and Washington pear handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the Order are derived from such assessments. The assessment rate established by this rule will be applicable to all assessable pears for the 2018-2019 fiscal period, and continue until amended, suspended, or terminated.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

The Order provides authority for the Committee, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the program. The members are familiar with the Committee's needs and with the costs of goods and services in their local area and are in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and discussed in a public meeting where all directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.

This rule increases the assessment rate from $0.449 to $0.463 per 44-pound standard box or equivalent of fresh “summer/fall” and “winter” pears handled for the 2018-2019 and subsequent fiscal periods. The higher rate is necessary to fully cover the Committee's 2018-2019 fiscal period budgeted expenditures. The Committee has had to draw from its monetary reserve to partially fund program activities during the last two fiscal periods. Drawing from reserves to fund operations on an on-going basis is not a sustainable strategy. Therefore, increasing the continuing assessment rate will allow the Committee to fully fund budgeted expenses and replenish its financial reserve.

The Committee met on May 31, 2018, and unanimously recommended 2018-2019 fiscal period expenditures of $9,213,133 and an assessment rate of $0.463 per standard box or equivalent of fresh “summer/fall” and “winter” pears handled. In comparison, last year's budgeted expenditures were $9,282,059. The new assessment rate of $0.463 is $0.014 higher than the $0.449 rate previously in effect. The Committee recommended the assessment rate increase because expenditures have exceeded assessment revenue in the previous two fiscal periods.

The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2018-2019 fiscal period include $550,790 for contracted administration by Pear Bureau Northwest, $190,700 for administrative expenses, $771,643 for production research and market development, and $7,700,000 for promotion and paid advertising for both “summer/fall” and “winter” varieties of fresh pears. In comparison, major expenses for the 2017-2018 fiscal period included $512,928 for contracted administration, $232,200 for administrative expenses, $836,931 for production research and market development, and $7,700,000 for promotion and paid advertising.

The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by considering anticipated expenses, expected shipments, and the amount of funds available in the authorized reserve. Anticipated income derived from handler assessments of $9,260,000 (20 million standard boxes or equivalent at $0.463 per box) should be adequate to cover budgeted expenses of $9,213,133, with any excess funds used to replenish the Committee's monetary reserve. Funds in the reserve (currently $1,096,332) will be kept within the maximum permitted by §  927.42(a) and will not exceed the expenses of approximately one fiscal period.

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

Although this assessment rate will be in effect for an indefinite period, the Committee will continue to meet prior to or during each fiscal period to recommend a budget of expenses and consider recommendations for modification of the assessment rate. The dates and times of Committee meetings are available from the Committee or USDA. Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. USDA will evaluate Committee recommendations and other available information to determine whether modification of the assessment rate is needed. Further rulemaking would be undertaken as necessary. The Committee's budget for subsequent fiscal periods will be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved by USDA.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

There are approximately 827 growers of fresh pears in the production area and approximately 38 handlers subject to regulation under the Order. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $7,500,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

According to data from USDA Market News, the industry, and the Committee, for the 2016-17 season, the weighted average f.o.b. price for Oregon-Washington fresh pears was approximately $26.99 per standard 44-pound box. Total shipments for that period were 17,878,219 standard boxes or equivalent. Using the number of handlers, and assuming a normal distribution, the majority of handlers may have average annual receipts of more than $7,500,000 ($26.99 per box times 17,878,219 equals $482,533,130 divided by 38 handlers equals $12,698,240 per handler).

In addition, based on National Agricultural Statistics Service data, the industry produced 441,950 tons of fresh pears in the production area during the 2016-2017 season, with an average grower price of $797 per ton. Based on the average grower price, production, and the total number of Oregon-Washington fresh pear growers, and assuming a normal distribution, the average annual grower revenue is below $750,000 ($797 per ton times 441,950 tons equals $352,234,150 divided by 827 growers equals $425,918 per grower). Thus, the majority of Oregon and Washington fresh pear handlers may be classified as large entities, while the majority of growers may be classified as small entities.

This rule increases the assessment rate collected from handlers for the 2018-2019 and subsequent fiscal periods from $0.449 to $0.463 per standard box or equivalent of Oregon and Washington fresh “summer/fall” and “winter” pears handled. The Committee unanimously recommended 2018-2019 fiscal period expenditures of $9,213,133 and the $0.463 per standard box or equivalent assessment rate. The assessment rate of $0.463 is $0.014 higher than the rate for the 2017-2018 fiscal period. The quantity of assessable fresh “summer/fall” and “winter” pears for the 2018-2019 fiscal period is estimated at 20 million standard boxes or equivalent. Thus, the $0.463 rate should provide $9,260,000 in assessment income. Income derived from handler assessments should be adequate to cover budgeted expenses, with any excess funds used to replenish the Committee's monetary reserve.

The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2018-2019 fiscal period include $550,790 for contracted administration by Pear Bureau Northwest, $190,700 for administrative expenses, $771,643 for production research and market development, and $7,700,000 for promotion and paid advertising for both “summer/fall” pears and “winter” pears. Budgeted expenses for these items in the 2017-2018 fiscal period were $512,928, $232,200, $836,931, and $7,700,000, respectively.

The higher assessment rate is necessary to fully cover the Committee's 2018-2019 fiscal period budgeted expenditures. The Committee has had to draw from its monetary reserve to partially fund program activities during the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 fiscal periods. Drawing from its financial reserve to fund operations on an on-going basis is not a sustainable strategy. Increasing the continuing assessment rate will allow the Committee to fully fund budgeted expenses and replenish its financial reserve.

Prior to arriving at this budget and assessment rate, the Committee considered maintaining the current assessment rate of $0.449 per standard box or equivalent. However, leaving the assessment unchanged would not have generated sufficient revenue to meet the Committee's 2018-2019 fiscal period budgeted expenses of $9,213,133, and would have required the Committee to continue to deplete its financial reserve. Based on estimated shipments, the recommended assessment rate of $0.463 per standard box or equivalent should provide $9,260,000 in assessment income. The Committee determined assessment revenue should be adequate to cover budgeted expenses for the 2018-2019 fiscal period. Any excess assessment revenue will be allocated to replenish the Committee's monetary reserve. Reserve funds will be kept within the amount authorized in the Order.

A review of historical information and preliminary information pertaining to the upcoming fiscal year indicates that the average grower price for the 2018-2019 season should be approximately $800 per ton of fresh pears. Therefore, the estimated assessment revenue for the 2018-2019 fiscal period as a percentage of total grower revenue is about 2.6 percent.

This action increases the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. While assessments impose some additional costs on handlers, the costs are minimal and uniform on all handlers. Some of the additional costs may be passed on to growers. However, these costs are offset by the benefits derived by the operation of the Order. In addition, the Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the Oregon and Washington fresh pear industry. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the May 31, 2018, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the OMB and assigned OMB No. 0581-0189 Fruit Crops. No changes in those requirements are necessary as a result of this action. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This rule imposes no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large Oregon and Washington fresh pear handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this final rule.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

A proposed rule concerning this action was published in the Federal Register on August 28, 2018 (83 FR 43799). Copies of the proposed rule were also mailed or sent via facsimile to all Oregon and Washington fresh pear handlers. The proposal was made available through the internet by USDA and the Office of the Federal Register. A 30-day comment period ending September 27, 2018, was provided for interested persons to respond to the proposal. One comment was received during the comment period. The commenter was in favor of the regulation. Accordingly, no changes will be made to the rule as proposed, based on the comment received.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the information and recommendation submitted by the Committee and other available information, it is hereby found that this rule, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 927

Marketing agreements, Pears, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 927 is amended as follows:

PART 927—PEARS GROWN IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 927 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 601-674.

2. In § 927.236, the introductory text and paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised to read as follows:
§ 927.236 Assessment rate.

On and after July 1, 2018, the following base rates of assessment for fresh pears are established for the Fresh Pear Committee:

(a) $0.463 per 44-pound net weight standard box or container equivalent for any or all varieties or subvarieties of fresh pears classified as “summer/fall”;

(b) $0.463 per 44-pound net weight standard box or container equivalent for any or all varieties or subvarieties of fresh pears classified as “winter”; and

Dated: November 7, 2018. Bruce Summers, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-24728 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 249 [Release No. 34-84541; File No. S7-23-15] RIN 3235-AL66 Regulation of NMS Stock Alternative Trading Systems AGENCY:

Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule; technical correction.

SUMMARY:

This document makes technical corrections to a rule that was published in the Federal Register on August 7, 2018. The Commission adopted amendments to the regulatory requirements in Regulation ATS under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 applicable to alternative trading systems (“ATSs”) that trade National Market System (“NMS”) stocks (hereinafter referred to as “NMS Stock ATSs”), which included, among other items, Form ATS-N. This document is being published to correct a citation contained in the adopted language of Part III, Item 15.a of Form ATS-N.

DATES:

Effective November 13, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tyler Raimo, Senior Special Counsel, at (202) 551-6227; Matthew Cursio, Special Counsel, at (202) 551-5748; Marsha Dixon, Special Counsel, at (202) 551-5782; Jennifer Dodd, Special Counsel, at (202) 551-5653; David Garcia, Special Counsel, at (202) 551-5681; or Megan Mitchell, Special Counsel, at (202) 551-4887; Office of Market Supervision, Division of Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-7010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

We are making a technical amendment to Part III, Item 15.a of Form ATS-N under 17 CFR 249.640.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 249

Brokers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

Statutory Authority and Text of Amendments

For the reasons set out above, title 17, chapter II of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 249—FORMS, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 1. The authority citation for part 249 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. and 7201 et seq.; 12 U.S.C. 5461 et seq.; 18 U.S.C. 1350; Sec. 953(b), Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1904; Sec. 102(a)(3), Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 309 (2012); Sec. 107, Pub. L. 112-106, 126 Stat. 313 (2012), and Sec. 72001, Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312 (2015), unless otherwise noted.

2. Amend Form ATS-N (referenced in § 249.640) by revising Part III, Item 15.a to read as follows: Note:

The text of Form ATS-N does not, and this amendment will not, appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Form ATS-N Item 15: Display a. Does the NMS Stock ATS operate as an Electronic Communication Network as defined in Rule 600(b)(23) of Regulation NMS? Yes ☐ No ☐
Dated: November 6, 2018. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-24549 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 73 [Docket No. FDA-2018-C-4117] Sensient Colors, LLC; Filing of Color Additive Petition AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Notification of petition.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing that we have filed a petition, submitted by Sensient Colors, LLC, proposing that the color additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of an aqueous extract of butterfly pea flower (Clitoria ternatea) as a color additive in various food categories, at levels consistent with good manufacturing practice.

DATES:

The color additive petition was filed on October 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen DiFranco, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-2710.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Under section 721(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379e(d)(1)), we are giving notice that we have filed a color additive petition (CAP 8C0313) submitted by Exponent, Inc. on behalf of Sensient Colors, LLC, 1150 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036. The petition proposes to amend the color additive regulations in part 73 (21 CFR part 73), “Listing of Color Additives Exempt From Certification,” to provide for the safe use of an aqueous extract of butterfly pea flower (Clitoria ternatea) as a color additive in: (1) Alcoholic beverages (liquor, liqueurs, and flavored alcoholic beverages); (2) ready-to-drink non-alcoholic beverages; (3) liquid coffee creamers (dairy and non‐dairy); (4) ice cream and frozen dairy desserts; (5) fruit preparation in yogurt; (6) chewing gum; (7) coated nuts; (8) hard candy; and (9) soft candy, at levels consistent with good manufacturing practice.

The petitioner has claimed that this action is categorically excluded under 21 CFR 25.32(k) because the substance is intended to remain in food through ingestion by consumers and is not intended to replace macronutrients in food. In addition, the petitioner has stated that, to their knowledge, no extraordinary circumstances exist. If FDA determines a categorical exclusion applies, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. If FDA determines a categorical exclusion does not apply, we will request an environmental assessment and make it available for public inspection.

Dated: November 6, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-24662 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0964] Safety Zone; Allegheny River, Miles 0.0-1.0, Pittsburgh, PA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership/Light Up Night Fireworks to provide for the safety of persons, vessels, and the marine environment on the navigable waters of the Allegheny River, miles 0.0 to 1.0, extending the entire width of the river. Our regulation for marine events within the Eighth Coast Guard District identifies the regulated area for this event in Pittsburgh, PA. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting, or anchoring in the safety zone is prohibited to all vessels not registered with the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 165.801 Table 1, line 37 will be enforced from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. on November 16, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email Petty Officer Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce a temporary safety Zone for the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership/Light Up Night Fireworks in 33 CFR 165.801 Table 1 titled “Sector Ohio Valley Annual and Recurring Safety Zones”, line 37 from 9 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. on November 16, 2018. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of persons, vessels, and the marine environment on the navigable waters of the Allegheny River during this event. Our regulation for marine events within the Eighth Coast Guard District, § 165.801 specifies the location of the regulated area for the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership/Light Up Night Fireworks. Entry into the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through the safety zone must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They can be reached on VHF FM channel 16. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.

In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register, the COTP or a designated representative will inform the public through Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs), and/or through other means of public notice as appropriate at least 24 hours in advance of enforcement.

Dated: October 29, 2018. A.W. Demo, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 2018-24624 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 55 [EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0011; FRL-9983-52-Region 1] Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations; Consistency Update for Massachusetts AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is updating a portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Air Regulations. Requirements applying to OCS sources located within 25 miles of states' seaward boundaries must be updated periodically to remain consistent with the requirements of the corresponding onshore area (COA), as mandated by section 328(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. The portion of the OCS air regulations that is being updated pertains to the requirements for OCS sources for which Massachusetts is the designated COA. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts' requirements discussed in this document will be incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations and listed in the appendix to the federal OCS air regulations.

DATES:

This rule is effective on December 13, 2018. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 13, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2018-0011. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eric Wortman, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square (Mail Code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109, (617) 918-1624, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

On September 4, 1992, the EPA promulgated 40 CFR part 55,1 which established requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources in order to attain and maintain federal and state ambient air quality standards and to comply with the provisions of part C of title I of the CAA. The regulations at 40 CFR part 55 apply to all OCS sources offshore of the states except those located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87.5 degrees longitude. Section 328 of the CAA requires that for such sources located within 25 miles of a state's seaward boundary, the requirements shall be the same as would be applicable if the sources were located in the COA. Because the OCS requirements are based on onshore requirements, and onshore requirements may change, section 328(a)(1) requires that the EPA update the OCS requirements as necessary to maintain consistency with onshore requirements.

1 The reader may refer to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and the preamble to the final rule promulgated September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further background and information on the OCS regulations.

On February 12, 2018 (83 FR 5971), the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to incorporate various Massachusetts air pollution control requirements into 40 CFR part 55. Pursuant to 40 CFR 55.12, consistency reviews will occur (1) at least annually; (2) upon receipt of a Notice of Intent (NOI) under 40 CFR 55.4; or (3) when a state or local agency submits a rule to the EPA to be considered for incorporation by reference in 40 CFR part 55. This action is being taken in response to the submittal of a NOI on December 11, 2017 by Vineyard Wind, LLC.

The EPA reviewed the rules for inclusion in 40 CFR part 55 to ensure that they are rationally related to the attainment or maintenance of federal or state ambient air quality standards and compliance with part C of title I of the CAA, that they are not designed expressly to prevent exploration and development of the OCS, and that they are potentially applicable to OCS sources. See 40 CFR 55.1. The EPA has also evaluated the rules to ensure they are not arbitrary or capricious. See 40 CFR 55.12(e). In addition, the EPA has excluded administrative or procedural rules,2 and requirements that regulate toxics which are not related to the attainment and maintenance of federal and state ambient air quality standards.

2 Each COA which has been delegated the authority to implement and enforce part 55 will use its administrative and procedural rules as onshore. However, in those instances where the EPA has not delegated authority to implement and enforce part 55, the EPA will use its own administrative and procedural requirements to implement the substantive requirements. See 40 CFR 55.14(c)(4).

Section 328(a) of the CAA requires that the EPA establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of states' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, the EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into 40 CFR part 55 as they exist onshore. This limits the EPA's flexibility in deciding which requirements will be incorporated into 40 CFR part 55 and prevents the EPA from making substantive changes to the requirements it incorporates. As a result, the EPA may be incorporating rules into 40 CFR part 55 that do not conform to all of the EPA's state implementation plan (SIP) guidance or certain requirements of the CAA. Consistency updates may result in the inclusion of state or local rules or regulations into 40 CFR part 55, even though the same rules may ultimately be disapproved for inclusion as part of the SIP. Inclusion in the OCS rule does not imply that a rule meets the requirements of the CAA for SIP approval, nor does it imply that the rule will be approved by the EPA for inclusion in the SIP.

On March 9, 2018, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts amended certain regulatory provisions that pertained to the EPA's February 12, 2018 proposed rulemaking. On May 9, 2018, the EPA reopened the comment period for 30 days and provided notice that the EPA modified the proposed regulatory text for incorporation by reference in this action. See 83 FR 21254 (May 9, 2018). The EPA also added the March 9, 2018 amended regulations at 310 CMR 7.00 to the docket as part of reopening the comment period to give all interested persons the opportunity to comment on the incorporation by reference of the amended regulations at 310 CMR 7.00.3

3 The EPA is required to submit a true copy of the regulations, attested by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to the Office of the Federal Register for incorporation by reference in the final rule. The EPA obtained a true copy of the amended regulations in effect as of March 9, 2018. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Bookstore bundles 310 CMR 6.00, 310 CMR 7.00, and 310 CMR 8.00 into a single package for the purpose of attesting a true copy. Although the regulations at 310 CMR 6.00 and 310 CMR 8.00 were not part of the March 9, 2018 amendments, the EPA updated the effective date for 310 CMR 6.00-8.00 in the regulatory text for incorporation by reference for consistency with the updated true copy of the regulations. The true copy of the regulations for 310 CMR 6.00-8.00 obtained by the EPA is included in the docket for this action.

Other specific requirements of the consistency update and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the February 12, 2018 NPRM and the May 9, 2018 reopening of comment period document and will not be restated here.

II. Response to Comments

In response to the February 12, 2018 NPRM and the May 9, 2018 reopening of the comment period, we received a number of anonymous comments that address subjects outside the scope of our final action, do not explain (or provide a legal basis for) how the final action should differ in any way, and make no specific mention of the final action, i.e. incorporation by reference of the relevant Commonwealth of Massachusetts regulations into 40 CFR part 55. This action is required by the CAA and EPA's regulations, based on Vineyard Wind, LLC's NOI. Consequently, the comments referenced above are not germane to this rulemaking and require no further response.

The EPA received one relevant comment from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that referred specifically to the proposed rulemaking on the consistency update for Massachusetts to the outer continental shelf regulations.

Comment: The commenter indicated that the Massachusetts regulations at 310 Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 7.21: Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Limitations and 310 CMR 7.22: Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Reductions for the Purpose of Reducing Acid Rain should be removed from the Part 55 Consistency Update because those sections were rescinded in the Commonwealth's March 9, 2018 amendments to 310 CMR 7.00.

Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter and has removed Sections 7.21 and 7.22 from the regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. Sections 7.21 and 7.22 were inadvertently included in the May 9, 2018 reopening of comment period document in error and have been removed from the regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference in this final action.

III. Final Action

The EPA is taking final action to incorporate the rules potentially applicable to OCS sources for which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be the COA. The rules that the EPA is taking final action to incorporate are applicable provisions of (1) 310 CMR 4.00: Timely Action Schedule and Fee Provisions; (2) 310 CMR 6.00: Ambient Air Quality Standards for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; (3) 310 CMR 7.00: Air Pollution Control; and (4) 310 CMR 8.00: The Prevention and/or Abatement of Air Pollution Episode and Air Pollution Incident Emergencies, as amended through March 9, 2018. The rules that EPA is taking final action to incorporate will replace the rules previously incorporated into 40 CFR part 55 for Massachusetts. See 75 FR 51950; August 24, 2010.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 55 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 1 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to establish requirements to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of states' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore air pollution control requirements. To comply with this statutory mandate, the EPA must incorporate applicable onshore rules into 40 CFR part 55 as they exist onshore. See 42 U.S.C. 7627(a)(1); 40 CFR 55.12. Thus, in promulgating OCS consistency updates, the EPA's role is to maintain consistency between OCS regulations and the regulations of onshore areas, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action simply updates the existing OCS requirements to make them consistent with requirements onshore, without the exercise of any policy direction by the EPA. For that reason, this action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In addition, this rule does have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, nor does it impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in 40 CFR part 55 and, by extension, this update to the rules, and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0249. OMB approved the EPA Information Collection Request (ICR) No. 1601.08 on September 18, 2017.4 The current approval expires September 30, 2020. The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collection of information under 40 CFR part 55 is estimated to average 643 hours per response, using the definition of burden provided in 44 U.S.C. 3502(2).

4 OMB's approval of the ICR can be viewed at www.reginfo.gov.

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

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 14, 2019. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 55

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

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

Part 55 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 55—OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF AIR REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows: Authority:

Section 328 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) as amended by Public Law 101-549.

2. Section 55.14 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(11)(i)(A) to read as follows:
§ 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries, by State.

(e) * * *

(11) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) Commonwealth of Massachusetts Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, March 9, 2018.

3. Appendix A to part 55 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) under the heading “Massachusetts” to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 55—Listing of State and Local Requirements Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, by State Massachusetts

(a) * * *

(1) The following Commonwealth of Massachusetts requirements are applicable to OCS Sources, March 9, 2018, Commonwealth of Massachusetts—Department of Environmental Protection.

The following sections of 310 CMR 4.00, 310 CMR 6.00, 310 CMR 7.00 and 310 CMR 8.00:

310 CMR 4.00: Timely Action Schedule and Fee Provisions Section 4.01: Purpose, Authority and General Provisions (Effective 3/24/2017) Section 4.02: Definitions (Effective 3/24/2017) Section 4.03: Annual Compliance Assurance Fee (Effective 3/24/2017) Section 4.04: Permit Application Schedules and Fee (Effective 3/24/2017) Section 4.10: Appendix: Schedules for Timely Action and Permit Application Fees (Effective 3/24/2017) 310 CMR 6.00: Ambient Air Quality Standards for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Section 6.01: Definitions (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 6.02: Scope (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 6.03: Reference Conditions (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 6.04: Standards (Effective 3/9/2018) 310 CMR 7.00: Air Pollution Control Section 7.00: Statutory Authority; Legend; Preamble; Definitions (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.01: General Regulations to Prevent Air Pollution (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.02: U Plan Approval and Emission Limitations (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.03: U Plan Approval Exemptions: Construction Requirements (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.04: U Fossil Fuel Utilization Facilities (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.05: U Fuels All Districts (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.06: U Visible Emissions (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.07: U Open Burning (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.08: U Incinerators (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.09: U Dust, Odor, Construction and Demolition (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.11: U Transportation Media (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.12: U Source Registration (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.13: U Stack Testing (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.14: U Monitoring Devices and Reports (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.18: U Volatile and Halogenated Organic Compounds (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.19: U Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for Sources of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.24: U Organic Material Storage and Distribution (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.25: U Best Available Controls for Consumer and Commercial Products (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.26: Industry Performance Standards (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.60: U Severability (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.00: Appendix A (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.00: Appendix B (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 7.00: Appendix C (Effective 3/9/2018) 310 CMR 8.00: The Prevention and/or Abatement of Air Pollution Episode and Air Pollution Incident Emergencies Section 8.01: Introduction (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.02: Definitions (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.03: Air Pollution Episode Criteria (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.04: Air Pollution Episode Potential Advisories (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.05: Declaration of Air Pollution Episodes and Incidents (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.06: Termination of Air Pollution Episodes and Incident Emergencies (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.07: Emission Reductions Strategies (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.08: Emission Reduction Plans (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.15: Air Pollution Incident Emergency (Effective 3/9/2018) Section 8.30: Severability (Effective 3/9/2018)
[FR Doc. 2018-24648 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0694; FRL-9985-32] Cyantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of cyantraniliprole in or on multiple commodities which are identified and discussed later in this document. The Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) and DuPont Crop Protection requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES:

This regulation is effective November 13, 2018. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before January 14, 2019, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0694, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg. Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

• Crop production (NAICS code 111).

• Animal production (NAICS code 112).

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go to https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-chemical-safety-and-pollution-prevention-ocspp and select “Test Methods and Guidelines.”

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

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0694 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before January 14, 2019. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0694, by one of the following methods:

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

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

Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.

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

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

In the Federal Register of March 21, 2018 (83 FR 12311) (FRL-9974-76), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 7E8631) by The Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.672 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide, cyantraniliprole, 3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-[((methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, in or on Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H, except blueberry, lowbush and lingonberry at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) (proposal to replace an existing tolerance at the same level that is only for imported Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H, with a tolerance supporting both domestic production and imported low growing berries, except strawberries); Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4-16B at 30 ppm; Caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 4.0 ppm; Celtuce at 20 ppm; Coffee, green bean at 0.05 ppm (proposal to replace an existing tolerance at the same level that is only for imported Coffee, green bean with a tolerance supporting both domestic production and imported coffee); Florence fennel at 20 ppm; Kohlrabi at 3.0 ppm; Leafy greens subgroup 4-16A at 20 ppm; Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 20 ppm; and Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 3.0 ppm. Upon the establishment of the above tolerances, IR-4 proposed to remove existing tolerances in 40 CFR part 180.672 in or on the following commodities: Brassica head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm; Brassica leafy vegetables, subgroup 5B at 30 ppm; and Vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at 20 ppm.

In the Federal Register of April 11, 2018 (83 FR 15528) (FRL-9975-57), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 7F8622) by DuPont Crop Protection, Stine-Haskell Research Center, P.O. Box 30, Newark, DE 19714-0030. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.672 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide cyantraniliprole, 3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-[((methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, in or on Rice, hulls at 0.05 ppm; Rice, straw at 0.015 ppm; Soybean, forage at 15 ppm; Soybean, hay at 50 ppm; Soybean, hulls at 1 ppm; Soybean, seed at 0.4 ppm; and Aspirated grain fractions at 200 ppm. Upon the approval of the proposed tolerances in soybean forage and hay, it is proposed that the existing tolerances for indirect or inadvertent residues in soybean forage and hay be cancelled. In addition, DuPont Crop Protection requests to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.672, in or on rice, grain at 0.02 ppm by replacing an existing tolerance at the same level that is only for imported grain with a tolerance supporting both domestic production and imported grain.

These documents referenced summaries of the petitions prepared by DuPont Crop Protection, the registrant, which are available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Three comments were received on the notices of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.

Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA modified some of the tolerance levels to conform to EPA's rounding classes and revised the commodity terminology for two tolerances. These changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

A. Toxicological Profile

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

In general, cyantraniliprole administration in mammalian test species produces both adverse and adaptive changes in the liver, thyroid gland, and adrenal cortex. With repeated dosing, consistent findings of mild to moderate increases in liver weights across multiple species (rats, mice and dogs) are observed. Dogs appear to be more sensitive than rats and mice; cyantraniliprole produces adverse liver effects (increases in alkaline phosphatase, decreases in cholesterol, and decreases in albumin) in dogs at lower dose levels than in rats. In addition, the liver effects in the dog show progressive severity with increased duration of exposure. The available data also show thyroid hormone homeostasis is altered in rats following exposure to cyantraniliprole after 28 or 90 days; however, cyantraniliprole is not a direct thyroid toxicant.

Cyantraniliprole is classified as “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans” based on the absence of increased tumor incidence in acceptable/guideline carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice, and there are no mutagenicity concerns. There are also no developmental or reproductive toxicity concerns and no offspring susceptibility concerns. Cyantraniliprole does not produce developmental toxicity in either rats or rabbits. The 2-generation reproduction study in rats shows that cyantraniliprole has no adverse effect on any reproductive parameters.

Acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies reveal no evidence of neurotoxicity. Similarly, cyantraniliprole does not adversely impact the immune system in rats and mice. Based on the results of a 28-day dermal study in rats (as well as the dermal LD50 study), cyantraniliprole does not demonstrate any appreciable toxicity via dermal exposure. The 28-day inhalation toxicity study in rats does not show any adverse systemic or portal of entry effect at the highest concentration tested (100 mg/m3, equivalent to 18 mg/kg/day).

Cyantraniliprole has no significant acute toxicity via the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes of exposure. Cyantraniliprole is not an eye or skin irritant and does not cause skin sensitization.

Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by cyantraniliprole as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document “Cyantraniliprole. Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses and Tolerance Requests on Coffee; Caneberry Subgroup 13-07A; Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07H, Except Strawberry, Lowbush Blueberry and Lingonberry; Brassica Leafy Greens Subgroup 4-16A; Leafy Greens Subgroup 4-16B; Brassica Head and Stem Vegetable Group 5-16; Leaf Petiole Vegetable Subgroup 22B; Celtuce; Florence Fennel; Kohlrabi; Rice; Soybean; and Aspirated Grain Fractions” on pages 36-45 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0694.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

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

A summary of the toxicological endpoints for cyantraniliprole used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B of the final rule published in the Federal Register of February 5, 2014 (79 FR 6826) (FRL-9388-7).

C. Exposure Assessment

1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to cyantraniliprole, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing cyantraniliprole tolerances in 40 CFR 180.672. EPA assessed dietary exposures from cyantraniliprole in food as follows:

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

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the 2003-2008 United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, a refined chronic (food and drinking water) dietary assessment was conducted assuming average field trial residues for all crops (except crop subgroup 1A, for which tolerance level residues were assumed); percent crop treated (PCT) data; empirical processing factors; and default processing factors were used as appropriate.

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

iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary risk only if:

Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain the pesticide residue.

Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group.

Condition c: If data are available on pesticide use and food consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not understate exposure for the population in such areas.

In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit data on PCT.

The Agency estimated the average PCT for existing uses as follows: Citrus: oranges 62%, grapefruit 87%, and lemons 46%; pome fruit: apples 61% and pears 76%; stone fruits: apricots 53%, cherries 48%, peaches 41%, and plums/prunes 59%; tree nuts: almonds 72%, hazelnuts 65%, pecans 22%, pistachios 49%, and walnuts 53%; bushberries (subgroup 13-07B): blueberries 45%; fruiting vegetables: peppers 45% and tomatoes 54%; cucurbits: cantaloupes 50%, cucumbers 23%, pumpkins 18%, squash 24%, and watermelons 29%; leafy vegetables: celery 70%, lettuce 78%, and spinach 53%; Brassica (cole) leafy vegetables: broccoli 81%, cabbage 50%, and cauliflower 83%; onion 58%; potato 50%; oilseeds: canola 15% and sunflower 35%; corn 56%, cotton 41%; peanuts 41%; carrots 23%; soybeans 21%; strawberries 59%; vegetable crop group 7: dry beans/peas 6%, soybeans 21%, beans (snap, bush, etc.) 49%, and peas fresh/green/sweet) 38%; vegetable crop group 2: sugar beets 40%; vegetable crop group 6A: soybeans 21%, beans (snap, bush, etc., string) 49%; peas fresh/green/sweet) 38%; and vegetable crop group 6C: dried bean and peas 6%. 100 PCT was assumed for all other crops, including all proposed new use crops. For imported grapes (wine grapes), a 50% import estimate was used in the chronic dietary risk assessment.

In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 10 years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis and a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figures for each existing use are derived by combining available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding up to the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is less than 1% or less than 2.5%. In those cases, the Agency would use less than 1% or less than 2.5% as the average PCT value, respectively. The maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported within the most recent 10 years of available public and private market survey data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%, except where the maximum PCT is less than 2.5%, in which case, the Agency uses less than 2.5% as the maximum PCT.

The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption information and consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of food to which cyantraniliprole may be applied in a particular area.

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

Based on the Pesticides in Water Calculator (PWC; version 1.52) and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW) for ground water and FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) for surface water, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of cyantraniliprole for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 24 ppb for surface water and 64 ppb for ground water.

Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 64 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

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

Cyantraniliprole is currently registered for the following uses that could result in residential exposures: Turf grass (including residential, recreational, and golf course turf), ornamentals, and structural buildings (including indoor crack/crevice and outdoor broadcast). EPA assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: EPA determined that residential exposures may occur by the dermal, oral, and inhalation routes of exposures. However, since dermal hazard has not been identified for cyantraniliprole, the only exposures of concern are handler inhalation (for adults), and post-application incidental oral (for children). Residential handler exposure is expected to be short-term in duration. The turf and ornamental labels indicate that a maximum of two applications are allowed per season. Thus, intermediate-term handler exposures are not likely because of the intermittent nature of applications by homeowners. Post-application incidental oral exposures for children may occur for short- and intermediate-term durations due to the persistence of cyantraniliprole. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.

4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.” EPA has not found cyantraniliprole to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and cyantraniliprole does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that cyantraniliprole does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

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

2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of susceptibility in developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits. The developmental toxicity study in rats is tested up to the limit dose (1,000 mg/kg/day). In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, decreases in fetal body weight are seen at a dose higher than that resulting in maternal effects. In the reproductive toxicity study, increased incidence of thyroid follicular epithelium hypertrophy/hyperplasia occurs in F1 parental animals at a dose lower than that for the parental (P) generation. A clear NOAEL (1.4 mg/kg/day) is established for F1 parental animals, and the PODs selected for risk assessment from the dog studies (1 or 3 mg/kg/day) are protective of the effect (thyroid effect) seen in the F1 parental animals. In addition, the submitted data support the conclusion that the effects on the thyroid are secondary to effects on the liver. As such, a comparative thyroid study is not required at this time.

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

i. The toxicity database for cyantraniliprole is complete.

ii. There is no indication that cyantraniliprole is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.

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

iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The exposure databases are complete or are estimated based on data that reasonably account for potential exposures. The chronic dietary food exposure assessment was a refined assessment which assumed average field trial residues for all crops (except crop subgroup 1A); PCT when available; empirical processing factors, if available, or default processing factors, as appropriate. The 2012 Residential standard operating procedures (SOPs) were previously used to assess post-application exposure to children including incidental oral exposure, and the residential post-application assessment assumed that maximum application rates are applied and that hand-to-mouth activities occur on the day of application. All of the exposure estimates are based on conservative, health-protective assumptions and are not likely to underestimate risk. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to cyantraniliprole in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess post application exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by cyantraniliprole.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

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

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

2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to cyantraniliprole from food and water will utilize 99% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of cyantraniliprole is not expected.

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

Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 149 for children 1 to 2 years old. For adults, the oral and inhalation routes of exposure are not appropriate to be aggregated since the endpoints of concern are not common. Because EPA's level of concern for cyantraniliprole is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of concern.

4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyantraniliprole is currently registered for uses that could result in intermediate-term residential exposure, however, the short-term aggregate risk estimate described above is protective of potential intermediate-term exposures and risks in children.

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

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

IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

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

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

B. International Residue Limits

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

There are no established Codex MRLs on the caneberry subgroup 13-07A, soybean, aspirated grain fractions, celtuce, Florence fennel and rice. The U.S. tolerances being established for coffee and Brassica, leafy greens subgroup 4-16A are harmonized with Codex. The U.S. tolerances being established for the low growing berry subgroup 13-07H; leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B; Brassica head and stem vegetable group 5-16; leafy greens subgroup 4-16B; and kohlrabi are not harmonized with Codex MRLs. The Codex MRLs established for residues of cyantraniliprole on these commodities are lower than the recommended U.S. tolerances. The U.S. tolerances cannot be harmonized because following the label use directions could result in residues above the established Codex MRLs.

C. Response to Comments

EPA received three comments in response to the Notices of Filing. The first comment indicated IR-4 and Rutgers University are profiteering by registering pesticides. The content of this comment is not material to the safety of the tolerances that are the subject of this action; pesticide registration occurs under the provisions of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The FFDCA allows any person to file a petition proposing the establishment of a tolerance, and financial benefit from associated registration of pesticides is not a factor EPA considers when determining whether a tolerance is safe.

The second comment stated, in part, that no residues should be allowed. The Agency recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops. However, the existing legal framework provided by section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. This citizen's comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework.

The last comment expressed concern about pollutant loadings and relatively high costs of regulations. The commenter also mentioned the Shelby Amendment, the Freedom of Information Act and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The comment did not raise any issue related to the Agency's safety determination for cyantraniliprole tolerances. The receipt of this comment is acknowledged; however, this comment is not relevant to this action.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

EPA modified the proposed tolerance levels for soybean, hulls and soybean, seed to conform to the Agency's rounding classes. The Agency also revised the commodity terminology to use the correct commodity definitions for Florence fennel (Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk) and Aspirated grain fractions (Grain, aspirated grain fractions).

V. Conclusion

Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyantraniliprole, 3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-[((methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, in or on Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H, except blueberry, lowbush and lingonberry at 0.08 parts per million (ppm); Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4-16B at 30 ppm; Caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 4.0 ppm; Celtuce at 20 ppm; Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk at 20 ppm; Grain, aspirated grain fractions at 200 ppm; Kohlrabi at 3.0 ppm; Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 20 ppm; Leafy greens subgroup 4-16A at 20 ppm; Rice hulls at 0.05 ppm; Rice, straw at 0.015 ppm; Soybean, forage at 15 ppm; Soybean, hay at 50 ppm; Soybean, hulls at 1.0 ppm; Soybean, seed at 0.40 ppm; and Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 3.0 ppm. In addition, EPA is removing the following tolerances as they are superseded by the new tolerances being established in this rulemaking: from paragraph (a) (Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H at 0.08 ppm; Brassica head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm; Brassica leafy vegetables, subgroup 5B at 30 ppm; and Vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at 20 ppm) and from paragraph (d) (soybean, forage at 0.70 ppm and soybean, hay at 0.70 ppm). Finally, EPA is removing the footnote noting the lack of US registrations for the tolerances for coffee, green bean and rice, grain.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

VII. Congressional Review Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

Dated: October 24, 2018. Michael Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

2. In § 180.672: a. In the table to paragraph (a): i. Remove the entry “Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H1”. ii. Add alphabetically the entry “Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H, except blueberry, lowbush and lingonberry”. iii. Remove the entry “Brassica head and stem, subgroup 5A”. iv. Add alphabetically the entry “Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4-16B. v. Remove the entry “Brassica leafy vegetables, subgroup 5B”. vi. Add alphabetically the entries: “Caneberry subgroup 13-07A” and “Celtuce”. vii. Revise the entry “Coffee, green bean”. viii. Add alphabetically the entries: “Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk”; “Grain, aspirated grain fractions”; “Kohlrabi”; “Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B”; “Leafy greens subgroup 4-16A”; ix. Revise the entry “Rice, grain”. x. Add alphabetically the entries: “Rice hulls”; “Rice, straw”; “Soybean, forage”; “Soybean, hay”; “Soybean, hulls”; “Soybean, seed”; and “Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16”. xi. Remove the entry “Vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4”. b. Remove from the table in paragraph (d) the entries: “Soybean, forage”; and “Soybean, hay”.

The additions and revisions read as follows:

§ 180.672 Cyantraniliprole; tolerances for residues.

(a) * * *

Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * Berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H, except blueberry, lowbush and lingonberry 0.08 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4-16B 30 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Caneberry subgroup 13-07A 4.0 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Celtuce 20 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Coffee, green bean 0.05 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk 20 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Grain, aspirated grain fractions 200 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Kohlrabi 3.0 Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B 20 Leafy greens subgroup 4-16A 20 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Rice, grain 0.02 Rice, hulls 0.05 Rice, straw 0.015 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Soybean, forage 15 Soybean, hay 50 Soybean, hulls 1.0 Soybean, seed 0.40 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Vegetable, Brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 3.0 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2018-24379 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 64 [Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-8555] Suspension of Community Eligibility AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule identifies communities where the sale of flood insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that are scheduled for suspension on the effective dates listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements of the program. If the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will not occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in the Federal Register on a subsequent date. Also, information identifying the current participation status of a community can be obtained from FEMA's Community Status Book (CSB). The CSB is available at https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-community-status-book.

    DATES:

    The effective date of each community's scheduled suspension is the third date (“Susp.”) listed in the third column of the following tables.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you want to determine whether a particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for further information, contact Adrienne L. Sheldon, PE, CFM, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 212-3966.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NFIP enables property owners to purchase Federal flood insurance that is not otherwise generally available from private insurers. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management measures aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits the sale of NFIP flood insurance unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed in this document no longer meet that statutory requirement for compliance with program regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be suspended on the effective date in the third column. As of that date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. We recognize that some of these communities may adopt and submit the required documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures after this rule is published but prior to the actual suspension date. These communities will not be suspended and will continue to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood insurance. A notice withdrawing the suspension of such communities will be published in the Federal Register.

    In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that identifies the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated in the fourth column of the table. No direct Federal financial assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act not in connection with a flood) may be provided for construction or acquisition of buildings in identified SFHAs for communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for more than a year on FEMA's initial FIRM for the community as having flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition against certain types of Federal assistance becomes effective for the communities listed on the date shown in the last column. The Administrator finds that notice and public comment procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and unnecessary because communities listed in this final rule have been adequately notified.

    Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification letters addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management measures are met prior to the effective suspension date. Since these notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less than 30 days.

    National Environmental Policy Act. FEMA has determined that the community suspension(s) included in this rule is a non-discretionary action and therefore the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) does not apply.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Administrator has determined that this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, Section 1315, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed no longer comply with the statutory requirements, and after the effective date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the communities unless remedial action takes place.

    Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

    Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule does not involve any collection of information for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

    Flood insurance, Floodplains.

    Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:

    PART 64—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376.

    § 64.6 [Amended]
    2. The tables published under the authority of § 64.6 are amended as follows: State and location Community
  • No.
  • Effective date authorization/cancellation of
  • sale of flood insurance in community
  • Current effective
  • map Date
  • Date certain
  • Federal
  • assistance
  • no longer
  • available in
  • SFHAs
  • Region IV North Carolina: Charlotte, City of, Mecklenburg County 370159 April 12, 1973, Emerg; August 15, 1978, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. November 16, 2018 November 16, 2018. Concord, City of, Cabarrus County 370037 January 16, 1974, Emerg; March 4, 1980, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Cornelius, Town of, Mecklenburg County 370498 N/A, Emerg; September 30, 1997, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Davidson, Town of, Mecklenburg and Iredell Counties 370503 N/A, Emerg; October 16, 1997, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Fairview, Town of, Union County 370024 N/A, Emerg; June 9, 2009, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Harrisburg, Town of, Cabarrus County 370038 June 17, 1975, Emerg; June 30, 1976, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Huntersville, Town of, Mecklenburg County 370478 January 11, 1995, Emerg; February 4, 2004, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Iredell County, Unincorporated Areas 370313 July 23, 1976, Emerg; May 15, 1980, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Kannapolis, City of, Cabarrus and Rowan Counties 370469 N/A, Emerg; March 25, 1991, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Locust, City of, Cabarrus and Stanly Counties 370508 N/A, Emerg; May 29, 2003, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Mecklenburg County, Unincorporated Areas 370158 May 17, 1973, Emerg; June 1, 1981, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Midland, Town of, Cabarrus County 370182 N/A, Emerg; June 1, 2009, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Mount Pleasant, Town of, Cabarrus County 370470 N/A, Emerg; February 24, 2012, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Rowan County, Unincorporated Areas 370351 August 23, 1976, Emerg; November 1, 1979, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Stanfield, Town of, Stanly County 370510 N/A, Emerg; July 15, 2010, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Region VII Iowa: Bevington, City of, Madison and Warren Counties 190273 November 30, 1976, Emerg; May 1, 1987, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. November 16, 2018 November 16, 2018. Carlisle, City of, Polk and Warren Counties 190274 December 17, 1974, Emerg; August 4, 1987, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Cumming, City of, Warren County 190946 N/A, Emerg; January 24, 2000, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Des Moines, City of, Polk and Warren Counties 190227 September 6, 1974, Emerg; February 4, 1981, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Hartford, City of, Warren County 190589 N/A, Emerg; October 7, 2008, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Indianola, City of, Warren County 190275 June 1, 1977, Emerg; July 31, 1979, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Lacona, City of, Warren County 190752 December 6, 1976, Emerg; July 1, 1987, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Martensdale, City of, Warren County 190524 April 28, 1994, Emerg; September 1, 1996, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Norwalk, City of, Warren County 190631 March 3, 1993, Emerg; November 20, 1998, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Spring Hill, City of, Warren County 190949 N/A, Emerg; May 26, 1998, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Warren County, Unincorporated Areas 190912 November 19, 1990, Emerg; July 1, 1991, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Region VIII Colorado: Breckenridge, Town of, Summit County 080172 July 25, 1975, Emerg; June 4, 1980, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Silverthorne, Town of, Summit County 080201 July 16, 1975, Emerg; May 1, 1980, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Summit County, Unincorporated Areas 080290 November 26, 1976, Emerg; December 16, 1980, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Region X Oregon: Brookings, City of, Curry County 410053 July 8, 1975, Emerg; September 18, 1985, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. Curry County, Unincorporated Areas 410052 March 19, 1971, Emerg; April 3, 1978, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. November 16, 2018 November 16, 2018. Gold Beach, City of, Curry County 410054 November 11, 1974, Emerg; November 15, 1985, Reg; November 16, 2018, Susp. ......-do-   Do. -do- = Ditto. Code for reading third column: Emerg. —Emergency; Reg. —Regular; Susp.—Suspension.
    Dated: October 30, 2018. Katherine B. Fox, Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration—FEMA Resilience, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24692 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 46 CFR Part 35 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0926] RIN 1625-AC27 Tankers—Automatic Pilot Systems; Correction AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is correcting a final rule that appeared in the Fedreal Register on November 5, 2018. The document issued a final rule that permited tankers with automatic pilot systems that meet certain international standards to operate using those systems in shipping safety fairways and traffic separation schemes specified in 33 CFR parts 166 and 167, respectively.

    DATES:

    Effective December 5, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In FR Doc. 2018-24127 appearing on page 55272 in the Federal Register of Monday November 5, 2018, the following corrections are made:

    § 35.20-45 [Corrected]
    1. On page 55281, in the third column, in § 35.20-45, the heading of the section “§ 35.20-40 Use of Auto Pilot—T/ALL.” is corrected to read “§ 35.20-45 Use of Auto Pilot—T/ALL.” Dated: November 6, 2018. Rebecca Orban, Acting Office Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24619 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    83 219 Tuesday, November 13, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 46 CFR Part 10 [Docket No. USCG-2018-0041] Draft Merchant Mariner Medical Manual AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notification of availability and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is seeking public comment regarding the draft Merchant Mariner Medical Manual. The guidance in this Manual should assist medical practitioners, the maritime industry, individual mariners, and Coast Guard personnel in evaluating a mariner applicant's physical and medical status to meet the requirements of the merchant mariner medical certificate. This draft Commandant Instruction Manual incorporates and consolidates prior guidance on the medical evaluation of merchant mariners contained in several Coast Guard documents. The Manual includes guidance on the medical certificate and related processes, including procedures for application, issuance, and cancellation of the medical certificate.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted to the online docket, via http://www.regulations.gov, on or before January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2018-0041 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information about this document call or email Adrienne Buggs, M.D., United States Coast Guard, Office of Merchant Mariner Credentialing; telephone: 202-372-2357, email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation and Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments (or related material) on the draft Merchant Mariner Medical Manual. We will consider all submissions and may adjust our final action based on your comments. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this document, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. Documents mentioned in this notification, and all public comments, will be posted in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or the Coast Guard publishes any additional documents related to this notification of availability.

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

    Background and Discussion of Draft Manual

    The Coast Guard provided guidance on the medical and physical requirements for merchant mariners in the Medical and Physical Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant Mariner Credentials, Navigation and Inspection Circular (NVIC) 04-08, Commandant Publication (COMDTPUB) 16700.4; and in Part A of the Marine Safety Manual, Volume III, Marine Industry Personnel, COMDTINST M16000.8 (Series) [MSM]. In the years since publication of NVIC 04-08, information received from public comment, medical appeals, and federal advisory committee recommendations highlighted the need for additional specificity and clarity in the medical guidance document. It also underscored the potential for confusion caused by having medical evaluation guidance contained in multiple guidance documents. For example, Part A of the MSM, Volume III, which has not been updated since 1999, may contain some information that conflicts with the guidance in NVIC 04-08. In response to these concerns, the Coast Guard began a series of revisions to the medical evaluation guidelines, published as Change 1 to NVIC 04-08, in June 2013, and Change 2 to NVIC 04-08, in April 2016.

    In addition to the revisions needed for improved clarity and specificity, the medical guidance also required new policy following publication of the Coast Guard's final rule on the Implementation of the Amendments to the International Convention on Standards for Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, and Changes to National Endorsements (78 FR 77795, Dec. 24, 2013). Specifically, the Coast Guard needed to develop new guidance to address the medical certificate and related processes required by these regulations. The Coast Guard provided this new guidance through a separate document, titled NVIC 01-14, Guidance on the Issuance of Medical Certificates. With the experience gained since the publication of NVIC 01-14, the Coast Guard has identified areas of the medical certificate policy that are in need of clarification, particularly with respect to some entry-level mariners, and procedures related to mariners who become unfit while in possession of a valid medical certificate. Rather than issuing a change to NVIC 01-14, the Coast Guard will include the revised medical certificate guidance with the medical evaluation guidance in a new policy document called the Merchant Mariner Medical Manual, also known as Commandant Instruction M16721.48.

    The draft Merchant Mariner Medical Manual revises, updates and combines the medical evaluation guidance previously published in NVIC 04-08, Part A of the MSM, Volume III, and NVIC 01-14. The Coast Guard developed the draft Manual in consultation with experienced maritime community medical practitioners and industry stakeholders serving on the Merchant Mariner Medical Advisory Committee (MEDMAC) and the Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee (MERPAC). The draft Manual reflects a synthesis of their recommendations and the medical requirements of Title 46 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 10, subpart C. Members of the public participated in the development of medical policy by providing comment and serving on working groups at the public meetings of MEDMAC and MERPAC. Additionally, the public had the opportunity to comment on drafts of policies contained in this Manual, and its predecessor, NVIC 04-08. See requests for comment on proposed policies regarding: Diabetes, cardiomyopathy, and sleep disorders (80 FR 8586, Feb. 18, 2015); Medications (80 FR 4582, Jan. 28, 2015); Seizures (78 FR 17917, Mar. 25, 2013); and Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (77 FR 55174, Sep. 7, 2012). The Coast Guard considered these public comments when developing this draft Manual.

    Changes made in this draft Manual seek to improve ease of use, clarify and update prior guidance, and provide more transparency to the regulated community. Major changes include (1) use of a single manual format; (2) clarification of medical certificate requirements for certain entry-level mariners; and (3) the proposed medical certificate cancellation policy.

    Manual Format: The Coast Guard reorganized the material into a manual format instead of a NVIC to improve utility and ease of use for the regulated community and others who reference the document. Additionally, in issuing a Commandant Instruction Manual, the name and number of the document will not change with every future issuance of the document, reducing the risk of confusion.

    Entry-level Mariners: This draft adds provisions that clarify confusion between 46 CFR 15.401(c), which requires a medical certificate in order to serve in a position requiring a merchant mariner credential (MMC), and other provisions in 46 CFR part 10 that indicate entry-level mariners do not require a medical examination except in certain circumstances (see, e.g., Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.239, which marks entry-level ratings “N/A” as to medical and physical exam requirements, and Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.302(a), which is silent as to medical requirements for certain entry-level mariners). The draft Manual will clarify that the Coast Guard does not require medical certificates for entry-level mariners on vessels not subject to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended, who do not serve as food handlers.

    Medical Certificate Cancellation Policy: The guidance now includes the process to be followed when the Coast Guard receives information indicating that a medical certificate holder has developed a medical condition that poses significant risk of sudden incapacitation, or is taking medication that poses significant risk of impairment. This process includes procedures for cancelling medical certificates, rather than merchant mariner credentials (MMCs), for mariners who no longer meet medical certification criteria.

    The Coast Guard began issuing medical certificates in January 2014. The medical certificate is a certificate issued by the Coast Guard under 46 CFR part 10, subpart C, that serves as proof that the seafarer meets the medical and physical standards for merchant mariners. The medical certificate is not a credential (see definitions of medical certificate and credential in 46 CFR 10.107). Prior to the establishment of the medical certificate, a merchant mariner's certification of medical and physical fitness was embedded in the MMC. Under that system, if the Coast Guard received credible information that a mariner no longer met the medical and physical standards, the Coast Guard's only option was to declare the mariner medically incompetent and take suspension and revocation action against the MMC, the mariner's professional credential.

    However, not all medical concerns require revocation of the professional credential. In most cases, once it is determined that a medical certificate holder no longer meets the standards for medical certification, it is more appropriate for the agency to take action against the certificate that serves as proof of the mariner's medical fitness. The proposed medical certificate cancellation policy describes the procedures that the Coast Guard would use to cancel a medical certificate if it receives credible information that a medical certificate holder no longer meets the standards for medical fitness. The process involves providing notice to the involved mariner about the information received, and allowing them the opportunity to respond and provide additional information. The proposed policy preserves the mariner's right to reconsideration and appeal under 46 CFR 1.03-15, and, allows the involved mariner to continue to work until final agency action, except in cases where there is evidence of compelling and substantial risk of imminent harm. Furthermore, the policy allows the mariner to retain their MMC, simplifying their return to work when their medical condition improves and allowing them to continue to work in the industry in positions that do not require a medical certificate.

    Questions for Public Comment

    The Coast Guard requests public comment on the draft Medical Manual, with emphasis on its readability, clarity, and ease of use. We welcome suggestions on how the Manual can be improved.

    We are particularly interested in whether the draft Manual adequately addresses safety concerns in situations where the Coast Guard receives information indicating that a medical certificate holder has developed a medical condition that poses a significant risk of sudden incapacitation, or is taking a medication that poses a significant risk of impairment.

    This document is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 46 U.S.C. 7101, and 46 U.S.C. 7302.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. J.G. Lantz, Director, Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24502 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    83 219 Tuesday, November 13, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 7, 2018.

    The Department of Agriculture will submit the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 on or after the date of publication of this notice. Comments are requested regarding: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC; New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602.

    Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received by December 13, 2018. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8681.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    National Agricultural Statistics Service

    Title: Mink Survey.

    OMB Control Number: 0535-0212.

    Summary of Collection: The primary function of the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) is to prepare and issue current official State and national estimates of crop and livestock production. The mink program consists of two surveys: An annual census of all known mink producers in the 50 states (the Mink Survey) and an annual survey of two prominent mink pelt auction houses (the Mink Price Survey). Statistics on mink production are published for the 12 major states that account for over 90 percent of the total U.S. pelt production. There is no other source for this type of information. General authority for these data collection activities is granted under U.S. Code Title 7, Section 2204.

    Need and Use of the Information: NASS collects information on mink pelts produced by color, number of females bred to produce kits the following year, number of mink farms, average marketing price, and the value of pelts produced. The data is disseminated by NASS in the Mink Report and is used by the U.S. government and other groups.

    Description of Respondents: Farms.

    Number of Respondents: 352.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: Annually.

    Total Burden Hours: 87.

    National Agricultural Statistics Service

    Title: Cost of Pollination Survey.

    OMB Control Number: 0535-0258.

    Summary of Collection: The primary objectives of the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) are to prepare and issue official State and national estimates of crop and livestock production, disposition and prices, economic statistics, and environmental statistics related to agriculture and to conduct the Census of Agriculture and its follow-on surveys. Pollinators (honeybees) are vital to the agricultural industry for producing food for the world's population. NASS' primary focus will center on costs associated with honey bee pollination, but will also collect some basic information relating to other forms of pollination. General authority for these data collection activities is granted under U.S.C. Title 7, Section 2204.

    Need and Use of the Information: NASS plans to collect economic data under this new collection using the “Cost of Pollination Inquiry” survey. Data relating to the targeted crops (fruits, nuts, vegetables and specialty crops) will be collected for the total number of acres that rely on honey bee pollination, the number of honey bee colonies that were used on those acres, and any cash fees associated with honey bee pollination. By publishing both regional and crop specific pollination costs, both, crop farmers and beekeepers will be able to benefit from this additional data.

    Description of Respondents: Farmers.

    Number of Respondents: 18,000.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: Once a year.

    Total Burden Hours: 5,340.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24699 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Farm Service Agency Information Collection Request; Servicing Minor Program Loans AGENCY:

    Farm Service Agency, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Farm Service Agency (FSA) is requesting comments from all interested individuals and organizations on an extension of a currently approved information collection to support the Servicing Minor Program Loans.

    DATES:

    We will consider comments that we receive by January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    We invite you to submit comments on this notice. In your comments, include the date, volume, and page number of this issue of the Federal Register, the OMB control number and the title of the information collection. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Cindy Pawlikowski, Loan Servicing and Properties Management Division, USDA, FSA, Farm Loan Programs, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Mail Stop 0523, Washington, DC 20250-00523.

    You may also send comments to the Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cindy Pawlikowski, (202) 720-0900.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Servicing Minor Program Loans.

    OMB Control Number: 0560-0230.

    Expiration Date: April 30, 2019.

    Type of Request: Extension.

    Abstract: Section 331(b) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (CONTACT, 7 U.S.C. 1981(b)), in part, authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to modify, subordinate and release terms of security instruments, leases, contracts, and agreements entered by FSA. That section also authorizes transfers of security property, as the Secretary deems necessary, to carry out the purpose of the loan or protect the Government's financial interest. Section 335 of the CONACT (7 U.S.C. 1985) provides servicing authority for real estate security; operation or lease of realty; disposition of property; conveyance of real property interest of the United States; easements; and condemnations.

    The information collection relates to a program benefit recipient or loan borrower requesting action on security they own, which was purchased with FSA loan funds, improved with FSA loan funds or has otherwise been mortgaged to FSA to secure a Government loan. The information collected is primarily financial data not already on file, such as borrower asset values, current financial information and public use and employment data. There are no changes to the burden hours since the last OMB approval.

    For the following estimated total annual burden on respondents, the formula used to calculate the total burden hour is the estimated average time per responses hours multiplied by the estimated total annual responses.

    Estimate of Annual Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average .64 hours per response.

    Type of Respondents: Individuals, associations, partnerships, or corporations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 58.

    Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Total Annual of Responses: 58.

    Estimated Average Time per Responses: 0.64 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 37 hours.

    We are requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection to help us:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Evaluate the quality, utility, and clarity of the information technology; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who respond through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses where provided, will be made a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval of the information collection.

    Richard Fordyce, Administrator, Farm Service Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24641 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P
    BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice DATE AND TIME:

    Wednesday, November 14, 2018, 10:00 a.m. ET.

    PLACE:

    Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Suite D, 7600 Boston Blvd, Springfield, VA 22153.

    Subject:

    Notice of meeting of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

    SUMMARY:

    The Broadcasting Board of Governors (Board) will be meeting at the time and location listed above. The Board will vote on a consent agenda consisting of the minutes of its September 5, 2018 meeting, a resolution honoring the 20th anniversary of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty broadcasting in the Persian language, and a proposed Board meeting dates in 2019. The Board will receive a report from the Chief Executive Officer and Director of U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM).

    This meeting will be available for public observation via streamed webcast, both live and on-demand, on the agency's public website at www.bbg.gov. Information regarding this meeting, including any updates or adjustments to its starting time, can also be found on the agency's public website.

    The public may also attend this meeting in person at the address listed above as seating capacity permits. Members of the public seeking to attend the meeting in person must register at https://bbgboardmeetingnovember2018.eventbrite.com by 12:00 p.m. (ET) on November 13.

    For more information, please contact USAGM Public Affairs at (202) 203-4400 or by email at [email protected]

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Persons interested in obtaining more information should contact Oanh Tran at (202) 203-4545.

    Oanh Tran, Managing Director.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24827 Filed 11-8-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8610-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Indiana Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Indiana Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Thursday September 27, 2018, from3-4 p.m. EDT for the purpose of discussing a draft op-ed regarding voting rights in the state.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday December 6, 2018, from 3-4 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information: Dial: 855-719-5012; Conference ID: 2724005.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is free and open to the public. Members of the public may join through the above listed toll free call in number. Members of the public will be invited to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Carolyn Allen at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Indiana Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Introductions Discussion: Civil Rights in Indiana Public Comment Adjournment Dated: November 7, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24646 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meetings of the Mississippi Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Mississippi Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Monday December 3, 2018 at 2:30 p.m. Central time. The Committee will review a draft project proposal and discuss next steps in their study of prosecutorial discretion in the state.

    DATES:

    The meeting will take place on Monday, December 3, 2018 at 2:30 p.m. Central Time.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at [email protected] or (312) 353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Public Call Information: Dial: 855-719-5012, Conference ID: 5202137.

    Members of the public may listen to this discussion through the above call in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S. Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Corrine Sanders at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (312) 353-8311.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Mississippi Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome and roll call II. Discussion: Project Proposal, Prosecutorial Discretion in Mississippi III. Public comment IV. Vote on proposal V. Next steps VI. Adjournment Dated: November 7, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24645 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Georgia Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Georgia Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting via teleconference on Monday December 17, 2018, at 12:00 p.m. EST for the purpose of reviewing testimony regarding Civil Rights and The Olmstead Act (Disability Rights). The Committee will also discuss next steps in their study of this topic.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Monday December 17, 2018, at 12:00 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call information: Dial: 855-719-5012, Conference ID: 6973191.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Wojnaroski, DFO, at [email protected] or 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the above listed toll free number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

    Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S. Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Carolyn Allen at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Georgia Advisory Committee link. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are also directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit office at the above email or street address.

    Agenda Welcome and Roll Call Discussion Civil Rights in Georgia: The Olmstead Act (Disability Rights) Public Comment Adjournment Dated: November 7, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24647 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census [Docket Number 180927898-8898-01] Census Tracts for the 2020 Census—Final Criteria AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final criteria and program implementation.

    SUMMARY:

    Census tracts are relatively permanent small-area geographic divisions of a county or statistically equivalent entity defined for the tabulation and presentation of data from the decennial census and selected other statistical programs. The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining census tracts for the 2020 Census. Census tracts defined by these criteria will also be used to tabulate and publish estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) and potentially data from other Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) censuses and surveys. In addition to census tracts, the Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) encompasses the review and update of census block groups, census designated places, and census county divisions.

    DATES:

    This notice's final criteria will be applicable on December 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information on this proposed program should be directed to Vincent Osier at the Geographic Standards, Criteria, and Quality Branch, Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, via email at [email protected] or telephone at 301-763-3056.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Census tracts are relatively permanent small-area geographic divisions of a county or statistically equivalent entity 1 defined for the tabulation and presentation of data from the decennial census and selected other statistical programs. The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining census tracts for the 2020 Census. Census tracts defined by these criteria will also be used to tabulate and publish estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) 2 and potentially data from other Census Bureau censuses and surveys.

    1 For the Census Bureau's purposes, the term “county” includes parishes in Louisiana; boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and census areas in Alaska; independent cities in Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia; districts and islands in American Samoa; districts in the U.S. Virgin Islands; municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; municipios in Puerto Rico; and the areas constituting the District of Columbia and Guam. This notice will refer to all these entities collectively as “counties”.

    2 The ACS is conducted in the United States and in Puerto Rico. In Puerto Rico the survey is called the Puerto Rico Community Survey. For ease of discussion, throughout this document the term ACS is used to represent the surveys conducted in the United States and in Puerto Rico.

    In addition to providing final criteria for census tracts, this notice contains a summary of comments received in response to proposed criteria published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6941) as well as the Census Bureau's response to those comments. After publication of final criteria in the Federal Register, the Census Bureau will offer designated governments or organizations an opportunity to review and, if necessary, suggest updates to the boundaries and attributes of the census tracts in their geographic area through the Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP). The program also encompasses the review and update of census block groups, census designated places, and census county divisions.

    I. History of Census Tracts

    In 1905, Dr. Walter Laidlaw originated the concept of permanent, small geographic areas as a framework for studying change from one decennial census to another in neighborhoods within New York City. For the 1910 Census, eight cities—New York, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis—delineated census tracts (then termed “districts”) for the first time. No additional jurisdictions delineated census tracts until just prior to the 1930 Census, when an additional ten cities chose to do so. The increased interest in census tracts for the 1930 Census is attributed to the promotional efforts of Howard Whipple Green, who was a statistician in Cleveland, Ohio, and later the chairman of the American Statistical Association's Committee on Census Enumeration Areas. For more than twenty-five years, Mr. Green strongly encouraged local citizens, via committees, to establish census tracts and other census statistical geographic areas. The committees created by local citizens were known as Census Tract Committees, later called Census Statistical Areas Committees.

    After 1930, the Census Bureau saw the need to standardize the delineation, review, and updating of census tracts and published the first set of census tract criteria in 1934. The goal of the criteria has remained unchanged; they assure comparability and data reliability through the standardization of the population thresholds for census tracts, as well as requiring that tracts' boundaries follow specific types of geographic features that do not change frequently. The Census Bureau began publishing census tract data as part of its standard tabulations beginning with the 1940 Census. Prior to that time, census tract data were published as special tabulations.

    For the 1940 Census, the Census Bureau began publishing census block 3 data for all cities with 50,000 or more people. Census block numbers were assigned, where possible, by census tract, but for those cities that had not yet delineated census tracts, “block areas,” called “block numbering areas” (BNAs) in later censuses, were created to assign census block numbers.

    3 Census blocks are statistical areas bounded by visible features, such as streets, roads, streams, and railroad tracks, and by non-visible boundaries, such as selected property lines and city, township, school district, and county limits and short line-of-sight extensions of streets and roads. Census blocks cover the entire territory of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas.

    Starting with the 1960 Census, the Census Bureau assumed a greater role in promoting and coordinating the delineation, review, and update of census tracts. For the 1980 Census, criteria for BNAs were changed to make them more comparable in size and shape to census tracts. For the 1990 Census, all counties contained either census tracts or BNAs.

    Census 2000 was the first decade in which census tracts were defined in all counties. In addition, the Census Bureau increased the number of geographic areas whose boundaries could be used as census tract boundaries. It also allowed tribal governments of federally recognized American Indian tribes with a reservation and/or off-reservation trust lands to delineate tracts without regard to state and/or county boundaries, provided the tribe had a 1990 Census population of at least 1,000.

    For the 2010 Census, the Census Bureau adopted changes to census tract criteria that recognized their utility as a framework of small geographic areas for presenting and analyzing statistical and other data for a variety of communities, settlement patterns, and landscapes. The Census Bureau augmented its minimum, maximum, and optimum population threshold with housing unit thresholds for use in defining census tracts for seasonal communities that have no or low population on census day (April 1). The Census Bureau formalized criteria for census tracts defined for employment centers, airports, parks, large water bodies, and other special land uses that had been permitted in previous decades, but never specified within the criteria. The Census Bureau also established tribal census tracts as a geographic framework defined within federally recognized American Indian reservations and off-reservation trust lands that is fully separate from the standard census tracts defined within counties.

    II. Summary of Comments Received in Response to the Proposed Criteria

    The Federal Register published on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6941) requested comment on the proposed census tract criteria for the 2020 Census. The proposed criteria were unchanged from the final criteria adopted for the 2010 Census.

    The Census Bureau received comments from 16 individuals or groups of individuals on topics related to (1) use of non-visible political boundaries when defining census tracts; (2) use of employment data to define census tracts encompassing areas with substantial amounts of commercial, industrial, or other non-residential activity for the purpose of transportation planning; (3) maintaining historical comparability; and (4) accounting for statistical data reliability and quality when developing census tract criteria and defining individual census tracts. Commenters represented state and local government agencies, regional planning organizations and councils of governments, state data centers, non-governmental organizations, and academic researchers. Comments received by the Census Bureau are summarized below, as well as the Census Bureau's response to these comments.

    1. Using Non-Visible Minor Civil Division Boundaries in Michigan as Census Tract Boundaries

    The Census Bureau received three comments from individuals in Michigan noting that non-visible minor civil division (MCD) boundaries in Michigan should be permitted to be census tract boundaries for the 2020 Census as was the case in the past. The commenters correctly noted that in Table 1, Acceptable Minor Civil Division and Incorporated Place Boundaries, the proposed criteria were in error with regard to Michigan. The Census Bureau has corrected the table in the final criteria.

    2. Defining Census Tracts on the Basis of Employment and Jobs

    The Census Bureau received 14 comments related to defining census tracts encompassing areas with concentrations of employment and jobs or other types of non-residential uses to improve the utility of census tracts for transportation and journey-to-work analysis and planning. Eleven commenters suggested adoption of a minimum threshold of 1,200 workers/jobs (and no maximum or optimum thresholds) to be applied as an alternative to the existing minimum population or housing unit threshold or in combination with population or housing unit thresholds. One commenter supported the use of worker/job counts when defining census tracts, but did not specify a minimum threshold. Two commenters expressed support for modifying criteria for special use census tracts primarily to improve identification of census tracts encompassing areas with concentrations of employment. One commenter noted that applying employment thresholds was not necessary as the sample design for the American Community Survey (which is the source for much of the demographic data used in journey-to-work analysis) focused on residential population concentrations rather than employment concentrations. This commenter suggested that changes to the special use census tract land area criteria could achieve the result desired by commenters proposing employment thresholds and could provide greater flexibility when defining census tracts.

    Based on consideration of the comments received on this topic and further discussion with stakeholders in the transportation community, the Census Bureau will change its criteria for defining special use census tracts to no longer specify minimum land area requirements. Special use census tracts should be comparable in land area size to surrounding census tracts to assure data reliability and quality when reporting on workplace-related data and to avoid data disclosure issues. The Census Bureau also recommends that, when defining special use census tracts encompassing employment centers and areas with concentrations of jobs, PSAP participants should strive for a minimum threshold of 1,200 workers/jobs.

    3. Maintaining Historical Comparability

    One commenter noted the importance of maintaining historical boundaries of census tracts for chronicling change in the sociodemographic characteristics of neighborhoods. The commenter noted that, while adherence to specified population thresholds (particularly the optimum and maximum population thresholds, which factor in decisions to split census tracts) is an important characteristic of census tracts, comparability over time also is a critical characteristic. Further, allowing census tracts to exceed the optimum and maximum thresholds will help mitigate issues related to the large sampling error associated with small geographic areas. The commenter suggested that by leaving census tract boundaries unchanged (i.e., by not splitting census tracts), local governments will be able to aggregate census tracts more easily to the neighborhood level, allowing for comparability over time as well as more reliable data. The commenter further suggested that if census tracts must be merged in order to meet the minimum population threshold, then an effort should be made to align the boundaries for block groups within the new census tract with the boundaries of the former census tracts.

    The Census Bureau agrees with the sentiments expressed by this commenter and will continue to allow individual PSAP participants to avoid splitting census tracts if they are more concerned about historical comparability or statistical data reliability or both. We also agree with the suggestion to align block group boundaries with the boundaries of former census tracts in those instances in which census tracts have been merged and will update the final criteria accordingly.

    4. Data Quality as an Explicit Criterion for Census Tracts

    One comment, submitted by a team of researchers, centered around the quality and reliability of statistical data for census tracts and other small geographic areas. Their concern was that the current methodology for updating and defining census tracts, with its focus on maintaining historical comparability as well as adherence to the optimum threshold of 4,000 persons, results in a framework of small geographic areas that may not meet current analytical and policy development needs for statistically reliable data. Similar to the sentiment expressed by the comment discussed above, this group of commenters suggested that in some places and contexts, the population size of census tracts should be allowed to increase beyond the maximum threshold, adding that these larger units would provide higher quality data because they would contain more responses from sample-based surveys. However, in their suggestion regarding adoption of explicit statistical data quality criteria, the commenters are proposing a fundamental change in the process for defining census tracts for data dissemination purposes; that is, if a census tract does not achieve the quality criterion for a given data release, it would be combined with an adjacent tract. The commenters suggest that through this combination, the margins of error on the estimates will be reduced, and data users will be able to obtain a more reliable estimate for a new larger “census tract” (encompassing multiple “sub-tracts”).

    While this is an intriguing idea, the Census Bureau cannot implement it at this time. Through the 2020 PSAP, the Census Bureau works with participants to update census tract boundaries prior to the 2020 Census to define a stable geographic framework for tabulating and presenting decennial census and ACS data. As we understand it, the commenters' proposal would result in a framework of “preliminary” census tracts that would be combined, as necessary, to meet statistical data reliability criteria after data have been tabulated, but prior to final release. The Census Bureau needs more time than is available prior to the start of the 2020 PSAP delineation process to research this proposal and consider any potential data tabulation, data disclosure, and analytical implications, particularly if census tracts were combined in different ways depending on the specific mix of variables presented in a particular data tabulation.

    III. General Principles and Criteria for Census Tracts for the 2020 Census A. General Principles

    1. The primary goal of the census tract is to provide a set of nationally consistent small, statistical geographic units, with stable boundaries, that facilitate analysis of data across time. A century of census tract use, along with ACS and the averaging of sample data for tracts over a five-year span, has shown that continuity and comparability in tracts and their boundaries over time are of considerable importance to data users. Pursuant to this goal, the Census Bureau requests that where a census tract must be updated, for example to meet the minimum or maximum population or housing unit thresholds, that the outer boundaries of the tract not be changed, but rather that a tract be split into two or more tracts, or merged with an adjacent tract. The Census Bureau discourages changes to tract boundaries (that is, “retracting”), except in specified circumstances, which the Census Bureau will review on a case-by-case basis.

    2. In order to ensure a minimal level of reliability in sample data and minimize potential disclosures of sensitive information, a census tract should contain at least 1,200 people or at least 480 housing units at minimum, and 8,000 people or 3,200 housing units at maximum. PSAP participants should aim to create census tracts that meet the optimal population of 4,000 or 1,600 housing units and maintain the minimum thresholds unless it is flagged as a special use tract (discussed below), or is coextensive with a county with fewer than 1,200 people. The housing unit criterion is used to accommodate areas that are occupied seasonally and may otherwise show a discrepancy between decennial and ACS figures.4

    4 “Occupied seasonally” refers to seasonal communities in which residents often are not present on the date of the decennial census, but will be present at other times of the year and for which estimates may be reflected in the ACS. The ACS is designed to produce local area data as of a 12-month period estimate (or an average).

    3. The Census Bureau recognizes that there are significant geographic areas that are characterized by unique populations (e.g., prisons or universities) or not characterized by residential populations at all (e.g., National Parks, large bodies of water, or employment centers) which local participants may wish to exclude from populated census tracts for either analytical or cartographic purposes. These areas may be designated as special use census tracts to distinguish them from standard populated census tracts. Special land and/or water use census tracts are not required, but if delineated they must be designated as a specific type of special use (discussed below), have an official name, ideally have no residential population or housing units or at least meet all minimum population or housing thresholds mention above, and must not create noncontiguous census tracts. While there are no longer minimum land area measurement thresholds for special use tracts in urban or rural areas, such census tracts should be comparable in size to surrounding census tracts, particularly if defined to encompass employment centers or other areas containing a greater concentration of jobs than residents. The Census Bureau recognizes that some special use areas not intended for residential population, such as parks, may contain some minimal population, such as caretakers or those experiencing homelessness. Since the primary purpose of census tracts is to help provide high-quality statistical data about the population, the participant and the Census Bureau must decide if a special use tract would be useful in such a situation.

    4. To facilitate the analysis of data for American Indian tribes, and to recognize their unique governmental status, program participants are encouraged to merge, split, or redefine census tracts to avoid unnecessarily splitting American Indian reservations (AIRs) and off-reservation trust lands (ORTLs). Each contiguous AIR and/or ORTL should be included, along with any necessary territory outside the AIR and/or ORTL, within a single census tract or as few census tracts as possible for the 2020 Census. This is the only situation in which retracting is encouraged (Figure 1).

    EN13NO18.096 B. Criteria

    The criteria herein apply to the United States, including federally recognized AIRs and ORTLs, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas.5 The Census Bureau may modify and, if necessary, reject any proposals for census tracts that do not meet the published criteria. In addition, the Census Bureau reserves the right to modify the boundaries and attributes of census tracts as needed to meet the published criteria and/or maintain geographic relationships before or after the final tabulation geography is set for the 2020 Census.

    5 For Census Bureau purposes, the United States typically refers to only the fifty states and the District of Columbia, and does not include the U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, the Island Areas, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands). The Island Areas includes American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The U.S. Minor Outlying Islands are an aggregation of nine U.S. territories: Baker Island, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef, Midway Islands, Navassa Island, Palmyra Atoll, and Wake Island.

    The Census Bureau sets forth the following criteria for use in reviewing, updating, and delineating 2020 Census tracts:

    5. Census tracts must not cross county or state boundaries.

    This criterion takes precedence over all other criteria or requirements (except for tribal tracts on federally recognized AIRs and/or ORTLs).

    6. Census tracts must cover the entire land and water area of a county.

    7. Census tracts must comprise a reasonably compact and contiguous land area.

    Noncontiguous boundaries are permitted only where a contiguous area or inaccessible area would not meet population or housing unit count requirements for a separate census tract, in which case the noncontiguous or inaccessible area must be combined within an adjacent or proximate tract. For example, an island that does not meet the minimum population threshold for recognition as a separate census tract should be combined with other proximate land to form a single, contiguous census tract. Each case will be reviewed and accepted at the Census Bureau's discretion.

    8. Census tract boundaries should follow visible and identifiable features.

    To make the location of census tract boundaries less ambiguous, wherever possible, tract boundaries should follow significant, visible, easily identifiable features. The use of visible features facilitates the location and identification of census tract boundaries in the field, both on the ground and in imagery. The selection of permanent physical features also increases the stability of the boundaries over time, as the locations of many visible features in the landscape tend to change infrequently. If census tract boundaries are changed, they should not be moved from a more significant feature (e.g., a highway or a major river) to a less significant feature (e.g., a neighborhood road or a small tributary stream). By definition, state and county boundaries must be used as census tract boundaries. The Census Bureau also permits the use of incorporated place and minor civil division (MCD) boundaries in states where those boundaries tend to remain unchanged over time (see Table 1).

    The following features are preferred as census tract boundaries for the 2020 Census:

    a. State and county boundaries must always be census tract boundaries. This criterion takes precedence over all other boundary criteria or requirements.

    b. AIR and ORTL boundaries.

    c. Visible, perennial, stable, relatively permanent natural and constructed features, such as roads, shorelines, rivers, perennial streams and canals, railroad tracks, or above-ground high-tension power lines.

    d. Boundaries of legal and administrative entities in selected states. Table 1 identifies by state which MCD and incorporated place boundaries may be used as census tract boundaries.

    e. Additionally, the following legally defined, administrative boundaries would be permitted as census tract boundaries:

    i. Barrio, barrio-pueblo, and sub-barrio boundaries in Puerto Rico;

    ii. Census subdistrict and estate boundaries in the U.S. Virgin Islands;

    iii. County and island boundaries (both MCD equivalents) in American Samoa;

    iv. Election district boundaries in Guam;

    v. Municipal district boundaries in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; and,

    vi. Alaska Native Regional Corporation boundaries in Alaska, at the discretion of the Census Bureau, insofar as such boundaries are unambiguous for allocating living quarters as part of 2020 Census activities.

    f. The boundaries of large parks, forests, airports, penitentiaries/prisons, and/or military installations, provided the boundaries are clearly marked or easily recognized in the field, in imagery, and on the ground.

    g. When acceptable visible and governmental boundary features are not available for use as census tract boundaries, the Census Bureau may, at its discretion, approve other nonstandard visible features, such as major ridgelines, above-ground pipelines, intermittent streams, or fence lines. The Census Bureau may also accept, on a case-by-case basis, relatively short stretches of boundaries of selected nonstandard and potentially nonvisible features, such as cadastral and parcel boundaries or the straight-line extensions or other lines-of-sight between acceptable visible features.

    Table 1—Acceptable Minor Civil Division (MCD) and Incorporated Place Boundaries State All MCD boundaries Boundaries of MCDs not
  • co-incident with the boundaries of incorporated places that themselves are MCDs
  • All
  • incorporated
  • place
  • boundaries
  • Only conjoint
  • incorporated
  • place
  • boundaries
  • Alabama X Alaska X Arizona X Arkansas X California X Colorado X Connecticut X X Delaware X Florida X Georgia X Hawaii Idaho X Illinois X a X Indiana X X Iowa X X Kansas X X Kentucky X Louisiana X Maine X X Maryland X Massachusetts X X Michigan X X Minnesota X X Mississippi X Missouri X b X Montana X Nebraska X a X Nevada X New Hampshire X X New Jersey X X New Mexico X New York X X North Carolina X North Dakota X X Ohio X X Oklahoma X Oregon X Pennsylvania X X Rhode Island X X South Carolina X South Dakota X X Tennessee X Texas X Utah X Vermont X X Virginia X Washington X West Virginia X Wisconsin X X Wyoming X a Townships only. b Governmental townships only.
    9. Population, Housing Unit, and Area Measurement Thresholds

    The following are the population, housing unit, and area measurement threshold criteria for census tracts (as summarized in Table 2). The same population and housing unit thresholds apply to all types of non-special use census tracts, including census tracts delineated for AIRs and ORTLs, the Island Areas, and encompassing group quarters, military installations, and institutions.

    Table 2—Census Tract Thresholds Census tract type Threshold type Optimum Minimum Maximum Standard & tribal census tracts Population threshold
  • Housing unit threshold
  • 4,000
  • 1,600
  • 1,200
  • 480
  • 8,000.
  • 3,200.
  • Special use census tracts Area measurement At least comparable in land area size to surrounding census tracts At least comparable in land area size to surrounding census tracts At least comparable in land area size to surrounding census tracts. Employment threshold (suggested) Suggested minimum of 1,200 workers or jobs.

    a. 2010 Census population counts should be used in census tract review in most cases. Housing unit counts should be used for census tracts in seasonal communities that have little or no population on Census Day (April 1). Locally produced population and housing unit estimates can be used when reviewing and updating census tracts, especially in areas that have experienced considerable growth since the 2010 Census.

    b. The housing unit thresholds are based on a national average of 2.5 persons per household. The Census Bureau recognizes that there are local and regional variations to this average, and will take this into consideration when reviewing all census tract proposals.

    c. Any census tract with a population or housing unit count less than the minimum threshold should be merged with an adjacent census tract to form a single tract with at least 1,200 people or at least 480 housing units (Figure 2). The Census Bureau recognizes the complexity that exists between meeting the optimum population or housing unit threshold in a census tract and maintaining census tract comparability over time. For example, if the population or housing unit count based on 2010 Census data was below the minimum thresholds, but significant growth has occurred since 2010 or is expected before 2020 for a census tract, the census tract should not be merged with another census tract. Supporting evidence may be requested by the Census Bureau. However, if the census tract's population does not increase as expected and does not meet either the minimum population or housing unit thresholds for 2020, this may adversely affect the reliability and availability of any sample estimates for that census tract. For this reason, the Census Bureau suggests merging the census tract with another adjacent census tract if there is a possibility that anticipated growth will not be sufficient to meet minimum thresholds. When merging census tracts, the Census Bureau suggests retaining the former census tract boundaries as boundaries for block groups within the newly defined census tract to facilitate historical analysis.

    EN13NO18.097

    d. For the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau will allow the delineation of special use census tracts, but they are not required. A special use census tract must be designated as a specific use type (e.g., state park), must have an official name (e.g., Jay Cooke State Park), have no (or very little) residential population or meet population or housing unit thresholds, and must not create a noncontiguous census tract. In some instances, multiple areas can be combined to form a single special use census tract if the land use or land management characteristics are similar, such as a special use census tract comprising an area with a concentration of employment or adjacent federal and state parks. Any resulting special use census tract should be at least as large in area as the surrounding standard, populated census tracts.

    10. Identification of Census Tracts

    a. A census tract has a basic census tract identifier composed of no more than four digits and may have a two-digit decimal suffix.

    b. The range of acceptable basic census tract identifiers for the 2020 Census is from 1 to 9989 (see 6.c. below for exceptions); special use census tracts delineated specifically to complete coverage of large water bodies will be numbered from 9950 to 9989 in each county.

    c. Census tracts delineated within or to primarily encompass AIRs and/or ORTLs should be numbered from 9400 to 9499.

    d. Census tract identifiers must be unique within each county.

    e. Once used, census tract identifiers cannot be reused in a subsequent census to reference a completely different area within a county. If a census tract is split, each portion may keep the same basic 4-digit identifier, but each portion must be given a unique suffix. If a census tract that was suffixed for 2010 Census is split, each portion must be given a new suffix.

    f. The range of acceptable census tract suffixes is .01 to .98.

    11. Census Tract Types

    Table 3 provides a summary of the types of census tracts (with their respective population, housing unit, and area measurement thresholds) that the Census Bureau will use for the 2020 Census.

    Table 3—Summary of Census Tract Types Census tract type Distinction from standard census tract Population
  • thresholds
  • Housing unit
  • thresholds
  • Area measurement
  • thresholds
  • Standard census tract Optimum: 4,000; Min: 1,200; Max: 8,000 Optimum: 1,600; Min: 480; Max: 3,200 None. Tribal census tract Tribal census tracts are conceptually similar and equivalent to census tracts defined within the standard state-county-tract geographic hierarchy used for tabulating and publishing statistical data Optimum: 4,000; Min: 1,200; Max: 8,000 Optimum: 1,600; Min: 480; Max: 3,200 None. Special use census tract A census tract encompassing an employment center, large airport, public park, public forest, or large water body with no (or very little) population or housing units None (or very little) or within the standard census tract threshold None (or very little) or within the standard census tract threshold At least comparable in size to surrounding standard census tracts.
    B. Tribal Census Tracts

    Tribal census tracts are statistical geographic entities defined by the Census Bureau in cooperation with tribal officials to provide meaningful, relevant, and reliable data for small geographic areas within the boundaries of federally recognized AIRs and/or ORTLs. As such, they recognize the unique statistical data needs of federally recognized American Indian tribes. The delineation of tribal census tracts allows for an unambiguous presentation of census tract-level data specific to the federally recognized AIR and/or ORTL without the imposition of state or county boundaries, which might artificially separate American Indian populations located within a single AIR and/or ORTL. To this end, the American Indian tribal participant may define tribal census tracts that cross county or state boundaries, or both. For federally recognized American Indian tribes with AIRs and/or ORTLs that have more than 2,400 residents, the Census Bureau will offer the tribal government the opportunity to delineate tribal census tracts and other tribal statistical geography on their AIR and/or ORTL. For federally recognized tribes with an AIR and/or ORTL with fewer than 2,400 residents, the Census Bureau will define one tribal census tract coextensive with the AIR and/or ORTL. Tribal census tracts must be delineated to meet all other census tract criteria, and must be identified uniquely to clearly distinguish them from county-based census tracts. Tribal census tracts are conceptually similar and equivalent to census tracts defined within the standard state-county-tract geographic hierarchy used for tabulating and publishing statistical data.

    In order to provide meaningful statistical geographic areas within the AIR and/or ORTL, as well as make meaningful and reliable data available for these areas and their populations, tribal census tract geography is maintained separately from standard county-based census tracts. This change was first introduced for the 2010 Census, creating standard, county-based census tracts nationwide and maintaining tribal census tracts as a completely separate set of geography from standard census tracts for both geographic and data presentation purposes. The change eliminated, in part, the reliability and availability data issues for the tribal census tracts and the derived standard census tracts that were present in Census 2000. 6

    6 For Census 2000, tribal tracts were defined for federally recognized AIRs and/or ORTLs and standard census tracts were identified by superimposing county and state boundaries onto the tribal tracts. For Census 2000 products in which data were presented by state and county, the standard state-county-census tract hierarchy was maintained, even for territory contained within an AIR and/or ORTL. In such instances, the state-county portions of a tribal tract were identified as individual census tracts. These standard census tracts may not have met the minimum population thresholds, potentially limiting sample data reliability or availability for both the tribal tract and the derived standard census tracts.

    As with standard census tracts submitted through this program, the tribal census tracts are submitted to the Census Bureau, and are subject to review to ensure compliance with the published criteria. Detailed criteria pertaining to tribal census tracts will be published in a separate Federal Register notice pertaining to all American Indian areas, including statistical areas defined through the PSAP.

    IV. Definitions of Key Terms

    Alaska Native Regional Corporation (ANRC)—A corporate geographic area established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (Pub. L. 92-203, 85 Stat. 688 (1971)) to conduct both the business and nonprofit affairs of Alaska Natives. Twelve ANRCs cover the entire state of Alaska except for the Annette Island Reserve.

    American Indian off-reservation trust land (ORTL)—An area of land located outside the boundaries of an AIR, whose boundaries are established by deed, and which are held in trust by the U.S. federal government for a federally recognized American Indian tribe or members of that tribe.

    American Indian reservation (AIR)—An area of land with boundaries established by final treaty, statute, executive order, and/or court order and over which a federally recognized American Indian tribal government has governmental authority. Along with “reservation,” designations such as colonies, communities, pueblos, rancherias, and reserves apply to AIRs.

    Census block—Census blocks are statistical areas bounded by visible features, such as streets, roads, streams, and railroad tracks, and by non-visible boundaries, such as selected property lines and city, township, school district, and county limits and short line-of-sight extensions of streets and roads. Census blocks cover the entire territory of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas.

    Conjoint—A description of a boundary line shared by two adjacent geographic entities.

    Contiguous—A description of areas sharing common boundary lines, more than a single point, such that the areas, when combined, form a single piece of territory. Noncontiguous areas form disjoint pieces.

    Group quarters—A location where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents. This is not a typical household-type living arrangement. These services may include custodial or medical care as well as other types of assistance, and residency is commonly restricted to those receiving these services. People living in group quarters are usually not related to each other. Group quarters include such places as college residence halls, residential treatment centers, skilled nursing facilities, group homes, military barracks, correctional facilities, and workers' dormitories.

    Incorporated place—A type of governmental unit, incorporated under state law as a city, town (except in New England, New York, and Wisconsin), borough (except in Alaska and New York), or village, generally to provide governmental services for a concentration of people within legally prescribed boundaries.

    Minor civil division (MCD)—The primary governmental or administrative division of a county in 28 states and the Island Areas having legal boundaries, names, and descriptions. The MCDs represent many different types of legal entities with a wide variety of characteristics, powers, and functions depending on the state and type of MCD. In some states, some or all of the incorporated places also constitute MCDs.

    Nonvisible feature—A map feature that is not visible on the ground such as a city or county boundary through space, a property line, or line-of-sight extension of a road.

    Retracting—Substantially changing the boundaries of a census tract so that comparability over time is not maintained.

    Special use census tract—Type of census tract that must be designated as a specific use type (e.g., state park or large lake) and have an official name (e.g., Jay Cooke State Park or Lake Minnetonka), should have no (or very little) population or housing units, and must not create a noncontiguous census tract. If delineated in a densely populated, urban area, a special use census tract must have an area of at least one square mile. If delineated completely outside an urban area, a special use census tract must have an area of at least 10 square miles.

    Visible feature—A map feature that can be seen on the ground and in imagery, such as a road, railroad track, major above-ground transmission line or pipeline, river, stream, shoreline, fence, sharply defined mountain ridge, or cliff. A nonstandard visible feature is a feature that may not be clearly defined on the ground (such as a ridge), may be seasonal (such as an intermittent stream), or may be relatively impermanent (such as a fence). The Census Bureau generally requests verification that nonstandard features used as boundaries for the PSAP geographic areas pose no problem in their location during field work.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Ron S. Jarmin, Deputy Director, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24567 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census [Docket Number 180926887-8887-01] Census County Divisions (CCDs) and Equivalent Entities for the 2020 Census—Final Criteria AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final criteria and program implementation.

    SUMMARY:

    Census county divisions (CCDs) and equivalent entities are statistical geographic entities established cooperatively by the Census Bureau and officials of state and local governments in 21 states where minor civil divisions (MCDs) either do not exist or have been unsatisfactory for reporting statistical data. The primary goal of the CCD program has been to establish and maintain a set of subcounty units that have stable boundaries and recognizable names. The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria and program implementation for defining CCDs for the 2020 Census. In addition to CCDs, the program also encompasses the review and update of census tracts, block groups, and census designated places (CDPs).

    DATES:

    This notice's final criteria will be effective on December 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information on this program should be directed to the Geographic Standards, Criteria, and Quality Branch, Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, via email at [email protected] or telephone at 301-763-3056.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Census county divisions (CCDs) and equivalent entities are statistical geographic entities established cooperatively by the Census Bureau and officials of state and local governments in 21 states 1 where minor civil divisions (MCDs) either do not exist or have been unsatisfactory for reporting statistical data. The primary goal of the CCD program has been to establish and maintain a set of subcounty 2 units that have stable boundaries and recognizable names.

    1 In Alaska, census subareas are county subdivisions equivalent to CCDs. For purposes of this notice, the term CCD also refers to census subareas in Alaska.

    2 For the Census Bureau's purposes, the term “county” includes parishes in Louisiana; boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and census areas in Alaska; independent cities in Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia; districts and islands in American Samoa; districts in the U.S. Virgin Islands; municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; municipios in Puerto Rico; and the areas constituting the District of Columbia and Guam. This notice will refer to all these entities collectively as “counties”.

    The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining CCDs for the 2020 Census. The Census Bureau did not receive any comments in response to proposed criteria published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6932). After publication of final criteria in the Federal Register, the Census Bureau will offer designated governments or organizations an opportunity to review and, if necessary, suggest updates to the boundaries and attributes of CCDs in their geographic area under the Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP). In addition to CCDs, the program also encompasses the review and update of census tracts, block groups, and census designated places (CDPs).

    I. History

    When CCDs were introduced prior to the 1950 Census, few alternatives were available for the provision of statistical data related to relatively stable, subcounty geographic units. Census tracts were defined in only a subset of metropolitan area counties. MCDs existed in all counties, but in some states MCD boundaries changed frequently enough that they were not useful for comparing statistical data from one decade to another.

    For much of the period from the 1950 Census through the 1980 Census, county subdivisions (MCDs and CCDs) provided the only subcounty unit of geography at which data users could obtain statistical data for complete coverage of counties nationwide. The introduction of block numbering areas (BNAs) in counties without census tracts for the 1990 Census offered an alternate subcounty entity for which data could be tabulated. For Census 2000, the Census Bureau introduced census tracts nationwide (in many counties, BNAs were simply relabeled as “census tracts”), increasing the dissemination of, and ability to analyze, data at the census tract level, and providing an alternative set of subcounty statistical geographic areas in each county in addition to MCDs and CCDs. Nevertheless, CCDs and MCDs remain useful for presenting subcounty statistics and, in less populous counties containing only one or two census tracts, can provide greater spatial resolution when analyzing the distribution of population and characteristics.

    II. Summary of Comments Received in Response to the Proposed Criteria

    The Census Bureau's proposed criteria for the 2020 Census were unchanged from the final criteria used to delineate CCDs for the 2010 Census. The Census Bureau did not receive any comments in response to the proposed criteria published in the Federal Register published on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6932). As a result, the proposed criteria are adopted as final criteria with only minor clarifying changes and an update for a population figure used as an example.

    III. General Principles and Criteria for CCDs for the 2020 Census

    The criteria outlined herein apply to the United States,3 Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas.4

    3 For Census Bureau purposes, the United States typically refers to only the fifty states and the District of Columbia, and does not include the U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, the Island Areas, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands.

    4 The Island Areas include the U.S. territories American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

    A. General Principles

    1. The primary goal of the CCD program is to establish and maintain a set of subcounty units that have stable boundaries and recognizable names. The boundaries of CCDs usually coincide with visible features or stable, significant legal boundaries, such as the boundary of an American Indian reservation (AIR), federally managed land, or conjoint incorporated places. CCDs have no legal status as statistical geographic entities and are defined only for the tabulation and presentation of statistical data.

    2. A CCD usually represents a single contiguous area consisting of one or more communities, economic centers, or, in some instances, major land uses that are relatively compact in shape.

    3. A CCD should have a relationship to existing census tracts, either encompassing one or more census tracts or having two or more CCDs nest within a single census tract. The boundaries of a CCD, or combination of nested CCDs, align with census tract boundaries. Note that a county with a population less than the optimum population for a census tract (less than 4,000 people) may contain more CCDs than census tracts. For example, McCone County, Montana, which has a 2017 estimated population of 1,718, contains only one census tract, but is divided into two CCDs.

    4. Since the 1950s, the Census Bureau has worked with state and local officials to replace MCDs with CCDs for the collection, presentation, and analysis of Census Bureau data, particularly in states in which MCDs do not provide governmental services and functions, and in which MCD boundaries tend to change between decennial censuses. For the 2020 Census, CCDs are defined in 21 states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. North Dakota adopted CCDs for use in tabulating and presenting data from the 1970 Census. Following the 1970 Census, North Dakota requested that the Census Bureau again use MCDs to tabulate and present statistical data. For the 2010 Census, Tennessee requested that the Census Bureau replace its CCDs with county commissioner districts, a type of legal, administrative MCD.

    B. Criteria

    CCDs should (1) have community orientation, (2) have visible and/or stable boundaries, (3) maintain relationships with census tract boundaries, and (4) have recognizable names.

    1. Community Orientation

    Each CCD should center on one or more places and encompass additional surrounding territory that together form a cohesive community area. The definition of community should take into account factors, such as production, marketing, consumption, and the integrating factor of local institutions.

    The locality on which a CCD is centered usually is an incorporated place or an unincorporated community, which might be identified as a CDP. In some cases, the CCD may center on a major area of significantly different topography, land use, or ownership, such as a large military installation or AIR. A CCD should always comprise a reasonably compact, continuous land area, generally with road access to all areas within the CCD.

    2. Visible and/or Stable Boundaries

    To make the location of CCD boundaries less ambiguous, the boundaries should follow, wherever possible, visible and identifiable features. The use of visible features makes it easier to locate and identify CCD boundaries over time, as the locations of most visible features in the landscape change infrequently, making data collection easier and more reliable, while reducing the possibility for data allocation errors. The Census Bureau requires that CCDs follow state and county boundaries, conform to census tract boundaries, and allows CCDs to follow the boundaries of federally recognized AIRs, and federal, state, or locally managed land.

    The following features are acceptable:

    a. County boundaries (always a CCD boundary);

    b. Census tract boundaries, which usually follow visible, perennial, natural, and cultural features, such as roads, rivers, canals, railroads, or above-ground, high-tension power lines;

    c. Legally defined, federally recognized AIR boundaries;

    d. The boundaries of federal, state, or locally managed land, such as national parks, national monuments, national forests, other types of large parks or forests, airports, marine ports, prisons, military installations, or other large facilities;

    e. Conjoint city limits (in certain situations, such as city limits that change infrequently); and,

    f. When the above types of features are not available for use as CCD boundaries, the Census Bureau may, at its discretion, approve other nonstandard, visible features, such as ridge lines, above-ground pipelines, streams, or fence lines. The Census Bureau may also accept, on a case-by-case basis, the boundaries of selected nonstandard and potentially nonvisible features, such as the boundaries of cemeteries, golf courses, glaciers, or the straight-line extensions of visible features and other lines-of-sight.

    3. Census Tract Boundaries and Population Size

    Whenever possible, a CCD should encompass one or more contiguous census tracts, or multiple CCDs should constitute a single census tract. Therefore, CCD boundaries should be consistent with census tract boundaries. Population size is not as important a consideration with CCDs as it is with census tracts. For CCDs that do not meet the thresholds for a census tract, the Census Bureau encourages creating one or more block groups within a census tract that encompass a CCD. Historically, CCDs have ranged from a few hundred people (in selected situations) to more than one million. However, data quality and availability may be factors that local governments and planners should consider in defining statistical geographic areas. As a general rule, period estimates of demographic characteristics of small population areas from the American Community Survey will be subject to higher variances than comparable period estimates for areas with larger populations. In addition, the Census Bureau's disclosure rules may have the effect of restricting the availability and amount of data for areas with small populations.

    4. Name Identification

    a. The names of existing CCDs shall not be changed unless a compelling reason is provided, such as when the name from which the CCD was derived has changed, as in the case of Bainbridge Island, Washington, when the name of the city (Winslow) changed;

    b. A new CCD usually is named after the largest population center or historically central place within it (e.g., Taos, Hobbs, or Zuni Pueblo, New Mexico);

    c. Where a CCD contains multiple centers with relatively equal importance, a CCD name may represent the two or three centers (e.g., Mount Pleasant-Moroni, Utah);

    d. A CCD may be named after the AIR (e.g., Hualapai, Arizona or Nez Perce, Idaho) or a prominent land use area (e.g., Federal Reservation, Washington or Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming) in which it is significantly or wholly located;

    e. A CCD may be named after a prominent physical feature (e.g., Mount Rainier, Washington) or a distinctive region within the county (e.g., Death Valley, California; Everglades or Lower Keys, Florida); and,

    f. If there is no clear cultural focus or topographic name that can be applied, a CCD name shall consist of the county name and a compass direction to indicate the portion of the county in the CCD or a place name and a compass direction to give the CCD location relative to the place. The directional indicator precedes a county name (e.g., Northeast Cobb, Georgia). If a place name is used, the directional indicator follows it (e.g., Del Rio Northwest, Texas).

    In all cases, the objective is to clearly identify the extent of the CCD by means of an area name since CCD names always should be meaningful to data users. Any name used as a CCD name must also be recognized by the Board on Geographic Names for federal use and appear in the Geographic Names Information System maintained by the U.S. Geological Survey. This includes any individual names combined to make a hyphenated CCD name.

    III. Definitions of Key Terms

    American Indian reservation (AIR)— An area of land with boundaries established by final treaty, statute, executive order, and/or court order and over which a federally recognized American Indian tribal government has governmental authority. Along with “reservation,” designations such as colonies, communities, pueblos, rancherias, and reserves apply to AIRs.

    Block group—A statistical subdivision of a census tract consisting of all census blocks whose numbers begin with the same digit in a census tract. A block group is the smallest geographic entity for which the Census Bureau normally tabulates sample data.

    Census block—A geographic area bounded by visible and/or invisible features shown on a map prepared by the Census Bureau. A block is the smallest geographic entity for which the Census Bureau tabulates and publishes decennial census data.

    Census county division (CCD)—Areas delineated by the Census Bureau in cooperation with state, tribal, and local officials for statistical purposes. CCDs have no legal function and are not governmental units. CCD boundaries usually follow visible features and usually coincide with census tract boundaries. The name of each CCD is based on a place, country, or well-known local name that identify its location.

    Census designated place (CDP)—A statistical geographic entity equivalent to an incorporated place with a concentration of population, housing, and commercial and nonresidential structures that is identifiable by name, but is not within an incorporated place.

    Census tract—A small, relatively permanent statistical geographic division of a county defined for the tabulation and publication of Census Bureau data. The primary goal of census tracts is to provide a set of nationally consistent, relatively small, statistical geographic units, with stable boundaries that facilitate analysis of data across time and between decennial censuses.

    Conjoint—A description of a boundary line shared by two adjacent geographic entities.

    Contiguous—A description of areas sharing common boundary lines, more than a single point, such that the areas, when combined, form a single piece of territory. Noncontiguous areas form disjoint pieces.

    Federally managed land—Territory that is federally owned and/or administered by an agency of the U.S. federal government, such as the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, or Department of Defense.

    Incorporated place—A type of governmental unit, incorporated under state law as a city, town (except in New England, New York, and Wisconsin), borough (except in Alaska and New York), or village, generally to provide governmental services for a concentration of people within legally prescribed boundaries.

    Minor civil division (MCD)—The primary governmental or administrative division of a county in 28 states and the Island Areas having legal boundaries, names, and descriptions. The MCDs represent many different types of legal entities with a wide variety of characteristics, powers, and functions depending on the state and type of MCD. In some states, some or all of the incorporated places also constitute MCDs.

    Nonvisible feature—A map feature that is not visible on the ground and in imagery such as a city or county boundary through space, a property line, or line-of-sight extension of a road.

    Visible feature—A map feature that can be seen on the ground and in imagery, such as a road, railroad track, major above-ground transmission line or pipeline, river, stream, shoreline, fence, sharply defined mountain ridge, or cliff. A nonstandard visible feature is a feature that may not be clearly defined on the ground (such as a ridge), may be seasonal (such as an intermittent stream), or may be relatively impermanent (such as a fence). The Census Bureau generally requests verification that nonstandard features used as boundaries for the PSAP geographic areas pose no problem in their location during field work.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Ron S. Jarmin, Deputy Director, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24566 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Census Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; National Survey of Children's Health AGENCY:

    U.S. Census Bureau, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at [email protected]). You may also submit comments, identified by Docket Number USBC-2018-0016 to the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments received are part of the public record. No comments will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov for public viewing until after the comment period has closed. Comments will generally be posted without change. All Personally Identifiable Information (for example, name and address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Leah Meyer, U.S. Census Bureau, ADDP, HQ-7H157, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233-0001 (301-763-7174 or via email at [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    Sponsored primarily by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Health Resources Services Administration's Maternal and Child Health Bureau (HRSA MCHB), the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH) is designed to produce data on the physical and emotional health of children under 18 years of age who live in the United States. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and United States Department of Health and Human Services' Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (HHS/CDC/NCBDDD) sponsor supplemental questions on the NSCH. The NSCH collects information on factors related to the well-being of children, including access to health care, in-home medical care, family interactions, parental health, school and after-school experiences, and neighborhood characteristics. The goal of the 2019 NSCH is to provide HRSA MCHB with the necessary data to support the production of national estimates yearly and state-based estimates with pooled samples on the health and well-being of children, their families, and their communities as well as estimates of the prevalence and impact of children with special health care needs.

    Treatment Groups and Experiments

    We have made minor content revisions for the 2019 NSCH. We also plan to monitor the continued effectiveness of unconditional incentives (the relative benefit for reducing survey non-response by providing a $0, $1, $2, or $5 incentive as a token of appreciation) and modifications to data collection strategies based on modeled information about paper or internet response preference. We will test an envelope overprint, a short message and simple image printed to the outside of the invitation envelope, designed to encourage respondents to open and read the invitation and a modified design for the screener invitation letter. We will also conduct a small test of a new screener card, a mechanism to more efficiently screen address eligibility. We will select approximately 184,000 addresses as the 2019 NSCH sample; around 4,000 of those addresses will be randomly assigned to the screener card test. Results from prior year surveys were used to inform the decisions made regarding this 2019 survey project.

    Based on the results from prior survey cycles and available funds, an unconditional cash incentive will be included with the initial mailing. Survey research indicates that incentives are a necessary and cost‐effective expense for achieving a response rate that minimizes nonresponse bias 1 . Our testing to date is consistent with this research. Evaluation of previous NSCH cycles showed that there was a statistically significant difference in the response rates when respondents received an incentive compared to those who were part of the control group that did not receive an incentive. The effect of the incentive was proportionately larger for household types that were less likely to respond in previous years, reducing nonresponse bias. There was a larger increase in response for households mailed a $5 incentive compared to those mailed a $2 incentive with their initial survey invite; both treatments proved effective at encouraging response and reducing nonresponse bias in 2018. We will continue to use $2 and $5 cash incentives going forward, and will include a test of a $1 cash incentive. A small group (20% or less) receiving no incentive will be included to monitor the effectiveness of the incentive in the initial mailing. For respondents who answer a paper screener interview and are mailed their first paper topical questionnaire, a $5 incentive will be used to reduce bias and gain cooperation for this critical second stage of paper questionnaire data collection.

    1 Brick JM, Williams D, Montaquila JM. 2011. “Address‐Based Sampling for Subpopulation Surveys”. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(3): 409-28; Foster EB, Frasier AM, Morrison HM, O'Connor KS, Blumberg SJ. 2010. “All Things Incentive: Exploring the Best Combination of Incentive Conditions”. Paper presented at the American Association for Public Opinion Research annual conference, Chicago, IL.

    In addition to testing incentives and developing materials, the 2019 NSCH will continue to serve as a platform to evaluate different nonresponse follow-up mailing strategies based on a household's likelihood to respond using a paper questionnaire. We assign a paper-preference probability to every address using American Community Survey (ACS) response mode choices, previous NSCH response mode choices, and small area geographic characteristics. The 30% of addresses with the highest paper-preference probability are assigned to the “High Paper” group and receive a paper questionnaire with the initial invitation. The other 70% of addresses are assigned to the “High Web” group and receive their first paper questionnaires in the second nonresponse follow-up screener invitation.

    Since there continues to be a significant potential for cost savings for web data collection over paper data collection, we are working to refine and retest an internet response indicator for future NSCH production cycles based on the results from prior data collection efforts.

    In 2019 and beyond, we will continue the use of a pressure-sealed reminder postcard. The reminder postcard will be mailed approximately one week after the initial survey invite mailing and the first nonresponse follow-up. We originally implemented this strategy because the time gap between mailings during the 2016 NSCH proved too long, and a significant dip in response flow was observed between mailings. The pressure-sealed postcard reminder proved effective in 2017 and 2018 at boosting response from the initial mailing and, in 2018, the first nonresponse follow-up. The ability to send reminders enclosed with a pressure-seal system allows us to include login information for the Centurion web instrument as well as specific information about the survey. The postcard also allows us to include a paragraph in Spanish that will direct the respondent to the Spanish web survey or the Telephone Questionnaire Assistance (TQA) line for assistance.

    As in prior administration of the NSCH, the 2019 NSCH will have a TQA line available to respondents who experience technical problems with the web instrument, have questions about the survey, or need other forms of assistance. TQA staff will be able to answer respondent questions and concerns, and also collect survey responses over the phone—if the respondent calls in and would like to have interviewer assistance in completing the interview. Also, respondents can submit questions by email. Email Questionnaire Assistance (EQA) agents will monitor the email account inbox and respond promptly.

    The 2018 NSCH tested a certified mail sticker, designed to encourage respondents to open the invitation envelope and respond to the NSCH. The sticker significantly increased response, but did not reduce nonresponse bias. The sticker also introduced logistical challenges that make current use as a treatment option untenable. Instead, we will test an envelope overprint, which is a short message on the outside of the envelope that can potentially encourage response and reduce nonresponse bias. Half of addresses (approximately 90,000) will receive the screener invitation in an envelope with the overprint; the other half of addresses will receive our standard white envelope. Packages can also include a modified version of the invitation letter designed to make the text more accessible, such as relocating some necessary information to a text box with a boundary.

    In both internet and paper collection modes, the survey design for the 2019 NSCH focuses on first collecting information about the children in the household and basic special health care needs, and then selecting a child from the household for follow-up to collect additional detailed topical information. If there is more than one eligible child in a household, a single child will be selected based on a sampling algorithm that considers the age and number of children as well as the presence of children with special health care needs. We estimate that, from the original 180,000 selected addresses that are assigned to the primary production cycle (excluding the 4,000 addresses assigned to the screener card test), our target screener return rate of 40.5% will yield approximately 72,900 responses to the screener. We then estimate that 50% of households from the first phase of the screener will be eligible to receive a topical questionnaire (households with children), and 70% of these households with children will return the topical questionnaire, resulting in approximately 25,515 completed topical interviews.2 A household could be selected for one of three age-based topical surveys: 0-to-5-year-old children, 6-to-11-year-old children, or 12-to-17-year-old children.

    2 The topical return rate was calculated using an average of the web topical return rate (95%) and the paper topical return rate (45%). The return rate includes fully complete topicals and sufficient partial topicals out of all completed screeners. The completion rate (31% for topicals) and response rate (40.4%) calculations on the following page additionally includes households in the denominator that are estimated to have eligible children, but who did not complete screeners.

    For the 4,000 screener card test addresses, we anticipate that 50% (2,000 addresses) will return the screener card and 10% (400 addresses) will use the web instrument.

    Census staff have developed a plan to select a production sample of approximately 184,000 households (addresses) from a Master Address File (MAF)-based sampling frame, with split panels to test mode of administration (i.e., high-web and low-web), and improvements to contact materials and strategies. Based on results of the prior NSCH incentive experiments, we plan to use small, unconditional cash incentives with a control group receiving no incentive to monitor the effectiveness of the incentive expenditures. For respondents who answer the paper screener and are mailed a paper topical questionnaire, an additional incentive is expected for that mailing. The recommendation for the amount of this secondary incentive will be based on the results of the 2016 NSCH and available funding. From prior cycles of the NSCH, using American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) definitions of response, we can expect an overall screener completion rate for the 2019 NSCH to be about 45% and a 31% overall topical completion rate.3 This is different from the total overall response rate, which we expect to be about 40.4%.4

    3 Screener Completion Rate is the propotion of screener-eligible households (i.e., occupied residences) that completed a screener. It is equal to (S+X)/(S+X+R+e(UR+UO)), where S is the count of completed screeners with children, X is completed screeners without children, R, is screener refusals, and e(UR+UO) is the estimated count of screener eligible households among nonresponding addressess.

    The Tropical Completion Rate is the proportion of topical-eligible houshoulds (i.e., occupied residences with children present) that completed a topical questionnaire. It is equal to I/HCt, where I is the count of completed topicals and HCt is the estimated count of households with children in the sample or S+R+(S+R)/(S+X+R)*e(UR+UO).

    4 Total Response Rate is the proportion of screener-eligible households that completed a screener or topical questionnaire. It is equal to (X+I+P)/(X+I+P+RS+eUS), where I is the count of completed topicals, P is the count of sufficient partial completed topicals, RS is screener refusals, and eUS is the estimated count of screener eligible households among nonresponding addresses.

    II. Method of Collection Web Push

    The production 2019 NSCH plan for the web push data collection design includes 70% of the estimated 180,000 primary production addresses receiving an initial invite with instructions on how to complete an English or Spanish-language screening questionnaire via the web. Households that decide to complete the web-based survey will be taken through the screening questionnaire to determine if they screen into one of the three topical instruments. Households that list at least one child who is 0 to 17 years old in the screener are directed into a topical questionnaire immediately after the last screener question. If a household in the web push treatment group decides to complete the paper screener, the household may have a chance to receive an additional topical questionnaire incentive.

    Mixed-Mode

    The production 2019 NSCH plan for the mixed-mode data collection design includes approximately 30% of the 180,000 primary production addresses receiving both an initial invite with a paper screening questionnaire and instructions on how to complete an English or Spanish language screening questionnaire via the web. Households that decide to complete the web-based survey will follow the same screening and topical selection path as the web push. Households that choose to complete the paper screener questionnaire rather than completing the survey on the internet and that have eligible children will be mailed a paper topical questionnaire upon receipt of their completed paper screener at the Census Bureau's National Processing Center. If a household in the mixed-mode group chooses to complete the paper screener instead of completing by internet, then the household may receive an additional topical questionnaire incentive.

    Follow-Up Reminder Design

    Prior to Census administration of the survey, the NSCH was conducted by the Health Services Resources Administration's Maternal and Child Health Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics. As such, the survey information was sent to respondents under letterhead from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with the Director of NCHS signing the letters to the respondent.

    In the 2016 NSCH, we tested both standard contact branding utilized for Census Bureau surveys, which included Census Bureau letterhead and the Census Director's signature, and an alternative sent with HRSA MCHB branding. The first follow-up mailing, sent to non-responding households approximately three-weeks after their initial invitation to respond to the survey by web, was split into two groups. The first group was sent a reminder to participate with their web login and password under standard Census Bureau letterhead. Response was higher from those addresses receiving the standard Census branding.

    Non-Response Follow-Up for the “High Web” Group and “High Paper” Group

    The “High Web” group will receive two web survey invitation letters requesting their participation in the survey prior to receiving their first paper screener questionnaire in the second follow-up mailing. The “High Paper” group will receive both a web survey invitation letter along with a mailed paper screener questionnaire with the initial invitation and each follow-up mailing. Once a household in the “High Web” group receives a paper screener questionnaire, it will then have the option to either complete the web-based survey or complete the mailed paper screener, similar to the “High Paper” group. If the household chooses to complete the mailed paper questionnaire, then they would then be considered part of the mailout/mailback paper-and-pencil interviewing treatment group. The paper-and-pencil treatment group receives a paper topical questionnaire, if there is at least one eligible child who is 0 to 17 years old listed on the screener. Nonresponse follow-up for the topical questionnaire will include up to one pressure-sealed postcard and up to three mailings including the paper topical questionnaire.

    The 2019 NSCH will also include a small screener card test. The screener card is a single-page instrument designed to screen household eligibility for the NSCH. An additional 4,000 addresses will receive the screener card in place of the traditional screener instrument. They will have the option to report only if there are children present at the address or not. Respondents will also have the option to report using the web instrument. We anticipate that the screener card instrument will reduce respondent burden for households without children and allow us to more efficiently identify households with children.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0990.

    Form Number(s): NSCH-S1 (English Screener), NSCH-T1 (English Topical for 0- to 5-year-old children), NSCH-T2 (English Topical for 6- to 11-year-old children), NSCH-T3 (English Topical for 12- to 17-year-old children), NSCH-S-S1 (Spanish Screener), NSCH-S-T1 (Spanish Topical for 0- to 5-year-old children), NSCH-S-T2 (Spanish Topical for 6- to 11-year-old children), NSCH-S-T3 (Spanish Topical for 12- to 17-year-old children), and NSCH-SC1 (Screener Card—perforated).

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Parents, researchers, policymakers, and family advocates.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 72,900 for the screener, 25,515 for the topical, 2,000 for the screener card, and 400 screener card respondents using the web instrument.

    Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes per screener response, 33 minutes per topical response, 2 minutes per screener card response, and 38 minutes per screener card response using the web instrument.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 20,428 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 (This is not the cost of respondents' time, but the indirect costs respondents may incur for such things as purchases of specialized software or hardware needed to report, or expenditures for accounting or records maintenance services required specifically by the collection.)

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Legal Authority:

    Title 13 U.S.C. Section 8(b);42 U.S.C. 701; 1769d(a)(4)(B); 42 U.S.C. 241; 7 U.S.C. 136r(a); and 15 U.S.C. 2609.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24681 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census [Docket Number 180927893-8893-01] Census Designated Places (CDPs) for the 2020 Census—Final Criteria AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final criteria and program implementation.

    SUMMARY:

    Census designated places (CDPs) are statistical geographic entities representing closely settled, unincorporated communities that are locally recognized and identified by name. They are the statistical equivalents of incorporated places, with the primary differences being the lack of a legally defined boundary and an active, functioning governmental structure, chartered by the state and administered by elected officials. CDPs defined for the 2020 Census will also be used to tabulate American Community Survey, Puerto Rico Community Survey, and Economic Census data after 2020, and potentially data from other Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) censuses and surveys. The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining CDPs for the 2020 Census. In addition to CDPs, the program also encompasses the review and update of census tracts, block groups, and census county divisions.

    DATES:

    This notice's final criteria will be applicable on December 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information on this program should be directed to Vincent Osier, Geographic Standards, Criteria, and Quality Branch, Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, via email at [email protected] or telephone at 301-763-3056.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Census designated places (CDPs) 1 are statistical geographic entities representing closely settled, unincorporated communities that are locally recognized and identified by name. They are the statistical equivalents of incorporated places, with the primary differences being the lack of a legally defined boundary and an active, functioning governmental structure, chartered by the state and administered by elected officials. CDPs defined for the 2020 Census will also be used to tabulate American Community Survey, Puerto Rico Community Survey, and Economic Census data after 2020, and potentially data from other Census Bureau censuses and surveys.

    1 The term CDP includes comunidades and zonas urbanas in Puerto Rico.

    The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining CDPs for the 2020 Census. The Census Bureau did not receive any comments in response to proposed criteria published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6934). After publication of final criteria in the Federal Register, the Census Bureau will offer designated governments or organizations an opportunity to review and, if necessary, suggest updates to the boundaries and attributes of the CDPs in their geographic area under the Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP). In addition to CDPs, the program also encompasses the review and update of census tracts, block groups, and census county divisions.

    I. History

    The CDP concept and delineation criteria have evolved over the past seven decades in response to data user needs for place-level data. This evolution has taken into account differences in the way in which places were perceived, and the propensity for places to incorporate in various states. The result, over time, has been an increase in the number and types of unincorporated communities identified as CDPs. This also results in an increasing consistency in the relationship between the CDP concept and the kinds of places encompassed by the incorporated place category, or a compromise between localized perceptions of place and a concept that would be familiar to data users throughout the United States,2 Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas.3

    2 For Census Bureau purposes, the United States typically refers to only the fifty states and the District of Columbia, and does not include the U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, the Island Areas, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands).

    3 The Island Areas include the U.S. territories American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. There are no CDPs in American Samoa or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands because villages are considered incorporated places and cover the entire territory and population in each territory

    Although not as numerous as incorporated places or municipalities,4 CDPs have been important geographic entities since their introduction for the 1950 Census (CDPs were referred to as “unincorporated places” from 1950 through the 1970 decennial censuses). For the 1950 Census, CDPs were defined only outside urbanized areas and were required to have at least 1,000 residents. For the 1960 Census, CDPs could also be identified inside urbanized areas outside of New England, but these were required to have at least 10,000 residents. The Census Bureau modified the population threshold within urbanized areas to 5,000 residents in 1970, allowed for CDPs in urbanized areas in New England in 1980, and lowered the threshold for CDPs within urbanized areas to 2,500 in 1990. In time, other population thresholds were adopted for identification of CDPs in Alaska, Puerto Rico, the Island Areas, and on American Indian reservations (AIRs). The Census Bureau eliminated all population threshold requirements for Census 2000, achieving consistency between CDPs and incorporated places, for which the Census Bureau historically has published data without regard to population size.

    4 Known by various terms throughout the United States: Cities, towns (except in the six New England states, New York, and Wisconsin), villages, and boroughs (except in New York and Alaska).

    According to the 2010 Census, more than 38.7 million people in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas lived in CDPs. The relative importance of CDPs varies from state to state depending on laws governing municipal incorporation and annexation, but also depending on local preferences and attitudes regarding the identification of places.

    II. Summary of Comments Received in Response to Proposed Criteria

    The Census Bureau's proposed criteria for the 2020 Census were unchanged from the final criteria used to delineate CDPs for the 2010 Census. The Census Bureau did not receive any comments in response to the proposed criteria published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6934). As a result, the proposed criteria are adopted as final criteria without change.

    III. CDP Criteria and Guidelines for the 2020 Census

    The criteria outlined herein apply to the United States, including AIRs and off-reservation trust lands, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas. In accordance with the final criteria, the Census Bureau may modify and, if necessary, reject any proposals for CDPs that do not meet the established criteria. In addition, the Census Bureau reserves the right to modify the boundaries and attributes of CDPs as needed to maintain geographic relationships before the final tabulation geography is set for the 2020 Census.

    The Census Bureau proposes the following criteria and guidelines for use in identifying the areas that will qualify for designation as CDPs for use in tabulating data from the 2020 Census, the American Community Survey, the Puerto Rico Community Survey, the Economic Census, and potentially other Census Bureau censuses and surveys.

    1. A CDP constitutes a single, closely settled center of population that is named. To the extent possible, individual unincorporated communities should be identified as separate CDPs. Similarly, a single community should be defined as a single CDP rather than multiple CDPs with each part referencing the community name and a directional term (i.e., north, south, east, or west). Since a CDP is defined to provide data for a single, named locality, the Census Bureau generally will not accept combinations of places and hyphenated place names defined as a CDP. In the past, communities were often combined as a single CDP in order to comply with the Census Bureau's former minimum population requirements. The Census Bureau's elimination of population threshold criteria starting with Census 2000 made such combinations unnecessary. Other communities were combined because visible features were not available for use as boundaries for separate CDPs. The Census Bureau's policy to allow the use of some nonvisible boundaries so that participants can separate individual communities has dispensed with the need to have multi-place CDPs.

    Multiple communities may only be combined to form a single CDP when the identities of these communities have become so intertwined that the communities are commonly perceived and referenced as a single place. For example, the communities of Arden and Arcade in California have grown together over time and residents commonly use the place name Arden-Arcade. Further, because of the intertwined identity, residents would have difficulty identifying a boundary between the separate, historical communities of Arden and Arcade. Multiple communities may also be defined as a single CDP when there are no distinguishable or suitable features in the landscape that can be used as a boundary between the communities, even if the two communities still have separate identities. For example, the CDP of Ashton-Sandy Spring in Maryland encompasses two communities that still maintain separate identities in common, daily usage. The two communities, however, have grown together to such an extent that a clear break between the two communities is no longer identifiable in the landscape. In general, when considering whether to combine multiple communities as a single CDP, the following questions should be taken into account:

    • Do residents commonly perceive and refer to the communities as a single entity?

    • Are there landscape elements, such as signs, that use a hyphenated name for the community?

    • Can residents or other knowledgeable individuals identify clear, commonly accepted boundaries for the individual communities?

    2. A CDP generally consists of a contiguous cluster of census blocks comprising a single piece of territory and containing a mix of residential, nonresidential, and commercial uses similar to that of an incorporated place of similar size. Some CDPs, however, may be predominantly residential; such places should represent recognizably distinct, locally known communities, but not typical suburban subdivisions. Examples of such predominantly residential communities that can be recognized as CDPs are colonias, small rural communities, and unincorporated resort and retirement communities.

    3. A CDP may not be located, either partially or entirely, within an incorporated place or another CDP.

    4. A CDP may be located in more than one county but must not cross state boundaries. It is important to note, however, that since county boundaries provide important demarcations for communities, CDPs that cross county lines should be kept to a minimum and identified only when the community clearly sees itself existing on both sides of a county boundary.

    5. There are no minimum population or housing unit thresholds for defining CDPs; however, a CDP must contain some population or housing units or both. For the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau will not accept a CDP delineated with zero population and zero housing units. The Census Bureau recognizes that some communities, such as a resort or other kinds of seasonal communities, may lack population at certain times of the year. Nevertheless, there should be some evidence, generally in the form of houses, barracks, dormitories, commercial buildings and/or other nonresidential structures, providing the basis for local perception of the place's existence. The Census Bureau will review the number of housing units within the place, as reported in the previous decennial census or as seen in imagery, and consider whether additional information is needed before recognizing the CDP. Participants submitting boundaries for places with less than ten housing units may be asked to provide additional information attesting to the existence of the CDP.

    6. CDP boundaries should follow visible features, except in those circumstances when a CDP's boundary is coincident with the nonvisible boundary of a state, county, minor civil division (in the six New England states, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), or incorporated place. CDP boundaries may follow other nonvisible features in instances where reliance upon visible features would result in overbounding of the CDP in order to include housing units on both sides of a road or street feature. Such boundaries might include parcel boundaries and public land survey system lines; fence lines; national, state, or local park boundaries; ridgelines; or drainage ditches.

    7. The CDP name should be one that is recognized and used in daily communication by the residents of the community. Because unincorporated communities generally lack legally defined boundaries, a commonly used community name and the geographic extent of its use by local residents is often the best identifier of the extent of a place, the assumption being that if residents associate with a particular name and use it to identify the place in which they live, then the CDP's boundaries can be mapped based on the use of the name. There should be features in the landscape that use the name, such that a non-resident would have a general sense of the location or extent of the community; for example, signs indicating when one is entering the community; highway exit signs that use the name; or businesses, schools, or other buildings that make use of the name. It should not be a name developed solely for planning or other purposes (including simply to obtain data from the Census Bureau) that is not in regular daily use by the local residents and business establishments.

    8. A CDP may not have the same name as an adjacent or nearby incorporated place. If the community does not have a name that distinguishes it from other nearby communities, then the community is not a distinct place. The use of directional terms (“north”, “south”, “east”, “west”, and so forth) to merely differentiate the name of a CDP from a nearby municipality where this name is not in local use is not acceptable. For example, the name “North Laurel” would be permitted if this name were in local use. The name “Laurel North” would not be permitted if it were not in local use. Again, this has much to do with the way in which people typically refer to the places in which they live. It is permissible to change the name of a 2010 CDP for the 2020 Census if the new name provides a better identification of the community.

    IV. Definitions of Key Terms

    American Indian off-reservation trust land—An area of land located outside the boundaries of an AIR, whose boundaries are established by deed, and which are held in trust by the U.S. federal government for a federally recognized American Indian tribe or members of that tribe.

    American Indian reservation (AIR)—An area of land with boundaries established by final treaty, statute, executive order, and/or court order and over which a federally recognized American Indian tribal government has governmental authority. Along with “reservation,” designations such as colonies, communities, pueblos, rancherias, and reserves apply to AIRs.

    Census block—A geographic area bounded by visible and/or invisible features shown on a map prepared by the Census Bureau. A block is the smallest geographic entity for which the Census Bureau tabulates and publishes decennial census data.

    Coextensive—A description of two or more geographic entities that cover exactly the same area, with all boundaries shared.

    Colonia—A small, generally unincorporated community located in one of the states on the U.S.-Mexico border where residents often build or provide their own housing and that usually lacks utilities, paved roads, and other infrastructure typically found other similarly sized communities.

    Comunidad—A CDP in Puerto Rico that is not related to a municipio's seat of government, called an aldea or a ciudad prior to the 1990 Census.

    Contiguous—A description of areas sharing common boundary lines, more than a single point, such that the areas, when combined, form a single piece of territory. Noncontiguous areas form disjoint pieces.

    Housing unit—A house, an apartment, a mobile home or trailer, or a group of rooms or a single room occupied as a separate living quarter or, if vacant, intended for occupancy as a separate living quarter. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live and eat separately from any other residents of the building and which have direct access from outside the building or through a common hall.

    Incorporated place—A type of governmental unit, incorporated under state law as a city, town (except in New England, New York, and Wisconsin), borough (except in Alaska and New York), or village, generally to provide governmental services for a concentration of people within legally prescribed boundaries.

    Minor civil division (MCD)—The primary governmental or administrative division of a county in 28 states and the Island Areas having legal boundaries, names, and descriptions. The MCDs represent many different types of legal entities with a wide variety of characteristics, powers, and functions depending on the state and type of MCD. In some states, some or all of the incorporated places also constitute MCDs.

    Municipio—A type of governmental unit that is the primary legal subdivision of Puerto Rico. The Census Bureau treats the municipio as the statistical equivalent of a county.

    Nonvisible feature—A map feature that is not visible on the ground and in imagery such as a city or county boundary through space, a property line, or line-of-sight extension of a road.

    Statistical geographic entity—A geographic entity that is specially defined and delineated, such as block group, CDP, or census tract, so that the Census Bureau may tabulate data for it. Designation as a statistical entity neither conveys nor confers legal ownership, entitlement, or jurisdictional authority.

    Urbanized area (UA)—An area consisting of a central place(s) and adjacent urban fringe that together have a minimum residential population of at least 50,000 people and generally an overall population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile. The Census Bureau uses published criteria to determine the qualification and boundaries of UAs at the time of each decennial census.

    Visible feature—A map feature that can be seen on the ground and in imagery, such as a road, railroad track, major above-ground transmission line or pipeline, river, stream, shoreline, fence, sharply defined mountain ridge, or cliff. A nonstandard visible feature is a feature that may not be clearly defined on the ground (such as a ridge), may be seasonal (such as an intermittent stream), or may be relatively impermanent (such as a fence). The Census Bureau generally requests verification that nonstandard features used as boundaries for the PSAP geographic areas pose no problem in their location during field work.

    Zona urbana—In Puerto Rico, the settled area functioning as the seat of government for a municipio. A zona urbana cannot cross a municipio boundary.

    Dated: October 30, 2018. Ron S. Jarmin, Deputy Director, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24571 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census [Docket Number 180926886-8886-01] Block Groups for the 2020 Census—Final Criteria AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final criteria and program implementation.

    SUMMARY:

    Block groups are statistical geographic subdivisions of a census tract defined for the tabulation and presentation of data from the decennial census and selected other statistical programs. Block groups also will be used to tabulate and publish estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) after 2020 and potentially data from other Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) censuses and surveys. The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining block groups for the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP). In addition to block groups, the program also encompasses the review and update of census tracts, census designated places, and census county divisions.

    DATES:

    This notice's final criteria will be applicable on December 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information on this program should be directed to Vincent Osier at the Geographic Standards, Criteria, and Quality Branch, Geography Division, U.S. Census Bureau, via email at [email protected] or by telephone at 301-763-3056.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Block groups are statistical geographic subdivisions of a census tract defined for the tabulation and presentation of data from the decennial census and selected other statistical programs. Block groups also will be used to tabulate and publish estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) 1 after 2020 and potentially data from other Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) censuses and surveys.

    1 The ACS is conducted in the United States and in Puerto Rico. In Puerto Rico the survey is called the Puerto Rico Community Survey. For ease of discussion, throughout this document the term ACS is used to represent the surveys conducted in the United States and in Puerto Rico.

    The Census Bureau is publishing this notice in the Federal Register to announce final criteria for defining block groups for the 2020 Census. In addition to providing final criteria for block groups, this notice also contains a summary of comments received in response to proposed criteria published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6937), as well as the Census Bureau's response to those comments. After publication of this final criteria in the Federal Register, the Census Bureau will offer designated governments or organizations an opportunity to review and, if necessary, suggest updates to the boundaries and attributes of the block groups in their geographic area under the Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP). In addition to block groups, the program also encompasses the review and update of census tracts, census designated places, and census county divisions. The Census Bureau published a notice, explaining PSAP process and participation, in the Federal Register on November 28, 2017 (82 FR 56208).

    I. History of Block Groups

    The Census Bureau first delineated block groups as statistical geographic divisions of census tracts for the 1970 Census, comprising contiguous combinations of census blocks for data presentation purposes. At that time, census block groups only existed in urbanized areas in which census blocks were defined. Block groups were defined without regard to political and administrative boundaries, with an average population of 1,000, and to be approximately equal in area.

    As use of census block, block group, and census tract data increased among data users, the Census Bureau expanded these programs to cover additional geographic areas while redefining the population threshold criteria to more adequately suit data users' needs. The 1990 Census was the first in which census blocks and block groups were defined throughout the entirety of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas. For the 2000 Census, as with census tracts, the Census Bureau increased the number of geographic areas whose boundaries could be used as block group boundaries, and allowed tribal governments of federally recognized American Indian tribes with a reservation and/or off-reservation trust lands to delineate tribal block groups without regard to state and/or county boundaries, provided the tribe had a 1990 Census population of at least 1,000.

    For the 2010 Census, the Census Bureau adopted changes to block group criteria that recognized their utility as a framework of small geographic areas and established tribal block groups as a geographic framework for presenting and analyzing statistical and other data for a variety of communities, settlement patterns, and landscapes. The Census Bureau augmented its minimum and maximum population threshold with housing unit thresholds for use in defining block groups for seasonal communities that have no or low population on census day (April 1). In addition, the Census Bureau formalized criteria for block groups defined for employment centers, airports, parks, large water bodies, and other special land uses that had been permitted in previous decades, but never specified within the criteria. The Census Bureau also established tribal block groups as a geographic framework defined within federally recognized American Indian reservations and off-reservation trust lands that is fully separate from the standard block groups defined within counties.

    II. Summary of Comments Received in Response to the Proposed Criteria

    The Federal Register notice published on February 15, 2018 (83 FR 6937) requested comment on the proposed block group criteria for the 2020 Census. The proposed criteria were unchanged from the final criteria adopted for the 2010 Census.

    The Census Bureau received comments from 16 individuals on one or more topics related to (1) use of non-visible political boundaries when defining block groups, (2) use of employment data to define block groups encompassing areas with substantial amounts of commercial, industrial, or other non-residential activity for the purpose of transportation planning, and (3) defining block groups to align with former census tract boundaries when census tracts are merged. Commenters represented state and local government agencies, regional planning organizations and councils of governments, state data centers, and non-governmental organizations. Comments received by the Census Bureau are summarized below, as well as the Census Bureau's response to these comments.

    1. Using Non-Visible Minor Civil Division Boundaries in Michigan as Block Group Boundaries

    The Census Bureau received three comments from individuals in Michigan noting that all minor civil division (MCD) boundaries in Michigan should be permitted to be block group boundaries for the 2020 Census as was the case in the past. The commenters correctly noted that in Table 1, Acceptable Minor Civil Division and Incorporated Place Boundaries, the proposed criteria were in error with regard to Michigan. The Census Bureau has corrected the table in the final criteria.

    2. Defining Block Groups on the Basis of Employment and Jobs

    The Census Bureau received 14 comments related to defining block groups encompassing areas with concentrations of employment and jobs or other types of non-residential uses to improve the utility of block groups for transportation and journey-to-work analysis and planning. Eleven commenters suggested adoption of a minimum threshold of 600 workers/jobs (and no maximum or optimum thresholds) to be applied as an alternative to the existing minimum population or housing unit threshold or in combination with population or housing unit thresholds. One commenter supported the use of worker/job counts when defining block groups, but did not specify a minimum threshold. Two commenters expressed support for modifying criteria for special use block groups primarily to improve identification of block groups encompassing areas with concentrations of employment. One of these commenters noted that applying employment thresholds was not necessary as the sample design for the American Community Survey (which is the source for much of the demographic data used in journey-to-work analysis) focused on residential population concentrations and not employment concentrations. Changes to the special use block group criteria could achieve the result desired by commenters proposing employment thresholds and could also provide greater flexibility when defining block groups.

    Based on consideration of the comments received on this topic and further discussion with stakeholders in the transportation community, the Census Bureau will change its criteria for defining special use block groups to no longer specify minimum land area requirements. Special use block groups should be comparable in land area size to surrounding block groups so as to assure data reliability and quality when reporting on workplace-related data and to avoid data disclosure issues. The Census Bureau also recommends that, when defining special use block groups encompassing employment centers and areas with concentrations of jobs, PSAP participants should strive for a minimum threshold of 600 workers/jobs.

    3. Defining Block Groups To Follow Former Census Tract Boundaries

    One commenter proposed that, when census tracts are merged, an effort should be made to align the boundaries for block groups within the new census tract with the boundaries of the former census tracts that were merged. The commenter noted that this would facilitate historical comparisons of data, particularly when chronicling change in the sociodemographic characteristics of neighborhoods, allowing data users to use block group data to bridge back to previous decades' census tracts.

    The Census Bureau agrees with the sentiments expressed by this commenter. We also agree with the suggestion to align block group boundaries with the boundaries of former census tracts in those instances in which census tracts have been merged and will update both the final block group and final census tract criteria accordingly.

    III. General Principles and Criteria for Block Groups for the 2020 Census A. General Principles

    1. Block groups are statistical geographic subdivisions of a census tract and are the smallest geographic areas for which the Census Bureau provides sample data, primarily from the ACS 5-year period estimates.

    2. Block groups form the geographic framework within which census blocks are numbered.

    3. In order to ensure a minimal level of reliability in sample data and minimize potential disclosures of sensitive information, a block group should contain either at least 600 people or at least 240 housing units at minimum, and 3,000 people or 1,200 housing units at maximum. The housing unit criterion is used to accommodate areas that are occupied seasonally and may otherwise show a discrepancy between decennial and ACS figures. 2 For the ACS, block groups are not designed to be used individually, rather they provide a smaller geographic area than census tracts that allow data users to combine them to create larger geographic areas that may be more meaningful for their specific use.

    2 “Occupied seasonally” refers to seasonal communities in which residents often are not present on the date of the decennial census, but will be present at other times of the year and for which estimates may be reflected in the ACS. The ACS is designed to produce local area data as of a 12-month period estimate (or an average).

    4. The Census Bureau also recognizes that there are significant geographic areas that are characterized by unique populations (e.g., prisons or universities) or not characterized by residential populations at all (e.g., National Parks or large bodies of water) which local participants may wish to exclude from populated block groups for either analytical or cartographic purposes. These areas may be designated as special use block groups to distinguish them from standard populated block groups. Special land and/or water use block groups are not required, but if delineated they must be designated as a specific type of special use (discussed below), have an official name, ideally have no residential population or housing units or at least meet all minimum population or housing thresholds mention above, and must not create noncontiguous block groups. While there are no longer minimum land area measurement thresholds for special uses block groups in urban or rural areas, such block groups should be comparable in size to surrounding block groups, particularly if defined to encompass employment centers or other areas containing a greater concentration of jobs than residents. The Census Bureau recognizes that some special use areas not intended for residential population, such as parks, may contain some minimal population, such as caretakers or the homeless, but since the primary purpose of block groups is to help provide high-quality statistical data about the population, the participant and the Census Bureau must decide if a special use block group would be useful in such a situation.

    B. Criteria

    The criteria herein apply to the United States, including federally recognized American Indian reservations (AIRs) and off-reservation trust lands (ORTLs), Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas. 3 The Census Bureau may modify and, if necessary, reject any proposals for block groups that do not meet the published criteria. In addition, the Census Bureau reserves the right to modify the boundaries and attributes of block groups as needed to meet the published criteria and/or maintain geographic relationships before or after the final tabulation geography is set for the 2020 Census.

    3 For Census Bureau purposes, the United States typically refers to only the fifty states and the District of Columbia, and does not include the U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, the Island Areas, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands). The Island Areas includes American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The U.S. Minor Outlying Islands are an aggregation of nine U.S. territories: Baker Island, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef, Midway Islands, Navassa Island, Palmyra Atoll, and Wake Island.

    The Census Bureau sets forth the following criteria for use in reviewing, updating, and delineating 2020 Census block groups:

    1. Block groups must not cross census tract boundaries.

    This criterion takes precedence over all other criteria or requirements. By definition, because census tracts cannot cross county 4 and state boundaries, neither can block groups. It is only permissible to define a block group with fewer than 600 people in a county that has a population less than 600, coextensive with a special use census tract, or as a special use block group delineated within a standard census tract.

    4 For the Census Bureau's purposes, the term “county” includes parishes in Louisiana; boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and census areas in Alaska; independent cities in Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia; districts and islands in American Samoa; districts in the U.S. Virgin Islands; municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; municipios in Puerto Rico; and the areas constituting the District of Columbia and Guam. This notice will refer to all these entities collectively as “counties”.

    2. Block groups must cover the entire land and water area of each census tract.

    Because census tracts must cover the entire area of a county, by definition, block groups also must cover the entire area of each census tract within each county.

    3. A block group must comprise a reasonably compact and contiguous land area.

    Noncontiguous boundaries are permitted only where a contiguous area or inaccessible area would not meet population or housing unit count requirements for a separate block group, in which case the noncontiguous or inaccessible area must be combined within an adjacent or proximate block group. For example, an island that does not meet the minimum population threshold for recognition as a separate block group should be combined with other proximate land to form a single block group. Each case will be reviewed and accepted at the Census Bureau's discretion.

    4. Block group boundaries should follow visible and identifiable features.

    To make the location of block group boundaries less ambiguous, wherever possible, block group boundaries should follow significant, visible, easily identifiable features. The use of visible features facilitates the location and identification of block group boundaries in the field, both on the ground and in imagery. The selection of permanent physical features also increases the stability of the boundaries over time, as the locations of many visible features in the landscape tend to change infrequently. If block group boundaries are changed, they should not be moved from a more significant feature (e.g., a highway or a major river) to a less significant feature (e.g., a neighborhood road or a small tributary stream). The Census Bureau also requires the use of state and county boundaries in all states to be used as census tract and block group boundaries. The Census Bureau also permits the use of incorporated place and minor civil division (MCD) boundaries in states where those boundaries tend to remain unchanged over time (see Table 1).

    The following features are preferred as block group boundaries for the 2020 Census:

    a. State, county, and census tract boundaries must always be block group boundaries. This criterion takes precedence over all other boundary criteria or requirements.

    b. AIR and ORTL boundaries.

    c. Visible, perennial, stable, relatively permanent natural and constructed features, such as roads, shorelines, rivers, perennial streams and canals, railroad tracks, or above-ground high-tension power lines.

    d. Boundaries of legal and administrative entities in selected states. Table 1 identifies by state which MCD and incorporated place boundaries may be used as block group boundaries.

    e. Additionally, the following legally defined, administrative boundaries are permitted as block group boundaries:

    i. Barrio, barrio-pueblo, and subbarrio boundaries in Puerto Rico;

    ii. Census subdistrict and estate boundaries in the U.S. Virgin Islands;

    iii. County and island boundaries (both MCD equivalents) in American Samoa;

    iv. Election district boundaries in Guam;

    v. Municipal district boundaries in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; and

    vi. Alaska Native Regional corporation boundaries in Alaska, at the discretion of the Census Bureau, insofar as such boundaries are unambiguous for allocating living quarters as part of 2020 Census activities.

    f. The boundaries of large parks, forests, airports, penitentiaries/prisons, and/or military installations, provided the boundaries are clearly marked or easily recognized in the field in imagery and on the ground.

    g. When acceptable visible and governmental boundary features are not available for use as block group boundaries, the Census Bureau may, at its discretion, approve other nonstandard visible features, such as major ridgelines, above-ground pipelines, intermittent streams, or fence lines. The Census Bureau may also accept, on a case-by-case basis, relatively short stretches of boundaries of selected nonstandard and potentially nonvisible features, such as cadastral and parcel boundaries or the straight-line extensions or other lines-of-sight between acceptable visible features.

    Table 1—Acceptable Minor Civil Division (MCD) and Incorporated Place Boundaries State All MCD boundaries Boundaries of MCDs not
  • coincident with
  • the boundaries of incorporated places that themselves are MCDs
  • All
  • incorporated
  • place
  • boundaries
  • Only conjoint incorporated place
  • boundaries
  • Alabama X Alaska X Arizona X Arkansas X California X Colorado X Connecticut X X Delaware X Florida X Georgia X Hawaii Idaho X Illinois X a X Indiana X X Iowa X X Kansas X X Kentucky X Louisiana X Maine X X Maryland X Massachusetts X X Michigan X X Minnesota X X Mississippi X Missouri X b X Montana X Nebraska X a X Nevada X New Hampshire X X New Jersey X X New Mexico X New York X X North Carolina X North Dakota X X Ohio X X Oklahoma X Oregon X Pennsylvania X X Rhode Island X X South Carolina X South Dakota X X Tennessee X Texas X Utah X Vermont X X Virginia X Washington X West Virginia X Wisconsin X X Wyoming X a Townships only. b Governmental townships only.
    5. Population, Housing Unit, and Area Measurement Thresholds

    The following are the population, housing unit, and area measurement threshold criteria for block groups (as summarized in Table 2). The same population and housing unit thresholds apply to all types of non-special use block groups, including those delineated for AIRs and ORTLs, the Island Areas, and encompassing group quarters, military installations, and institutions.

    Table 2—Block Group Thresholds Block group type Threshold types Minimum Maximum Standard & tribal block groups Population thresholds 600 3,000 Housing unit thresholds 240 1,200 Special use block groups Area measurement At least comparable in land area size to surrounding block groups At least comparable in land area size to surrounding block groups. Population thresholds None (or very little), or must be within the standard block group thresholds.

    a. 2010 Census population counts should be used in census block group review in most cases. Housing unit counts should be used for block groups in seasonal communities that have little or no population on Census Day (April 1). Locally produced population and housing unit estimates can be used when reviewing and updating block groups, especially in areas that have experienced considerable growth since the 2010 Census.

    b. The housing unit thresholds are based on a national average of 2.5 people per household. The Census Bureau recognizes that there are regional variations to this average, and will take this into consideration when reviewing all census block group proposals.

    c. For the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau will allow the delineation of special use census tracts, and special use block groups will be created coextensive with these special use census tracts, but they are not required. A special use census tract, and hence a special use block group, must be designated as a specific use type (e.g., state park), must have an official name (e.g., Jay Cooke State Park), have no (or very little) residential population or meet population or housing unit thresholds, and must not create a noncontiguous census tract/block group. In some instances, multiple areas can be combined to form a single special land use census tract/block group if the land management characteristics are similar, such as a special land use census tract/block group comprising an area with a concentration of employment or adjacent federal and state parks. Any resulting special use census tract/block group should be at least as large in area as the surrounding adjacent standard, populated census tracts/block groups.

    6. Identification of Block Groups

    a. A block group encompasses a cluster of census blocks. Each standard block group is identified using a single-digit number that will correspond to the first digit in the number of each census block encompassed by the block group. For example, block group 3 includes all census blocks numbered in the 3000 range within a single census tract.

    b. The range of acceptable standard block group numbers is 1 through 9.

    c. Block group numbers must be unique within a census tract.

    7. Block Group Types

    Table 3 provides a summary of the types of block groups (with their respective population, housing unit, and area measurement thresholds) that the Census Bureau will use for the 2020 Census.

    Table 3—Summary of Block Group Types Block group types Distinction from standard block groups Population thresholds Housing unit thresholds Area measurement thresholds Standard block groups Min: 600, Max: 3,000 Min: 240, Max: 1,200 None. Tribal block groups Tribal block groups are conceptually similar and equivalent to census block groups defined within the standard state-county-tract-block group geographic hierarchy used for tabulating and publishing statistical data Min: 600, Max: 3,000 Min: 240, Max: 1,200 None. Special use block groups A block group, usually coextensive with a special census tract, encompassing an employment center, large airport, public park, public forest, or large water body with no (or very little) population or housing units None (or very little) or within the standard block group thresholds None (or very little) or within the standard block group thresholds At least comparable in size to surrounding standard block groups. C. Tribal Block Groups

    Tribal block groups are statistical geographic entities defined by the Census Bureau in cooperation with tribal officials to provide meaningful, relevant, and reliable data for small geographic areas within the boundaries of federally recognized AIRs and/or ORTLs. As such, they recognize the unique statistical data needs of federally recognized American Indian tribes. The delineation of tribal block groups allows for an unambiguous presentation of statistical data specific to the federally recognized AIR and/or ORTL without the imposition of state or county boundaries, which might artificially separate American Indian populations located within a single AIR and/or ORTL. To this end, the American Indian tribal participant may define tribal block groups that cross county or state boundaries, or both. For federally recognized American Indian tribes with AIRs and/or ORTLs that have fewer than 1,200 residents, the Census Bureau will define one tribal census tract and one tribal block group coextensive with the AIR and/or ORTL. Tribal block groups must be delineated to meet all other census block group criteria, and must be identified uniquely so as to clearly distinguish them from county-based block groups. The Census Bureau will address the type of identifiers required for tribal block groups in more detail in a separate Federal Register notice pertaining to all American Indian areas, including statistical areas defined through PSAP. Tribal block group boundaries will be held as census block boundaries. Census blocks, however, will be numbered uniquely within county-based block groups, and thus there will not be a direct relationship between a tribal block group identifier and the census block numbers. Tribal block groups are conceptually similar and equivalent to census block groups defined within the standard state-county-tract-block group geographic hierarchy used for tabulating and publishing statistical data.

    In order to provide meaningful statistical geographic areas within the AIR and/or ORTL, as well as make meaningful and reliable data available for these areas and their populations, tribal block group geography is maintained separately from standard, county-based block groups. This change was first introduced for the 2010 Census, creating standard block groups nationwide and maintaining tribal block groups as a completely separate set of geography from standard block groups for both geographic and data presentation purposes, and eliminates, in part, the reliability and availability data issues for the tribal block groups and the derived standard block groups that were present in Census 2000.5

    5 For Census 2000, tribal block groups were defined for federally recognized AIRs and/or ORTLs, and standard block groups were identified by superimposing county and state boundaries onto the Census 2000 tribal block groups. For Census 2000 products in which data were presented by state and county, the standard state-county-tract-block group hierarchy was maintained, even for territory contained within an AIR and/or ORTL. In such instances, the state-county portions of tribal block groups were identified as individual block groups, and these standard block groups may not have met the minimum population or housing unit thresholds, potentially limiting sample data reliability or availability for both the tribal block groups and the derived standard block groups.

    As with standard block groups submitted through this program, the tribal block groups are submitted to the Census Bureau, and are subject to review to ensure compliance with the published criteria. Detailed criteria pertaining to tribal block groups will be published in a separate Federal Register notice pertaining to all American Indian areas, including statistical areas defined through PSAP.

    IV. Definitions of Key Terms

    Alaska Native Regional Corporation (ANRC)—A corporate geographic area established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (Pub. L. 92-203, 85 Stat. 688 (1971)) to conduct both the business and nonprofit affairs of Alaska Natives. Twelve ANRCs cover the entire state of Alaska except for the Annette Island Reserve.

    American Indian off-reservation trust land (ORTL)—An area of land located outside the boundaries of an AIR, whose boundaries are established by deed, and which are held in trust by the U.S. federal government for a federally recognized American Indian tribe or members of that tribe.

    American Indian reservation (AIR)—An area of land with boundaries established by final treaty, statute, executive order, and/or court order and over which a federally recognized American Indian tribal government has governmental authority. Along with “reservation”, designations such as colonies, communities, pueblos, rancherias, and reserves apply to AIRs.

    Conjoint—A description of a boundary line shared by two adjacent geographic entities.

    Contiguous—A description of areas sharing common boundary lines, more than a single point, such that the areas, when combined, form a single piece of territory. Noncontiguous areas form disjoint pieces.

    Group quarters—A location where people live or stay in a group living arrangement that is owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents. This is not a typical household-type living arrangement. These services may include custodial or medical care as well as other types of assistance, and residency is commonly restricted to those receiving these services. People living in group quarters are usually not related to each other. Group quarters include such places as college residence halls, residential treatment centers, skilled nursing facilities, group homes, military barracks, correctional facilities, and workers' dormitories.

    Incorporated place—A type of governmental unit, incorporated under state law as a city, town (except in New England, New York, and Wisconsin), borough (except in Alaska and New York), or village, generally to provide governmental services for a concentration of people within legally prescribed boundaries.

    Minor civil division (MCD)—The primary governmental or administrative division of a county in 28 states and the Island Areas having legal boundaries, names, and descriptions. The MCDs represent many different types of legal entities with a wide variety of characteristics, powers, and functions depending on the state and type of MCD. In some states, some or all of the incorporated places also constitute MCDs.

    Nonvisible feature—A map feature that is not visible on the ground and in imagery such as a city or county boundary through space, a property line, or line-of-sight extension of a road.

    Retracting—Substantially changing the boundaries of a census tract so that comparability over time is not maintained.

    Special use census tract/block group—Type of census tract or block group that must be designated as a specific use type (e.g., state park or large lake) and have an official name (e.g., Jay Cooke State Park or Lake Minnetonka), should have no (or very little) population or housing units, and must not create a noncontiguous census tract/block group. If delineated in a densely populated, urban area, a special use census tract/block group must have an area of at least one square mile. If delineated completely outside an urban area, a special use census tract/block group must have an area of at least 10 square miles.

    Statistical geographic entity—A geographic entity that is specially defined and delineated, such as block group, CDP, or census tract, so that the Census Bureau may tabulate data for it. Designation as a statistical entity neither conveys nor confers legal ownership, entitlement, or jurisdictional authority.

    Visible feature—A map feature that can be seen on the ground and in imagery, such as a road, railroad track, major above-ground transmission line or pipeline, river, stream, shoreline, fence, sharply defined mountain ridge, or cliff. A nonstandard visible feature is a feature that may not be clearly defined on the ground (such as a ridge), may be seasonal (such as an intermittent stream), or may be relatively impermanent (such as a fence). The Census Bureau generally requests verification that nonstandard features used as boundaries for the PSAP geographic areas pose no problem in their location during field work.

    Dated: November 1, 2018. Ron S. Jarmin, Deputy Director, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24570 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-071, C-570-072] Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products From the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Orders AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders on sodium gluconate, gluconic acid, and derivative products (GNA Products) from the People's Republic of China (China).

    DATES:

    Applicable November 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Magd Zalok (AD) at (202) 482-4162 or Robert Galantucci (CVD) at (202) 482-2923, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In accordance with sections 705(d) and 735(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on September 21, 2018, Commerce published its affirmative final determination of sales at less than fair value (LTFV) and its affirmative final determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of GNA Products from China.1 On October 31, 2018, the ITC notified Commerce of its final affirmative determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of LTFV imports and subsidized imports of GNA Products from China, within the meaning of sections 705(b)(1)(A)(i) and 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act.2

    1See Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 47876 (September 21, 2018) (AD Final Determination); Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid and Derivative Products from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 83 FR 47879 (September 21, 2018) (CVD Final Determination).

    2See Letter to Honorable Gary Taverman, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Enforcement and Compliance, from David S. Johanson, Chairman of the U.S. International Trade Commission, regarding antidumping and countervailing duty investigations concerning imports of Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products from the People's Republic of China (Investigation Nos. 701-TA-590 and 731-TA-1397(Final)), dated October 31, 2018 (ITC Letter).

    Scope of the Orders

    The scope of the orders covers all grades of sodium gluconate, gluconic acid, liquid gluconate, and glucono delta lactone (GDL) (collectively GNA Products), regardless of physical form (including, but not limited to substrates; solutions; dry granular form or powders, regardless of particle size; or as a slurry). The scope also includes GNA Products that have been blended or are in solution with other product(s) where the resulting mix contains 35 percent or more of sodium gluconate, gluconic acid, liquid gluconate, and/or GDL by dry weight.

    Sodium gluconate has a molecular formula of NaC6H11O7. Sodium gluconate has a Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) registry number of 527-07-1, and can also be called “sodium salt of gluconic acid” and/or sodium 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 pentahydroxyhexanoate. Gluconic acid has a molecular formula of C6H12O7. Gluconic acid has a CAS registry number of 526-95-4, and can also be called 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 pentahydroxycaproic acid. Liquid gluconate is a blend consisting only of gluconic acid and sodium gluconate in an aqueous solution. Liquid gluconate has CAS registry numbers of 527-07-1, 526-95-4, and 7732-18-5, and can also be called 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-pentahydroxycaproic acid-hexanoate. GDL has a molecular formula of C6H10O6. GDL has a CAS registry number of 90-80-2, and can also be called d-glucono-1,5-lactone.

    The merchandise covered by the scope of the orders is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 2918.16.1000, 2918.16.5010, and 2932.20.5020. Merchandise covered by the scope may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 2918.16.5050, 3824.99.2890, and 3824.99.9295. Although the HTSUS subheadings and CAS registry numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.

    Antidumping Duty Order

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, the ITC has notified Commerce of its final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of imports of GNA Products that are sold in the United States at LTFV. Therefore, in accordance with section 735(c)(2) of the Act, we are publishing this antidumping duty order. Because the ITC determined that imports of GNA Products from China are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from China, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to the assessment of antidumping duties.

    In accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise, for all relevant entries of GNA Products from China. Antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of GNA Products from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after July 10, 2018, the date of publication of the AD Preliminary Determination. 3

    3See Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 31949 (July 10, 2018).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation (AD)

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on entries of subject merchandise from China. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

    We will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amount indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins listed below. Commerce has made no adjustments to the antidumping cash deposit rate because Commerce has made no findings in the countervailing duty investigation that any of the programs are export subsidies.4

    4See AD Final Determination, 83 FR at 47878.

    Estimated Weighted-Average Antidumping Duty Margin

    The weighted-average antidumping duty margin is as follows:

    Exporter Producer Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Anhui Xingzhou Medicine Food Co., Ltd Xiwang Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd 213.15 Anhui Xingzhou Medicine Food Co., Ltd Zhucheng Shuguang Biotech Co., Ltd 213.15 China-wide Entity 5 213.15
    Countervailing Duty Order

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination that the industry in the United States producing GNA Products is materially injured within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of subsidized imports of GNA Products from China.6 Therefore, in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act, we are publishing this countervailing duty order. Because the ITC determined that imports of GNA Products from China are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from China, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to assessment of countervailing duties.

    5 The China-wide Entity includes Dezhou Huiyang Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Qingdao Dongxiao Enterprise Co., Ltd., Shandong Fuyang Biotechnology Co., Ltd./Shandong Fuyang Biology Starch Co., Ltd., and Zhejiang Tianyi Food Additives Co., Ltd.

    6See ITC Letter.

    Commerce directed CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties on unliquidated entries of GNA Products entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 23, 2018, the date of publication of the CVD Preliminary Determination. 7 However, section 703(d) of the Act states that the suspension of liquidation pursuant to a preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than 120 days. Therefore, we instructed CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, unliquidated entries of GNA Products from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after September 20, 2018, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register.

    7See Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 83 FR 23888 (May 23, 2018).

    Suspension of Liquidation (CVD)

    In accordance with section 706 of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation on all entries of GNA Products from China, as further described below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. Commerce will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts as indicated below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the subsidy rates listed below. The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed below, as appropriate.

    Exporter/producer Subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • Qingdao Dongxiao Enterprise Co., Ltd 194.67 Shandong Fuyang Biotechnology Co 194.67 Shandong Kaison Biochemical Co Ltd 194.67 Tongxiang Hongyu Chemical Co., Ltd 194.67 All-Others 194.67
    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice constitutes the AD and CVD orders with respect to GNA Products from China pursuant to sections 736(a) and 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find an updated list of orders currently in effect by either visiting http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

    These orders are published in accordance with sections 706(a), 736(a), and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

    Dated: November 2, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24705 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-357-820, C-357-821] Biodiesel From Argentina: Initiation of Changed Circumstances Reviews of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is initiating changed circumstances reviews (CCR) of the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders on biodiesel from Argentina.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 13, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathryn Wallace, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6251.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On January 4, 2018, and April 26, 2018, Commerce published the CVD and AD orders on biodiesel from Argentina.1 On September 21, 2018, the GOA, joined by Vicentin S.A.I.C. (Vicentin) and LDC Argentina (LDC), requested that Commerce initiate a CCR of the AD order, and the GOA requested that Commerce initiate a CCR of the CVD order, in order to adjust the cash deposit rates established in the AD and CVD investigations to reflect changes to Argentina's export tax regime.2 On October 1, 2018, the National Biodiesel Board Fair Trade Coalition (petitioner) filed comments requesting that Commerce deny the GOA's request.3 On October 11, 2018, the GOA, Vicentin and LDC filed comments responding to the petitioner's October 1, 2018 comments.4 On October 15, 2018, the petitioner submitted information and data illustrating the improvements in the domestic industry since the imposition of the orders, and on October 23, 2018, the petitioner submitted further comments opposing the CCRs.5 Between September 26, 2018, and October 19, 2018, Commerce met with the GOA and the petitioner to discuss their submissions to the record.6

    1See Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina and the Republic of Indonesia: Countervailing Duty Orders, 83 FR 522 (January 4, 2018), corrected by Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina and the Republic of Indonesia: Countervailing Duty Orders, 83 FR 3114 (January 23, 2018); see also Biodiesel from Argentina and Indonesia: Antidumping Duty Orders, 83 FR 18278 (April 26, 2018) (collectively, Orders).

    2See GOA's Letter, “Biodiesel from Argentina: Request for Changed Circumstances Review,” dated September 21, 2018 and filed on the record of A-357-820; see also GOA's Letter, “Biodiesel from Argentina: Request for Changed Circumstances Review,” dated September 21, 2018 and filed on the record of C-357-821 (collectively, Requests for CCRs).

    3See Petitioner's Letter, “Biodiesel from Argentina: Petitioner's Opposition to the Government of Argentina's Requests for Changed Circumstances Reviews,” dated October 1, 2018.

    4See GOA's Letter, “Biodiesel from Argentina: Response to Petitioners' Opposition to the Government of Argentina's Request for Changed Circumstances Review,” dated October 11, 2018 (GOA's October 11, 2018 Submission).

    5See Petitioner's Letter, “Positive Impact of Orders from Argentina on Domestic Biodiesel Industry,” dated October 15, 2018; see also Petitioner's Letter, “Biodiesel from Argentina: Petitioner's Response to Respondents' October 11, 2018 Submission,” dated October 23, 2018.

    6See Memorandum, “AD/CVD Orders on Biodiesel from Argentina—Requests for Changes Circumstance Reviews,” dated September 26, 2018; see also Memorandum, “Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Biodiesel from Argentina—Requests for Changed Circumstances Reviews: Ex Parte Meeting,” dated October 4, 2018; see also Memorandum, “Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Biodiesel from Argentina—Requests for Changed Circumstances Reviews: Ex Parte Meeting,” dated October 19, 2018.

    Scope of the Orders

    The product covered by the Orders is biodiesel from Argentina. For a complete description of the scope of the Orders, see the appendix to this notice.

    Initiation of Changed Circumstances Reviews

    Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216(d), Commerce will conduct a CCR of an AD or CVD order when it receives information concerning, or a request from an interested party which demonstrates, changed circumstances sufficient to warrant such a review. However, section 751(b)(4) of the Act also provides that Commerce may not conduct a CCR of an investigation determination within 24 months of the date of the investigation determination in the absence of “good cause.”

    In its request for initiation, the GOA explains that there are changed circumstances sufficient to warrant reconsideration of the AD and CVD final determinations. Regarding changed circumstances, the GOA provided information indicating that, since the Orders, there have been changes in the export tax regime, which was a key element in Commerce's analysis of: (1) The soybeans for less than adequate remuneration program in the CVD investigation; and (2) the particular market situation finding concerning the cost of soybean input prices in the AD investigation.7 In particular, the GOA attached three legislative decrees effecting changes across its export tax regime, including changes to the export taxes applied to soybeans, soybean oil, soymeal, and biodiesel. Decrees 793/2018 and 486/2018, issued after the investigations were finalized, in May and September 2018, respectively, decreased significantly the export tax on soybeans and other commodities in the soybean value chain (e.g., soybean oil, soymeal), and imposed a new biodiesel export tax. According to the decrees themselves, such changes were “necessary to continue fostering the convergence between the export tax applicable to {soybeans, soybean oil, soymeal} and that applicable to biodiesel,” 8 and “in order to, among other objectives, implement the monetary, exchange or foreign trade policy, to stabilize internal prices and to address public financial needs.” 9 Additionally, Decree 793/2018, in addition to decreasing the export tax on soybeans, imposes new, temporary taxes on “all products” exported from Argentina. The decree's preamble references an underlying statutory regime, as well as the GOA's 2018 national budget, noting concerns with ensuring “fiscal convergence, an efficient tax policy and the gradual reduction of the tax burden.” 10 The GOA suggests that such changes indicate a revised focus on fiscal policy, and not the development of particular industries. The GOA documented that these changes are not merely theoretical or prospective but have been in full effect as of September 2018. Furthermore, the GOA submitted information to support its claim that, since the imposition of the Orders, Argentine exporters have effectively been unable to ship biodiesel to the United States in light of combined AD and CVD cash deposit rates.11 According to the GOA, this alleged inability to ship to the United States prevents the conduct of administrative reviews through which Commerce would typically reexamine findings from investigations.12

    7See Requests for CCRs at 2, 4; see also Biodiesel from the Republic of Argentina: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 82 FR 53477 (November 16, 2017) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (CVD Final Determination) and Biodiesel from Argentina: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part, 83 FR 8837, and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (AD Final Determination), which discussed these aspects of the final determinations.

    8 Decree 486/2018. See Requests for CCRs at Attachment 3.

    9 Decree 793/2018. See Requests for CCRs at Attachment 2.

    10Id.

    11See GOA's October 11, 2018 Submission at 8.

    12Id. (citing U.S. Census Data).

    Additionally, the GOA provided two correlating reasons for satisfying the “good cause” requirement pursuant to section 751(b)(4) of the Act. First, the GOA explained that the changes it has made to its export tax system, discussed above, have virtually eliminated the export tax differential among products in the soybean value chain. Specifically, prior to the issuance of the CVD order, in December 2017, products in the soybean value chain (except biodiesel) were subject to an export tax of 27 to 30 percent, while biodiesel was subject to an export tax rate of zero percent.13 As of September 2018, the export tax on soybean products has been reduced to 18 percent, and the export tax on biodiesel has been increased to 15 percent, reducing the export tax differential from approximately 30 percent to 3 percent.14 The GOA also noted its belief that the remaining three percent differential is offset by the Most-Favored Nation tariff of 4.6 percent applied to U.S. biodiesel imports.15 Second, the GOA notes that the imposition of the AD and CVD rates (ranging from 60.44 percent to 86.23 percent, and 71.45 percent to 72.28 percent, respectively) has completely closed the U.S. market for Argentine biodiesel, reducing Argentina's biodiesel exports to the United States from approximately $1.2 billion in 2016 to zero in 2018.16 The GOA notes the combined AD and CVD rates total at least 130 percent, depending on the producer and exporter.

    13See Requests for CCRs at 3-4, Attachments 1-3.

    14Id.

    15 See Requests for CCRs at 4.

    16See GOA's October 11, 2018 Submission at 8.

    In considering the GOA's request for a CCR, we note that Commerce has initiated CCRs to address a wide variety of issues, some of which otherwise may or may not be addressed in the context of an annual administrative review. 17 Here, although the issues raised by the GOA may be considered in the context of an administrative review under section 751(a) of the Act, there have been no shipments which could be the subject of an administrative review. Thus, under Commerce's normal administrative review procedures, we otherwise would not have an opportunity to review the substantial changes that the GOA has made to its export tax regime, which formed the basis for certain of our findings in the AD Final Determination and CVD Final Determination. These changes, as discussed in greater detail above, include legislative decrees that significantly reduced the export tax on soybeans and other soybean products which were examined in the underlying investigations, and imposed new export taxes on biodiesel and other goods which were not previously in place at the time of the investigations. In light of the above, including the information submitted by the GOA regarding a complete cessation of shipments of biodiesel from Argentina to the United States and the unique nature of the substantial changes to the GOA's export tax regime since the imposition of the Orders, we find that there is sufficient information and “good cause” to initiate CCRs.

    17See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Initiation and Preliminary Results of Expedited Changed Circumstances Review, 83 FR 34548 (July 20, 2018) (finding sufficient information to initiate a CCR to recalculate certain cash deposit rates); Certain Steel Nails From Malaysia: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 80 FR 71772 (Nov. 17, 2015) (finding sufficient information and “good cause” to initiate a CCR to evaluate whether a company was properly utilizing the correct cash deposit rate); Initiation of Changed Circumstances Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews; Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium From Canada, 57 FR 41473 (Sept. 10, 1992) (finding sufficient information and “good cause” to initiate a CCR to evaluate changes to the major subsidy program at issue in the underlying investigation).

    Therefore, we are initiating CCRs pursuant to sections 751(b)(1) and (4) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216(c) and (d) to assess the impacts of the GOA's revised export tax regime on the AD Final Determination and CVD Final Determination, as discussed above.

    We intend to publish in the Federal Register a notice of preliminary results of the AD and CVD CCRs, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4) and 351.221(c)(3)(i), which will set forth the factual and legal conclusions upon which our preliminary results are based, and a description of any action proposed based on these results. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4), interested parties will have an opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. We will issue the final results of review no later than 270 days after publication of this notice of initiation in accordance with 19 CFR 351.216(e).

    This notice is published in accordance with section 751(b)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3) of the Act.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. APPENDIX Scope of the Orders

    The product covered by these orders is biodiesel, which is a fuel comprised of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from vegetable oils or animal fats, including biologically-based waste oils or greases, and other biologically-based oil or fat sources. These orders cover biodiesel in pure form (B100), as well as fuel mixtures containing at least 99 percent biodiesel by volume (B99). For fuel mixtures containing less than 99 percent biodiesel by volume, only the biodiesel component of the mixture is covered by the scope of these order.

    Biodiesel is generally produced to American Society for Testing and Materials International (ASTM) D6751 specifications, but it can also be made to other specifications. Biodiesel commonly has one of the following Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers, generally depending upon the feedstock used: 67784-80-9 (soybean oil methyl esters); 91051-34-2 (palm oil methyl esters); 91051-32-0 (palm kernel oil methyl esters); 73891-99-3 (rapeseed oil methyl esters); 61788-61-2 (tallow methyl esters); 68990-52-3 (vegetable oil methyl esters); 129828-16-6 (canola oil methyl esters); 67762-26-9 (unsaturated alkylcarboxylic acid methyl ester); or 68937-84-8 (fatty acids, C12-C18, methyl ester).

    The B100 product subject to the orders is currently classifiable under subheading 3826.00.1000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), while the B99 product is currently classifiable under HTSUS subheading 3826.00.3000. Although the HTSUS subheadings, ASTM specifications, and CAS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-24689 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Construction Safety Team (NCST) Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold an open meeting via teleconference on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The primary purpose of this meeting is to finalize the Committee's annual report to Congress. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST website at https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster-failure-studies/national-construction-safety-team-ncst/advisory-committee.

    DATES:

    The NCST Advisory Committee will meet on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 from 11:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via teleconference. For instructions on how to participate in the meeting, please see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melissa Banner, Administrative Office Assistant, Community Resilience Program, Engineering Laboratory, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8615, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8604. Ms. Banner's email address is [email protected]; and her phone number is (301) 975-8912.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Committee was established pursuant to Section 11 of the NCST Act (Pub. L. 107-231, codified at 15 U.S.C. 7301 et seq.). The Committee is currently composed of six members, appointed by the Director of NIST, who were selected on the basis of established records of distinguished service in their professional community and their knowledge of issues affecting the National Construction Safety Teams. The Committee advises the Director of NIST on carrying out the NCST Act; reviews the procedures developed for conducting investigations; and reviews the reports issued documenting investigations. Background information on the NCST Act and information on the NCST Advisory Committee is available at https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster-failure-studies/national-construction-safety-team-ncst/advisory-committee.

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the NCST Advisory Committee will meet on Tuesday, November 27, 2018 from 11:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The meeting will be open to the public and will be held via teleconference. There will be no central meeting location. Interested members of the public will be able to participate in the meeting from remote locations by calling into a central phone number. The primary purpose of this meeting is to finalize the Committee's annual report due to Congress. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST website at https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster-failure-studies/national-construction-safety-team-ncst/advisory-committee-meetings.

    Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to items on the Committee's agenda for this meeting are invited to request a place on the agenda. Approximately fifteen minutes will be reserved at the beginning of the meeting for public comments. Speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. All those wishing to speak must submit their request by email to the attention of Melissa Banner [email protected], by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Friday, November 23, 2018. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend are invited to submit written statements to the NCST, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 8604, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8604, or electronically by email to [email protected].

    Anyone wishing to participate in this meeting must register by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Friday, November 23, 2018. To register please submit your first and last name, email address, and phone number to Melissa Banner at [email protected] or (301) 975-8912. After registering, participants will be provided with detailed instructions on how to join the meeting remotely.

    Kevin A. Kimball, Chief of Staff.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24639 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG596 Caribbean Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of a public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Caribbean Fishery Management Council will hold its 164th meeting in December to discuss the items contained in the agenda in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    DATES:

    The meetings will be held on December 11-12, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meetings will be held at the Condado Vanderbilt Hotel, Ashford Avenue, 1055, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00907.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Caribbean Fishery Management Council, 270 Muñoz Rivera Avenue, Suite 401, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918-1903, telephone: (787) 766-5926.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    December 11, 2018, 9 a.m.-5 p.m. —Call to Order —Adoption of Agenda —Consideration of 163rd Council Meeting Verbatim Transcriptions —Executive Director's Report —Island-Based Fishery Management Plans —Review of Draft Environmental Impact Statements —Puerto Rico —St. Thomas/St. John —St. Croix —Review Action 7 (Accountability Measures) of Draft Environmental Impact Statements and Choose Preferred Alternative(s) —Review Other Actions, Additions, or Changes, as Appropriate —Council Decision on Publication of DEIS for Public Comment —Review Timeline for Completion of IBFMPs —Project Events Update—Graciela García-Moliner —GIS PR/USVI —Connectivity Report —EFH 3-Year Review —Okeanos Explorer Visit Public Comment Period (5-minute presentations) December 11, 2018, 5 p.m.-6 p.m. —Administrative Issues —Closed Session December 12, 2018, 9 a.m.-5 p.m. °Strategic Reorientation of the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission (WECAFC)—Ms. Warner Kramer —Ecosystem Based Fishery Management (EBFM) Initiative Update —Data Compilations and Integrations—Mallory Brooks —Risk Assessment Framework and Application to Conceptual Model—Tauna Rankin —Request to Council to Convene DAPs and SSC for Risk Analysis Exercise —Engagement Strategy—Alida Ortiz —Outreach and Education Report—Alida Ortiz —USVI Recreational Fishery Data Project Update—Ruth Gomez —Exempted Fishing Permit Application Updates —Clean Ocean Initiative —Puerto Rico DNER —NOAA/NMFS Panama City Laboratory —Any Other Applications Received Prior to this Meeting —Enforcement Issues: —Puerto Rico-DNER —USVI—DPNR —U.S. Coast Guard —NMFS/NOAA —Meetings Attended by Council Members and Staff —Other Business —Spiny Lobster Data Collection Project Update—Marcos Hanke Public Comment Period—(5-minute presentations) °Next Meeting

    The order of business may be adjusted as necessary to accommodate the completion of agenda items. The meeting will begin on December 11, 2018 at 9 a.m. Other than the start time, interested parties should be aware that discussions may start earlier or later than indicated. In addition, the meeting may be extended from, or completed prior to the date established in this notice.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. For more information or request for sign language interpretation and other auxiliary aids, please contact Mr. Miguel A. Rolón, Executive Director, Caribbean Fishery Management Council, 270 Muñoz Rivera Avenue, Suite 401, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 00918-1903, telephone: (787) 766-5926, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24614 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Capital Construction Fund Agreement, Certificate Family of Forms and Deposit/Withdrawal Report AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Richard VanGorder, NOAA/NMFS/F/MB5, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13113, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (301) 427-8784, and [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    This request is for extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Respondents will be commercial fishing industry individuals, partnerships, and corporations which entered into Capital Construction Fund (CCF) agreements with the Secretary of Commerce allowing deferral of Federal taxation on fishing vessel income deposited into the fund for use in the acquisition, construction, or reconstruction of fishing vessels. Deferred taxes are recaptured by reducing an agreement vessel's basis for depreciation by the amount withdrawn from the fund for its acquisition, construction, or reconstruction. The Capital Construction Fund Agreement and Certificate Family of Forms is required pursuant to 50 CFR part 259.2, 50 CFR part 259.9 and Public Law 115-97 (Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017). The deposit/withdrawal information collected from agreement holders is required pursuant to 50 CFR part 259.7 and Public Law 115-97. The information collected from applicants for the CCF Agreement is used to determine their eligibility to participate in the CCF Program. The information collected from agreement holders for the Certificate Family of Forms is used to identify their program eligible vessels, their program projects and to certify the cost of a project at completion. The information collected on the deposit/withdrawal report form is required to ensure that agreement holders are complying with fund deposit/withdrawal requirements established in program regulations and properly accounting for fund activity on their Federal income tax returns. The information collected on the deposit/withdrawal report must also be reported semi-annually to the Secretary of Treasury in accordance with the Tax Reform Act.

    II. Method of Collection

    The information will be collected on forms submitted electronically, by mail or by fax.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0041.

    Form Number(s): NOAA Form 34-82, NOAA Form 88-14.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (extension of a current information collection).

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,000.

    Estimated Time Per Response: NOAA Form 34-82, 20 minutes; NOAA Form 88-14, 3.5 hours for agreements and 1 hour for certificate.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,917.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $15,320 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24611 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG133 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Port of Kalama Expansion Project on the Lower Columbia River AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to the Port of Kalama (POK) for the take of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to construction activities associated with an expansion project at the Port of Kalama on the Lower Columbia River, Washington.

    DATES:

    This Authorization is in effect from October 18, 2018 to October 18, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dale Youngkin, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained by visiting the internet at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The MMPA prohibits the “take” of marine mammals, with certain exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed incidental take authorization may be provided to the public for review.

    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as “mitigation”); and requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such takings.

    The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.

    History of Request

    On September 28, 2015, we received a request from the POK for authorization of the taking, by Level B harassment only, of marine mammals incidental to the construction associated with the Port of Kalama Expansion Project, which involved construction of the Kalama Marine Manufacturing and Export Facility including a new marine terminal for the export of methanol, and installation of engineered log jams, restoration of riparian wetlands, and the removal of existing wood piles in a side channel as mitigation activities. The specified activity is expected to result in the take of three species of marine mammals (harbor seals, California sea lions, and Steller sea lions). A final version of the application, which we deemed adequate and complete, was submitted on December 10, 2015. We published a notice of a proposed IHA and request for comments on March 21, 2016 (81 FR 715064). After the public comment period and before we issued the final IHA, POK requested that we issue the IHA for 2017 instead of the 2016 work season. We subsequently published the final notice of our issuance of the IHA on December 12, 2016 (81 FR 89436), effective from September 1, 2017-August 31, 2018. In-water work associated with the project was expected to be completed within the one-year timeframe of the IHA.

    On June 21, 2018, POK informed NMFS that work relevant to the specified activity considered in the MMPA analysis for the 2017-2018 IHA was postponed and would not be completed. POK requested that the IHA be issued to be effective for the period from 2018—2019. In support of that request, POK submitted an application addendum affirming that no change in the proposed activities is anticipated and that no new information regarding the abundance of marine mammals is available that would change the previous analysis and findings. A notice for the proposed incidental take authorization was published on July 25, 2018 (83 FR 35220), and a corrected notice was published on August 14, 2018 (83 FR 40257). Therefore, comments were received until September 13, 2018. Please refer to the Comments and Responses section below for information on the comments received during the comment periods for the proposed IHA.

    Description of the Activity

    The 2017-2018 IHA covered the incidental take of marine mammals due to construction of a marine terminal and dock/pier for the export of methanol, and associated compensatory mitigation activities for the purposes of offsetting habitat effects from the action. The marine terminal will be approximately 45,000 square feet in size, supported by 320 concrete piles (24-inch precast octagonal piles to be driven by impact hammer) and 16 steel piles (12 × 12-inch and 4 × 18-inch anticipated to be driven by vibratory hammer, and impact hammering will only be done to drive/proof if necessary). The compensatory mitigation includes installation of eight engineered log jams (ELJs), which will be anchored by untreated wooden piles driven by impact hammer at low tides (not in water). The compensatory mitigation also includes removal of approximately 157 untreated wooden piles from an old trestle in a nearby backwater area. The piles will be removed either by direct pull or vibratory extraction. Finally, the compensatory mitigation includes wetland restoration and enhancement by removal of invasive species and replacement with native wetland species.

    Since no changes have been made to the planned activities reflected in the proposed IHA, NMFS refers the reader to the documents related to the 2017-2018 IHA for more detailed description of the project activities. These previous documents include the Federal Register notice of the issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA for the POK's Port of Kalama Expansion Project (81 FR 89436, December 12, 2016), the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (81 FR 15064, March 21, 2016), POK's application (and 2018 application addendum), and all associated references, which can be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities.

    Comments and Responses

    NMFS published a notice of receipt of POK's updated application addendum and proposed IHA in the Federal Register on July 25, 2018 (83 FR 35220), with a comment response date of August 24, 2018. However, during the public review period for this notice, it was noted that instructions for submitting comments were lacking. Therefore, a second notice of the proposed IHA was published on August 14, 2018 (83 FR 40257), which included full instructions for submittal of comments. Comments were accepted on this corrected notice until September 13, 2018. NMFS received two comments during the review of the first notice. One comment was from a private citizen and one comment was received from the Columbia Riverkeeper, stating that instructions for submitting comments was not clear and voicing their concern with the use of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for our action. During public review of the corrected notice, NMFS received four additional comments. Two of these additional comments were from the same private citizen who commented on the first notice; one was from the Marine Mammal Commission (MMC); and one was from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD). Copies of the full comments received are available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities. Additionally, all comments received on both notices are summarized and responses are provided below:

    Comment: Three comments were received from the same private citizen (Jean Public) expressing opposition to the project and concern regarding any government authorization to kill birds, seals, and sea lions in the Columbia River. One of these comments also suggested charging the POK (terminal builders) $100,000 for every seal they kill.

    Response: NMFS has issued an IHA to the POK for the incidental take, by Level A and Level B harassment only, of marine mammals due to in-water construction activities associated with the POK expansion project. Mortality is not expected or authorized by the IHA.

    Comment: The MMC concurred with NMFS's findings and recommended that NMFS issue the IHA subject to inclusion of the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures discussed in the notice of the Proposed IHA.

    Response: NMFS thanks the MMC for their comment and concurs with the recommendation. NMFS has issued the IHA to the Port of Kalama subject to the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures that were included in the notice of the Proposed IHA.

    Comment: The MMC recommended that NMFS revise the Level A harassment zones for harbor seals during impact driving of concrete piles and vibratory driving of steel piles based on eight hours of activities, or eight piles/day, because harbor seals may be present in the project area for longer periods than California or Steller sea lions and therefore accumulate more sound energy.

    Response: NMFS agrees that it is possible that harbor seals may be present in the general project area for longer periods than California or Steller sea lions. However, NMFS feels that it is unreasonable to assume that seals would remain within the area for a full eight hours, as they may be transiting between two sites (one approximately one mile upstream and one approximately 3.5 miles downstream) where they are known to forage and/or haul out. In addition, it is not reasonable to assume that pile driving activities would occur for eight consecutive hours daily, and is more likely that these activities would occur for an hour to two hours at a time, and would be broken up by time needed to set up new piles. However, NMFS has determined it is reasonable to assume that seals would be present for double the amount of time as sea lions (assuming a two-hour duration versus a one-hour duration due to the fact that they may be transiting the area twice if they move from one site to the other and return again) results in a Level A harassment threshold distance of 63 m for impact driving of concrete piles and 26 m for vibratory driving of steel piles.

    As noted in the notice for the proposed IHA, Level A harassment takes proposed for authorization did not rely on calculated takes, and were qualitatively proposed for authorization out of an abundance of caution in the event that some seals may be undetected before entering the Level A harassment zone. Therefore, the amount of Level A harassment takes authorized has not changed as a result of reconsidering the Level A harassment zone and only results in a revision of the Level A harassment monitoring area. Therefore, the requirement for monitoring and shut down distance to avoid Level A harassment take has been revised to 63 m and 26 m to correspond to a two-hour duration for impact driving of concrete piles and vibratory driving of steel piles, respectively.

    Comment: The MMC recommended that NMFS further investigate appropriate timeframes over which sound exposure levels should be accumulated when estimating Level A harassment zones, and recommended that NMFS make this a priority to resolve in the near future. MMC further recommended that NMFS consult with its own and external scientists and acousticians to determine appropriate accumulation times.

    Response: NMFS considers this a priority and has recently formed a group to work on the issue of accumulation time.

    Comment: The Commission expressed continuing concern with NMFS's notice that one-year renewals could be issued in certain circumstances without additional public notice and comment requirements. The Commission also suggested that NMFS should discuss the possibility of renewals through a more general route, such as abbreviated notices such as was done in this instance. The Commission further recommended that if NMFS did not pursue renewals solely using abbreviated notices, that the agency provide a legal analysis supporting our conclusion that this process is consistent with the requirements of section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.

    Response: As stated in previous responses to this comment from the Commission, the process of issuing a renewal IHA does not bypass the public notice and comment requirements of the MMPA. The Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA expressly notified the public that under certain, limited conditions an applicant could seek a renewal IHA for an additional year. The notice describes the conditions under which such a renewal request could be considered and seeks public comment on those circumstances. Importantly, such renewals would be limited to circumstances where: The activities are identical or nearly identical to those analyzed in the proposed IHA or the activities would not be completed by the time the IHA expires and renewal would allow completion of the activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section; monitoring does not indicate impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized; and the mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial proposed IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as they are for all IHAs. The option for issuing renewal IHAs has been in NMFS's implementing regulations for the incidental take provisions of the MMPA (Section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D)) since 1996.

    Comment: The Columbia Riverkeeper (Riverkeeper) submitted a comment expressing concern with NMFS's use of a CE for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the issuance of our IHA to the POK for incidental take of marine mammals from construction activities associated with the POK expansion project. The Riverkeeper stated that use of the CE would be counter to NOAA's NEPA guidance, citing language in the Companion Manual to NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A that says a CE may only be applied when the proposed action is not part of a larger action and can therefore be reviewed independently from other actions under NEPA. In addition, the Riverkeeper asserted that use of the CE would be a waste of agency time and resources since the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is currently preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the overall construction project. The Riverkeeper suggested that NMFS should participate in USACE's ongoing NEPA process and base its IHA decision on the USACE NEPA document. In addition, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) submitted a comment stating they were in agreement with the Riverkeeper comment.

    Response: The application of a CE for NMFS's action (issuance of an IHA) is entirely consistent with NOAA's NEPA guidance and practices. The issuance of an IHA is not part of a larger NMFS action that would be segmented for the purposes of NEPA (i.e., NMFS's action would not be segmented for purposes of NEPA such that several CEs would be required for a larger project, as the only action NMFS has would be the issuance or denial of the IHA for the incidental take of marine mammals due to in-water construction work associated with the POK expansion). Further, as stated in the notice of the proposed IHA, NMFS had previously prepared its own EA for the issuance of the previous IHA, which resulted in a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Based on this past analysis, as well as an Administrative Record justifying the use of the CE (CE B4) for similar types of activities, NMFS has determined that the use of the CE for this action is well supported. While we appreciate that the USACE must prepare a NEPA document for its own action (issuance of a permit, or permits, for the larger construction project), relying on the NEPA analysis for this larger project would be of no benefit for NMFS's purposes due to the fact that the majority of the larger project construction activities would be associated with upland areas with no potential for the incidental take of marine mammals associated with NMFS's action.

    Comment: The CBD commented that their primary concern is that the scope of the authorization is arbitrarily narrow in light of the Project's recognized impacts on marine mammals. More specifically, the CBD states that NMFS previously considered the Project and concluded in its biological opinion that the Project would adversely affect blue, humpback, fin, and sperm whales, yet none of these species are considered in the applicant's request. The Biological Opinion also concluded the Project would adversely affect several species of Chinook salmon and critical habitat, yet the applicant did not consider the resulting impacts to the critically endangered Southern Resident killer whales that feed on those salmon.

    Response: The two statutes (Endangered Species Act (ESA) and MMPA) are different both substantively and procedurally, with different analyses and potentially involving different scopes. The Biological Opinion was prepared pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA due to the requirement for consultation on the effects of the proposed action by a federal action agency, in this case the USACE, to issue permits for the construction of the Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility on the Columbia River and to Northwest Pipeline LLC for construction of the Kalama Lateral Project.1 The Biological Opinion evaluates the effects of the USACE issuance of permits that would authorize the construction project for the marine export facility, which is a component of the overall Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility project. The ESA consultation (Biological Opinion) evaluates the direct and indirect effects of the proposed action, together with interrelated and interdependent actions such as the manufacturing/production facility, into the reasonably foreseeable future. Therefore, the ESA consultation broadly evaluated the effects of the agency action. The Biological Opinion determined that the project is likely to indirectly affect several species of marine mammals including blue, humpback, fin, and sperm whales, based on increased vessel traffic (including increased potential for ship strike and noise associated with OGVs and supertankers) from the long-term operation of the facility.

    1 The U.S. Department of Energy is also identified as an action agency because of its consideration of whether to issue a loan guarantee for the project.

    The Biological Opinion does not identify potential effects of pile driving/in-water construction in regard to any ESA-listed marine mammal species, as none are anticipated to be present in the area of pile driving activities. The Biological Opinion did determine adverse effects to salmon as a result of in-water construction/pile driving but also concluded that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect southern resident killer whales.

    The IHA was issued pursuant to section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, which requires NMFS to authorize the incidental (but not intentional) take from a specified activity (in this case, in-water construction work associated with the Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility) in a specified geographic region for a one-year period if the relevant statutory standards are satisfied. The applicant for an IHA describes the specified activity for which the IHA is requested, and need not be a federal action agency. The IHA does not evaluate interrelated and interdependent activities of the specified activity. As Steller sea lions, California sea lions, and harbor seals are the only marine mammal species anticipated to occur in the specified area, these are the appropriate species considered for the IHA.

    Description of Marine Mammals

    A description of the marine mammals in the area of the activities is found in the previous documents referenced above, which remain applicable to this IHA as well. In addition, NMFS has reviewed recent Stock Assessment Reports, information on relevant Unusual Mortality Events, and recent scientific literature. Since the submittal of the 2015 IHA application, the USACE has published updated data on pinniped presence at the Bonneville Dam (Tidwell et al., 2017). This information reveals that in both 2016 and 2017 the numbers of pinnipeds present at Bonneville Dam were within the range of historical variability. The latest USACE data does not suggest a trend that would require a modification to the take estimates or to the effects analysis (see Table 1 below for a summary of monitoring data by year from Tidwell et al., 2017). Therefore, NMFS has determined that the updated information does not affect our analysis of impacts for the 2018-2019 IHA.

    Table 1—Minimum Estimated Number of Individual Pinnipeds Observed at Bonneville Dam Tailrace Areas and the Hours of Observation During the Focal Sampling Period, 2002 to 2017 [From Tidwell et al., 2017] Year Total hours observed California sea lions Steller sea lions Harbor seals Total pinnipeds 2002 662 30 0 1 31 2003 1,356 104 3 2 109 2004 516 99 3 2 104 2005 * 1,109 81 4 1 86 2006 3,650 72 11 3 86 2007 4,433 71 9 2 82 2008 5,131 82 39 2 123 2009 3,455 54 26 2 82 2010 3,609 89 75 2 166 2011 3,315 54 89 1 144 2012 3,404 39 73 0 112 2013 3,247 56 80 0 136 2014 2,947 71 65 1 137 2015 2,995 195 a 69 0 264 2016 1,974 149 a 54 0 203 2017 1,142 92 a 63 1 156 * Observations did not begin until March 18 in 2005. a In 2015, 2016, and 2017 the minimum estimated number of Steller sea lions was 55, 41, and 32, respectively. These counts were less than the maximum number of Steller sea lions observed on one day, so Tidwell et al. (2017) used the maximum number observed on one day as the minimum number. This difference was driven by a focus on California sea lions and lack of branding or unique markers on Steller sea lions. Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

    A description of the potential effects of the specified activities on marine mammals and their habitat is found in the previous documents referenced above, and remain applicable to this proposed IHA. There is no new information on potential effects that would change our analyses or determinations under the 2018-2019 IHA.

    Estimated Take

    A description of the methods and inputs used to estimate take anticipated to occur and, ultimately, the take that was authorized is found in the previous documents referenced above. The methods of estimating take for this IHA are identical to those used in the 2017-2018 IHA, as is the density of marine mammals. The source levels, also remain unchanged from the 2017-2018 IHA, and NMFS's 2016 Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016) was used to address new acoustic thresholds in the notice of issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA (see Table 2 for NMFS User Spreadsheet inputs). As stated above, since the submittal of the application for the 2017-2018 IHA (in effect from September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2018), the USACE has published updated data on pinniped presence at the Bonneville Dam, and this data does not suggest a trend that would require a modification to the take estimates or effects analysis. Consequently, the authorized Level B harassment take for this 2018-2019 IHA is identical to the 2017-2018 IHA, as presented in Table 3 below. However, the originally issued IHA did not authorize any Level A harassment take. As harbor seals are smaller and may be more difficult to detect at larger Level A harassment zones, and to account for the potential that they may be unseen or linger longer than expected, a small number of takes by Level A harassment is now authorized. Finally, the pile driving duration informing the calculation of Level A harassment zone sizes has changed from the notice of the proposed IHA as a result of a public comment received. As seals are not transiting to the Bonneville Dam similar to sea lions, and may spend more time in the project vicinity, the duration has been doubled for these species for impact driving of concrete piles and for vibratory driving of steel piles. For impact driving of steel piles, the duration was kept at the original one hour due to the fact that impact driving of these piles would only occur briefly (for proofing) if at all.

    Table 2—Inputs for NMFS User Spreadsheet Input parameter Vibratory pile driving (steel) Impact pile driving (steel) Impact pile driving (concrete) Weighting Factor Adjustment 1 2.5 2 2 Source Level (SL) 2 170 178 166 Duration 3 2 hours 1 hour 2 hours Strikes per pile 1,025 1,025 Piles per day 3 1 (1 hour duration) (1 pile/hour) (1 pile/hour) Propagation (xlogR) 15 15 15 Distance from SL measurement 10 10 10 1 In instances where full auditory weighting functions associated with the SELcum metric cannot be applied, NMFS has recommended the default, single frequency weighting factor adjustments (WFAs) provided here. As described in Appendix D of NMFS's Technical Guidance (NMFS, 2016), the intent of the WFA is to broadly account for auditory weighting functions below the 95 frequency contour percentile. Use of single frequency WFA is likely to over-predict Level A harassment distances. 2 SLs from CalTrans (2012). SL for all steel piles are based on 18” steel pipe (4 of the piles are 18” and 12 of the piles are 12”). 3 A 1-hour duration was used for California and Steller sea lions, as there are no haul-outs in the project area. Animals are transiting through the project area, and are not anticipated to be present for a full 8-hour day of pile driving activity. POK estimates 6-8 piles/day, or approximately 1 pile/hour. Animals are anticipated to be present for the duration of 1 pile being driven (1 hour) at most. For harbor seals, a two-hour duration was used, as they may be transiting between two sites (one approximately one mile upstream and one approximately 3.5 miles downstream of the project area). Given that these animals may transit back and forth between these two sites, the duration was doubled. Table 3—Estimated Take Authorized and Proportion of Population Potentially Affected Estimated take by level B harassment Estimated take by level A harassment Abundance of stock Percentage of stock potentially affected Population trend Harbor seal 1,530 10 24,732 6.2 Stable. California sea lion 372 0 153,337 0.2 Stable. Steller sea lion 372 0 59,968 0.6 Increasing.

    Description of Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Measures—A description of mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures is found in the previous documents referenced above, and remain unchanged for this IHA with the exception of a change in the required monitoring distance to avoid Level A harassment takes. In summary, mitigation includes implementation of shut down procedures if any marine mammal approaches or enters the Level A harassment zone for pile driving (26 m (85 feet (ft)) for vibratory pile driving of steel piles; 63 m (207 ft) for impact driving of concrete piles; and 252 m (828 ft) for impact driving of steel piles). For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving (e.g. standard barges, barge-mounted cranes, excavators, etc.), if a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations must cease and vessels must reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions. One trained observer must monitor to implement shutdowns and collect information at each active pile driving location (whether vibratory or impact driving of steel or concrete piles).

    At least three observers must be on duty during impact driving at all times. As discussed above, one observer must monitor and implement shutdowns and collect information at each pile driving location at all times. In addition, two shore-based observers are required (one upstream of the project and another downstream of the project), whose primary responsibility shall be to record pinnipeds in the Level B harassment zone and to alert the barge-based observer to the presence of pinnipeds, thus creating a redundant alert system for prevention of injurious interaction as well as increasing the probability of detecting pinnipeds in the disturbance zone. At least three observers must be on duty during vibratory pile driving activity for the first two days, and thereafter on every third day to allow for estimation of Level B harassment takes. Similar to requirements for impact driving, the first observer must be positioned on a work platform or barge where the entirety of the shutdown zone can be monitored. Shore based observers must be positioned to observe the disturbance zone from the bank of the river. Protocols will be implemented to ensure that coordinated communication of sightings occurs between observers in a timely manner.

    Pile driving activities may only be conducted during daylight hours. If the shutdown zone is obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile driving will not be initiated until the entire shutdown zone is visible. Work that has been initiated appropriately in conditions of good visibility may continue during poor visibility. The shutdown zone will be monitored for 30 minutes prior to initiating the start of pile driving, during the activity, and for 30 minutes after activities have ceased. If pinnipeds are present within the shutdown zone prior to pile driving, the start will be delayed until the animals leave the shutdown zone of their own volition, or until 15 minutes elapse without re-sighting the animal(s).

    Soft start procedures must be implemented at the start of each day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation of impact driving for a period of thirty minutes or longer. If steel piles require impact installation or proofing, a bubble curtain must be used for sound attenuation. If water velocity is 1.6 ft per second (1.1 miles per hour (mph)) or less for the entire installation period, the pile being driven must be surrounded by a confined or unconfined bubble curtain that will distribute small air bubbles around 100 percent of the pile perimeter for the full depth of the water column. If water velocity is greater than 1.6 feet per second (1.1 mph) at any point during installation, the pile being driven must be surrounded by a confined bubble curtain (e.g., a bubble ring surrounded by a fabric or non-metallic sleeve) that will distribute air bubbles around 100 percent of the pile perimeter for the full depth of the water column.

    Determinations

    The POK proposes to conduct activities in 2018-2019 that are identical to those covered in the current 2017-2018 IHA. As described above, the number of estimated takes of the same stocks of harbor seals (OR/WA Coast stock), California sea lion (U.S. stock), and Steller sea lion (Eastern DPS) is the same for this IHA as those authorized in the 2017-2018 IHA, which were found to meet the negligible impact and small numbers standards. The authorized take of 1,540 harbor seals; 372 California sea lions, and 372 Steller sea lions represent 6.2 percent, 0.2 percent, and 0.6 percent of these stocks of marine mammals, respectively. We evaluated the impacts of the additional authorization of 10 Level A harassment takes of harbor seal, and find that consideration of impacts to these 10 individuals accruing a small degree of permanent threshold shift (PTS) does not meaningfully change our analysis, nor does it change our findings/determinations. This IHA includes identical required mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures as the 2017-2018 IHA, and there is no new information suggesting that our prior analyses or findings should change.

    Based on the information contained here and in the referenced documents, NMFS has determined the following: (1) The authorized takes will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks; (2) the required mitigation measures will effect the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat; (3) the authorized takes represent small numbers of marine mammals relative to the affected species or stock abundances; and (4) the POK's activities will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on taking for subsistence purposes, as no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals are implicated by this action.

    National Environmental Policy Act

    In compliance with the NEPA of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), NMFS prepared an EA to consider the direct, indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from our previous IHA action (issuance of an IHA for incidental take of marine mammals due to the POK Expansion project). NMFS made the EA available to the public for review and comment in order to assess the impacts to the human environment of issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA to the POK. Also in compliance with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, NMFS made a FONSI on October 24, 2016, for issuance of the 2017-2018 IHA. These NEPA documents are available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities.

    Since this IHA covers the same work covered in the 2017-2018 IHA, NMFS has reviewed our previous EA and FONSI, and has determined that our current action is consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review. We have reviewed all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to concluding our NEPA process and making our final decision on the 2018-2019 IHA request.

    Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species. No incidental take of ESA-listed marine mammal species is expected to result from this activity, and none would be authorized. Therefore, NMFS has determined that consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this action.

    Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to POK for the incidental take of marine mammals due to in-water construction work associated with the POK Expansion Project for a period of one year, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24665 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Application for Appointment in the NOAA Commissioned Officer Corps AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to LT Jared Halonen—Chief, NOAA Corps Recruiting, or LT Ricardo Rodriguez—NOAA Corps Recruiting Officer; OMAO-CPC-OCMD, 8403 Colesville Road, Suite 500, Silver Spring, MD 20910, ((800)-299-6622), [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    This request is for extension of a currently approved information collection. The NOAA Commissioned Corps is the uniformed component of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a bureau of the Department of Commerce. Officers serve under Senate-confirmed appointments and Presidential commissions (33 U.S.C. chapter 17, subchapter 1, sections 853 and 854). The NOAA Corps provides a cadre of professionals trained in engineering, earth sciences, oceanography, meteorology, fisheries science, and other related disciplines, who are dedicated to the service of their country and optimization of NOAA's missions to ensure the economic and physical well-being of the Nation.

    NOAA Corps officers serve in assignments throughout NOAA, as well as in each of NOAA's Line Offices (National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service, National Ocean Service, National Weather Service, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research and Office of Planning, Programming and Integration).

    Persons wishing to be considered for a NOAA Corps Commission must submit a complete application package, including NOAA Form 56-42, at least three letters of recommendation, and official transcripts. A personal interview must also be conducted. Eligibility requirements include a bachelor's degree with at least 48 credit hours of science, engineering or other disciplines related to NOAA's mission, excellent health, and normal color vision with uncorrected visual acuity no worse than 20/400 in each eye (correctable to 20/20).

    II. Method of Collection

    Applicants must utilize the E-recruit electronic application process (https://cpc.omao.noaa.gov/erecruit/login.jsp) and then submit paper forms via mail. An in-person interview is also required.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0047.

    Form Number(s): NOAA 56-42 and NOAA 56-42A.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Affected Public: Individuals or households.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 150.

    Estimated Time per Response: Written applications, 5 hours; interviews, 90 minutes; references, 15 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,088.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $10,875 in recordkeeping, recording and travel costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24610 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Department of Defense Military Family Readiness Council; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Department of Defense Military Family Readiness Council will take place.

    DATES:

    Open to the public Tuesday, December 11, 2018 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The address of the open meeting is the Pentagon, 1155 Defense Pentagon PLC2, Pentagon Library and Conference Center, Room B6, Washington, DC 20301.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William C. Story, (571) 372-5345 (Voice), (571) 372-0884 (Facsimile), OSD Pentagon OUSD P-R Mailbox Family Readiness Council, [email protected] (Email). Mailing address is Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Military Community & Family Policy), Office of Family Readiness Policy, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350-2300, Room 3G15. Website: http://www.militaryonesource.mil/those-who-support-mfrc. The most up-to-date changes to the meeting agenda can be found on the website.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Purpose of the Meeting: This is the first meeting of the Council for Fiscal Year 2019 (FY2019). During this meeting subject matter experts will present information to the Council concerning the Delivery of Service and Family Member Programs Tailored to Millennials, one of the focus areas chosen by the Council for FY2019.

    Agenda: Opening Remarks, Status Updates, Administrative Issues, Review of Written Public Submissions, Effective Digital Communication Strategies to Reach Millennials, Installations of the Future-What Today's Millennials Want on Tomorrow's Installations, Marine Corps Community Services Innovation Effort, Military Community Outreach and Messaging to Millennials and Families, Questions and Answers and Council Member Discussion, Closing Remarks. Note: exact order may vary.

    Meeting Accessibility: This meeting is open to the public. Members of the public who are interested in attending this meeting must RSVP online to [email protected] no later than December 4, 2018. Meeting attendee RSVPs should indicate if an escort is needed to the meeting location (non-CAC Card holders need an escort) and if handicapped accessible transportation is needed. All visitors without CAC cards that are attending the MFRC must pre-register prior to entering the Pentagon. RSVPs to the MFRC mailbox needing escort to the meeting will be contacted by email from the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA) with instructions for registration. Please follow these instructions carefully. Otherwise, members of the public may be denied access to the Pentagon on the day of the meeting. Members of the public who are approved for Pentagon access should arrive at the Pentagon Visitors Center waiting area (Pentagon Metro Entrance) no later than 9:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting to allow time to pass through security check points and to be escorted to the meeting location. Contact Eddy Mentzer, (571) 372-0857 (Voice), (571) 372-0884, (Facsimile) if you have any questions about your RSVP.

    Written Statements: Persons interested in providing a written statement for review and consideration by Council members attending the December 11, 2018 meeting must do so no later than close of business Tuesday, November 27, 2018, through the Council mailbox at [email protected] Written statements received after this date will be provided to Council members in preparation for the second MFRC meeting of FY2019. The Designated Federal Officer (DFO) will review all timely submissions and ensure submitted written statements are provided to Council members prior to the meeting that is subject to this notice. Written statements must not be longer than two type-written pages and should address the following details: Issue or concern, discussion, and a recommended course of action. Those who make submissions are requested to avoid including personally identifiable information (PII) such as names of adults and children, phone numbers, addresses, social security numbers and other contact information within the body of the written statement. Links or supporting documentation may also be included, if necessary, to provide brief appropriate historical context and background information.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24640 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Board of Regents, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The DoD is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Board of Regents (“the Board”), Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) will take place.

    DATES:

    Tuesday, November 6, 2018, open to the public from 8:00 a.m. to approximately 11:15 a.m. Closed session will occur from approximately 11:20 a.m. to 11:50 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Everett Alvarez Jr. Board of Regents Room (D3001), Bethesda, Maryland 20814.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joshua Barricklow, 301-295-9805 (Voice), 301-295-1960 (Facsimile), [email protected] (Email). Mailing address is 4301 Jones Bridge Road, A1020, Bethesda, Maryland 20814. Website: https://www.usuhs.edu/vpe/bor.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Designated Federal Officer, the Board of Regents, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences was unable to provide public notification required by 41 CFR 102-3.150(a) concerning the meeting on November 6, 2018 of the Board of Regents, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day notification requirement.

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C., Appendix), the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of the meeting is to provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Defense, through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, on academic and administrative matters critical to the full accreditation and successful operation of USU. These actions are necessary for USU to pursue its mission, which is to educate, train and comprehensively prepare uniformed services health professionals, officers, scientists and leaders to support the Military and Public Health Systems, the National Security and National Defense Strategies of the United States, and the readiness of our Uniformed Services.

    Agenda: The actions scheduled to occur include recommendations regarding the awarding of associate, baccalaureate and graduate degrees; recommendations regarding the approval of faculty appointments and promotions; and recommendations regarding award nominations. The USU President will provide a report on recent actions affecting academic and operational aspects of USU. Member reports will include an Academics Summary consisting of reports from the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute; the Registrar; the Assistant Vice President for Accreditation and Organizational Assessment; and the Faculty Senate. Member Reports will also include a Finance and Administration Summary consisting of reports from the Senior Vice President, Southern Region; the Senior Vice President, Western Region; the Vice President for Finance and Administration; and the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine. There will be reports from each of the deans from the F. Edward Hebert School of Medicine, the Daniel K. Inouye Graduate School of Nursing, the Postgraduate Dental College, and the College of Allied Health Sciences. A closed session will be held, immediately following the open session, to discuss active investigations and personnel actions.

    Meeting Accessibility: Pursuant to Federal statutes and regulations (5 U.S.C., Appendix, 5 U.S.C. 552b, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165) and the availability of space, the meeting is open to the public from 8:00 a.m. to approximately 11:15 a.m. Seating is on a first-come basis. Members of the public wishing to attend the meeting should contact Joshua Barricklow at the address and phone number noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2, 5-7), the DoD has determined that the portion of the meeting from 11:20 a.m. to 11:50 a.m. shall be closed to the public. The Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), in consultation with the Department of Defense Office of General Counsel, has determined in writing that this portion of the Board's meeting will be closed as the discussion will disclose sensitive personnel information, will include matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of the agency, will involve allegations of a person having committed a crime or censuring an individual, and may disclose investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes.

    Written Statements: Pursuant to section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and 41 CFR 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments to the Board about its approved agenda pertaining to this meeting or at any time regarding the Board's mission. Individuals submitting a written statement must submit their statement to the Designated Federal Officer at the address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Written statements that do not pertain to a scheduled meeting of the Board may be submitted at any time. However, if individual comments pertain to a specific topic being discussed at the planned meeting, then these statements must be received prior to the meeting, otherwise, the comments may not be provided to or considered by the Board until a later date. The Designated Federal Officer will compile all timely submissions with the Board's Chair and ensure such submissions are provided to Board Members before the meeting.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24634 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy Notice of Availability of Government-Owned Inventions; Available for Licensing AGENCY:

    Department of the Navy, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of the Navy (DoN) announces the availability of the inventions listed below, assigned to the United States Government, as represented by the Secretary of the Navy, for domestic and foreign licensing by the Department of the Navy.

    ADDRESSES:

    Requests for copies of the patents cited should be directed to Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Div., Code OOL, Bldg. 2, 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522-5001.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Christopher Monsey, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Div., Code OOL, Bldg. 2, 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522-5001, email [email protected], 812-854-2777.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following patents are available for licensing: Patent No. 10,101125 (Navy Case No. 200366): PRECISION ENGAGEMENT SYSTEM//Patent No. 10,106,880 (Navy Case No. 200332): MODIFYING THE SURFACE CHEMISTRY OF A MATERIAL//Patent No. 10,109,915 (Navy Case No. 103078): PLANAR NEAR-FIELD CALIBRATION OF DIGITAL ARRAYS USING ELEMENT PLANE WAVE SPECTRA//Patent No. 10,091,664 (Navy Case No. 200240): SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR UNOBTRUSIVELY AND RELOCATEABLY EXTENDING COMMUNICATION COVERAGE AND SUPPORTING UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV) ACTIVITIES//Patent No. 10,094,866 (Navy Case No. 103206): PORTABLE MULTI-FUNCTION CABLE TESTER//Patent No. 10,095,193 (Navy Case No. 200284): HIGH SPEED, HIGH VOLTAGE (HV) CAPACITOR SYSTEM (HVCS) CONTROL SYSTEMS AND RELATED METHODS FOR HVCS CHARGE/DISCHARGE UPON ACTIVATION/DEACTIVATION OF A HV MAIN POWER SYSTEM (MPS) OR SYSTEM FAULT EVENT INCLUDING A FIRST AND SECOND TIMING SEQUENCE FOR MPS MAIN RELAY(S) AND HVCS RELAY(S) OPERATION//Patent No. 10,101,106 (Navy Case No. 200388): PORTABLE PART OR CONSUMABLE ITEM CARRIER WITH ANTI-JAM FEED SYSTEM WITH EXEMPLARY CONSUMING ITEM SYSTEMS//Patent No. 10,107,858 (Navy Case No. 200360): DIGITAL TEST SYSTEM//Patent No. 10,109,924 (Navy Case No. 200393): METHOD FOR ASSEMBLING A MULTI-ELEMENT APPARATUS USING A RECONFIGURABLE ASSEMBLY APPARATUS//and Patent No. 10,114,127 (Navy Case No. 200238): AUGMENTED REALITY VISUALIZATION SYSTEM.

    Authority:

    35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. Meredith Steingold Werner, Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24644 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
    ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION Meeting Notice AGENCY:

    U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Public Quarterly Conference Call for EAC Board of Advisors.

    DATES:

    Monday, November 26, 2018, 2:00-4:00 p.m. (EDT).

    ADDRESSES:

    EAC Board of Advisers Quarterly Conference Call.

    To listen and monitor the event as an attendee:

    1. Go to: https://eacevents.webex.com/eacevents/onstage/g.php?MTID=e510ecfadd5368d5dd1ccb09b121792fa.

    2. Click “Join Now”.

    To join the audio conference only:

    1. To receive a call back, provide your phone number when you join the event, or

    2. call the number below and enter the access code.

    U.S. Toll Free: +1-855-892-3345 U.S. TOLL: +1-415-527-5035 Access code: 905 062 514

    (See toll-free dialing restrictions at https://www.webex.com/pdf/tollfree_restrictions.pdf).

    For assistance: Contact the host, Mark Abbott at [email protected]eac.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bryan Whitener; Telephone: (301) 563-3961.

    Purpose: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) Board of Advisors will conduct a conference call to discuss current EAC activities.

    Agenda: The Board of Advisors (BOA) will receive updates from EAC staff and BOA officers regarding EAC activities; the 2019 BOA Conference; Election Day Activities; Post-Election Day Activities; and BOA Committee/Sub-Committee Updates. The Board of Advisors will receive updates from the following BOA Committees: Resolutions; Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG); By-Laws; and Strategic Planning. The Board of Advisors will discuss the next Quarterly BOA Conference Call. There will be no votes conducted on this call.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the public may submit relevant written statements to the Board of Advisors with respect to the meeting no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on Friday, November 23, 2018. Statements may be sent via email at [email protected], via standard mail addressed to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 1335 East-West Highway, Suite 4300, Silver Spring, MD 20910, or by fax at 301-734-3108.

    This conference call will be open to the public.

    Bryan Whitener, Director, National Clearinghouse on Elections, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24631 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-KF-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection for the Weatherization Assistance Program AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Energy (DOE), pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995), intends to extend for three years, an information collection request with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The information collection request, Historic Preservation for Energy Efficiency Programs, was initially approved on December 1, 2010 under OMB Control No. 1910-5155 and expired on September 30, 2015. The reinstatement will allow DOE to continue data collection on the status of the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), the State Energy Program (SEP), and the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this propose information collection must be received on or before January 14, 2019. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting comments within that period, contact the person listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments may be sent to: Christine Askew, EE-5W, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585, Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to: Christine Askew, EE-5W, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585-1290, Phone: (202) 586-8224, Fax: (202) 287-1992, Email: [email protected]

    Additional information and reporting guidance concerning the Historic Preservation reporting requirement for the WAP, SEP, and EECBG programs are available for review at: https://www.energy.gov/eere/wipo/downloads/wpn-10-12-historic-preservation-implementation.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Program activities will ensure compliance the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the extended collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No.: 1910-5155; (2) Information Collection Request Title: “Historic Preservation for Energy Efficiency Programs”; (3) Type of Review: Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection; (4) Purpose: To collect information on the status of Weatherization Assistance Program, State Energy Program, and Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program activities; (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 275; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 275; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 662; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.

    Statutory Authority: Title V, National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Public Law 89-665 as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.).

    Signed in Washington, DC, on October 30, 2018.

    James R. Carlisle, Operations Supervisor, Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs, U.S. Department of Energy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24695 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC19-23-000.

    Applicants: sPower OpCo A, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of sPower OpCo A, LLC.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5096.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1648-002.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2018-11-06_Time Bar Compliance Filing to be effective 11/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5051.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2440-001.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: SCE's Response to Deficiency re Revised Formula Rate TO Tariff TCJA to be effective 11/16/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5104.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2465-000.

    Applicants: Potter Road Powerhouse LLC.

    Description: Supplement to September 24, 2018 Potter Road Powerhouse LLC tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5067.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2466-000.

    Applicants: Federal Way Powerhouse LLC.

    Description: Supplement to September 24, 2018 Federal Way Powerhouse LLC tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5066.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-292-000.

    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Clay Solar LGIA Termination Filing to be effective 10/10/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5055.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-293-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., ALLETE, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-06_SA 3202 MP-GRE IA (Clover Valley) to be effective 11/7/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5079.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-294-000.

    Applicants: GE Oleander LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market Based Rate Authority to be effective 11/7/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-295-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits Informational filing for Qualification in the Forward Capacity Market.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5083.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-296-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to WMPA, SA No. 4794; Queue No. AC1-116 (consent and amend) to be effective 8/22/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5107.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-297-000.

    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, West Penn Power Company.

    Description: PJM RTEP Generator Deactivation Project, Incentive Rate Application, et al. of Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5109.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24669 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC19-22-000.

    Applicants: Dominion Bridgeport Fuel Cell, LLC, FuelCell Energy Finance, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of Dominion Bridgeport Fuel Cell, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5209.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1533-018.

    Applicants: Macquarie Energy LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Macquarie Energy LLC.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5199.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2219-001.

    Applicants: System Energy Resources, Inc.

    Description: Report Filing: SERI Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5197.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2324-000.

    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.

    Description: Supplement (Diagram) to August 27, 2018 Request for Limited Waiver of Filed Tariff of NorthWestern Corporation.

    Filed Date: 11/2/18.

    Accession Number: 20181102-5259.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/9/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-286-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 3101R2 Heartland Consumers Power District NITSA and NOA to be effective 4/22/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5063.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-287-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA SA No. 5227; Queue No. AB2-158 to be effective 10/8/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5064.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-288-000.

    Applicants: Carson Hybrid Energy Storage LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market Based Rate to be effective 12/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5076.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-289-000.

    Applicants: Cleco Cajun LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective 1/5/2019.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5181.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-290-000.

    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Appendix A to the US DOE Berkeley Site Office IA (SA 63) to be effective 11/6/2018.

    Filed Date: 11/5/18.

    Accession Number: 20181105-5198.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/26/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-291-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool.

    Description: ISO New England Inc., et al. submits Installed Capacity Requirement, Hydro Quebec Interconnection Capability Credits and Related Values for the 2022/2023 Capacity Commitment Period.

    Filed Date: 11/6/18.

    Accession Number: 20181106-5025.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/27/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24671 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2788-017] Goodyear Lake Hydro, LLC; Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for a subsequent license for the Colliersville Hydroelectric Project, located on the Susquehanna River, in the Town of Milford, Otsego County, New York, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project.

    The EA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

    A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY).

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this notice.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support. In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2788-017.

    For further information, contact Emily Carter at (202) 502-6512 or by email at [email protected].

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24703 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 11426-000] T.A. Keck, III and H.S. Keck; Notice of Existing Licensee's Failure To File a Notice of Intent To File a Subsequent License Application, and Soliciting Notices of Intent To File a License Application and Pre-Application Documents

    The current license for T.A. Keck, III and H.S. Keck's (the Kecks') Blackstone Mill Hydroelectric Project No. 11426 (Blackstone Mill Project) was issued on November 18, 1993, for a term of 30 years, ending October 31, 2023.1 The 65-kilowatt (kW) project is located on East Mahantango Creek, a tributary of the Susquehanna River near the Town of Pillow, in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.

    1See T.A. Keck, III and H.S. Keck, 65 FERC ¶ 62,149 (1993).

    The principal project works consist of: (1) A 102-foot-long, approximately 2.5-foot-high dam; (2) a reservoir with a surface area of about 3 acres and a total volume of about 7 acre-feet at the normal water surface elevation of approximately 470 feet mean sea level; (3) a headrace or power canal about 3,200 feet long by 20 feet wide by 5 feet deep; (4) a stone-masonry powerhouse containing two generating units rated at 50 kW and 15 kW for a total installed capacity of 65 kW; (5) an overhead 240-volt transmission line about 60 feet long; and (6) appurtenant equipment and facilities.

    At least five years before the expiration of a license for a minor water power project in which sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act were waived, the Commission's regulations require the licensee to file with the Commission a notice of intent (NOI) that contains an unequivocal statement of the licensee's intention to file or not to file an application for a subsequent license, details on the principal project works and installed plant capacity, and other information.2

    2 18 CFR 16.19(b) (2018) (citing 18 CFR 16.6(b)). Section 16.19(b) applies to licenses not subject to Parts 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act.

    If such a licensee does not inform the Commission that it intends to file an application for, in this case, a subsequent license for the project, the licensee may not file an application for a subsequent license, either individually or in conjunction with an entity or entities that are not currently licensees of the project.3

    3 18 CFR 16.24(b) (2018).

    Because the existing license expires on October 31, 2023, the NOI was due to be filed no later than the close of business on October 31, 2018. The Kecks, the existing licensee for the Blackstone Mill Project, failed to file an NOI by this date.

    Any party interested in filing a license application for the Blackstone Mill Project No. 11426 must first file a Notice of Intent (NOI) 4 and pre-application document (PAD) 5 pursuant to Part 5 of the Commission's regulations. Although the integrated licensing process (ILP) is the default pre-filing process, section 5.3(b) of the Commission's regulations allows a potential license applicant to request to use alternative licensing procedures when it files its NOI.6

    4 18 CFR 5.5 (2018).

    5 18 CFR 5.6 (2018).

    6 18 CFR 5.3(b) (2018).

    This notice sets a deadline of 120 days from the date of this notice for interested applicants, other than the existing licensee, to file NOIs, PADs, and requests to use an alternative licensing process.

    Applications for a subsequent license from potential (non-licensee) applicants must be filed with the Commission at least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license.7 Because the existing license expires on October 31, 2023, applications for license for this project must be filed by October 31, 2021.8

    7 18 CFR 16.20 (2018).

    8 To the extent an interested applicant files an NOI and PAD and elects or is required to use the Commission's ILP, a process plan will be issued within 180 days of this notice, which accelerates the steps of the ILP to allow for filing a subsequent license application by the October 31, 2021 deadline.

    Questions concerning this notice should be directed to Andy Bernick at (202) 502-8660 or [email protected]

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24701 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER19-288-000] Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Carson Hybrid Energy Storage LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of Carson Hybrid Energy Storage LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is November 26, 2018.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24670 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL19-11-000] American Wind Energy Association, The Wind Coalition v. Southwest Power Pool, Inc.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on November 2, 2018, pursuant to sections 206, 306, and 309 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e, 825e, and 825h, and section 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 (2018), the American Wind Energy Association and The Wind Coalition (collectively, Complainants) filed a formal complaint (complaint) against Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Respondent) requesting that the Commission find that sections of the Respondent's Financial Obligations of Withdrawing Members Bylaws and Membership Agreement, as applied to Independent Power Producer and other similarly situated non-transmission owners and non-load-serving entities, are unlawful, unjust and unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory, as more fully explained in the complaint.

    Complainants certify that a copy of the complaint has been served on the contacts for the Respondent as listed on the Commission's website in the list of Corporate Officials.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 23, 2018.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24702 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AC19-19-000] Notice of Filing; Southern California Edison Company, Appalachian Power Company, Arizona Public Service, Indiana Michigan Power Company, Kentucky Power Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, PNM Resources, Public Service Company of Colorado, Puget Sound Energy, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Southwestern Electric Power Company, Southwestern Public Service Company, Wheeling Power Company

    Take notice that on November 5, 2018, Southern California Edison Company, Appalachian Power Company, Arizona Public Service, Indiana Michigan Power Company, Kentucky Power Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, PNM Resources, Public Service Company of Colorado, Puget Sound Energy, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Southwestern Electric Power Company, Southwestern Public Service Company, and Wheeling Power Company (collectively, the Joint Requesters), filed a request for approval to use Account 439, authorized by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 26, 2018.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24706 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0256; FRL-9986-00-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Emission Guidelines for Existing Other Solid Waste Incineration Units (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Emission Guidelines for Existing Other Solid Waste Incineration Units (EPA ICR No. 2164.06, OMB Control No. 2060-0562), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register on June 29, 2017, during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0256, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The Emission Guidelines for Existing Other Solid Waste Incineration (OSWI) Units (40 CFR part 60, subpart FFFF) apply to any air quality program in either a state or a United States protectorate with one or more existing OSWI units or air curtain incinerators that commenced construction either on or before December 9, 2004. The affected OSWI units include two sub-categories: Very small municipal waste combustion (VSMWC) units that combust less than 35 tons per day of waste and institutional waste incineration (IWI) units. This Subpart does not directly affect incineration unit owners and operators; however, they must comply with the state's plan that was developed by the air quality program administrator to implement the emission guidelines. In general, all emission guidelines require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart FFFF.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: OSWI units, which include two subcategories—VSMWC units that combust less than 35 tons per day of waste and IWI units.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60, subpart FFFF).

    Estimated number of respondents: 99 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, semiannually, and annually.

    Total estimated burden: 70,200 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $8,190,000 (per year), which includes $495,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours or cost in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due to two considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the past three years, and are not anticipated to change over the next three years; and (2) the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall burden.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24654 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0022; FRL-9983-64-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Acid Rain Program (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Acid Rain Program (EPA ICR No. 1633.17, OMB Control No. 2060-0258) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register on June 6, 2018 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0022, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karen VanSickle, Clean Air Markets Division, Office of Air and Radiation, (6204M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9220; fax number: 202-343-2361; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The Acid Rain Program was established under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments to address acid deposition by reducing emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX). This ICR addresses the burden and costs associated with developing and modifying permits, complying with NOX permitting requirements, monitoring emissions, transferring allowances, participating in the annual allowance auctions, and participating in the program as an opt-in source.

    Form Numbers: Agent Notice of Delegation #5900-172; Certificate of Representation #7610-1; General Account Form #7610-5; Allowance Transfer Form #7610-6; Retired Unit Exemption #7610-20; Allowance Deduction #7620-4; Acid Rain Permit Application #7610-16; Acid Rain NOX Compliance Plan #7610-28; Acid Rain NOX Averaging Plan #7610-29; New Unit Exemption #7610-19; Opt-In Permit Application #7610-26; Opt-In Utilization Report #7620-9; Letter of Credit #7610-7A; EPA Allowance Auctions—Additional Information for Certified Checks or Wire Transfers #7610-7; SO2 Allowance Offer Form #7610-8; Thermal Energy Plan #7610-27; Notification For Distribution of Proceeds From EPA Auctions #7610-11; Opt-In Reduction from Improved Efficiency Confirmation Report #7620-8; Thermal Energy Compliance Report #7620-10.

    Respondents/affected entities: Electricity generating plants, industrial sources, and other persons.

    Respondents' obligation to respond: Voluntary and mandatory (Clean Air Act sections 403, 407, 408, 410, 412, and 416).

    Estimated number of respondents: 1,234 (total); includes 1,184 sources and 50 non-source entities participating in allowance trading activities.

    Frequency of response: On occasion, quarterly, and annually.

    Total estimated burden: 1,873,880 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $276,159,952 (per year), includes $139,339,770 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in Estimates: There is a decrease of 249,525 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. The decrease is principally due to source retirements, which have both reduced the estimated overall number of affected sources and shifted the estimated mix of monitoring methodologies used. The other factors contributing to the decrease in burden are reductions in the estimated numbers of allowance transfer and deduction submissions, expected opt-in sources, and allowance auction bids.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24649 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0599; FRL-9985-43-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Renewable Fuel Standard Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Renewable Fuel Standard Program (EPA ICR No. 2546.01, OMB Control No. 2060-NEW) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a request for approval of an ICR that consolidates several existing collections. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register on December 8, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0599, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anne-Marie Pastorkovich, Office of Air and Radiation/Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, (6405A), Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9623; fax number: 202-343-2800; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: This information collection request (ICR) consolidates and updates recordkeeping and reporting burden and cost estimates related to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program into one, consistent, and easy-to-understand format. This consolidation will assist interested parties in better understanding all the information collection activities associated with RFS.

    Under the RFS program, a certain volume of renewable fuel is required to replace or reduce the quantity of petroleum-based transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel. Obligated parties under the RFS program are refiners or importers of gasoline or diesel fuel. Obligated parties, and exporters of renewable fuel, must meet an annual Renewable Volume Obligation (RVO). Parties meet their RVO by blending renewable fuels into transportation fuel or by obtaining credits called Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs). EPA calculates and establishes RVOs every year through rulemaking, based on the CAA volume requirements and projections of gasoline and diesel production for the coming year. The standards are converted into a percentage and obligated parties must demonstrate compliance annually. RINs are used to demonstrate compliance with the standard and are generated by producers and importers of renewable fuels and traded by various parties. To track compliance with the RFS program, various parties involved with the production and blending of renewable fuels, and who generate, trade or use RINs, must register with EPA and submit various types of compliance reports related to the activity they engage in under the program. Recordkeeping requirements under the RFS program include product transfer documents (PTDs) and retention of records.

    Recordkeeping and reporting are based upon the activity the party engages in under the regulations. A party may be registered in more than one activity. For example, a single party may be both an obligated party and a RIN generator. Such a party would register once, but would submit registration information describing both activities they plan to engage in under the program. The party would then submit reports based upon which activities they actually engaged in during the compliance (calendar) year. Basing the recordkeeping and reporting upon a party's activities ensures that parties must sustain only the recordkeeping and reporting burden necessary to implement the RFS program.

    This ICR will supersede and replace several existing ICRs, including: RFS2 Voluntary RIN Quality Assurance Program, OMB Control Number 2060-0688; Cellulosic Production Volume Projections and Efficient Producer Reporting, OMB Control Number 2060-0707; Renewable Fuels Standard Program (RFS2-Supplemental), OMB Control Number 2060-0637; Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) Program, OMB Control Number 2060-0640; Regulation of Fuel and Fuel Additives: 2011 Renewable Fuel Standards—Petition for International Aggregate Compliance Approach, OMB Control Number 2060-0655; and Production Outlook Report for Unregistered Renewable Fuels Producers, OMB Control Number 2060-0660.

    Form Numbers: RFS0104: RFS Activity Report, RFS0303: RFS Annual Compliance Report, RFS0601: RFS Renewable Fuel Producer Supplemental Report, RFS0701: RFS Renewable Fuel Producer Co-Products Report, RFS0801: RFS Renewable Biomass Report, RFS0901: RFS Production Outlook Report, RFS1400: Reporting Fuels under 80.1451(b)(1)(ii)(T), RFS1500: Reporting Fuels under 80.1451(b)(1)(ii)(T)—Finished Fuel Blending, RFS1600: Reporting Fuels under 80.1451(b)(1)(ii)(T)—Blender Contact, RFS2000: Batch Verification, RFS2100: Aggregate RIN Verification, RFS2200: On-Site Audit Report, RFS2300: List of Potentially Invalid RINs, RFS2400: Mass Balance, RFS2500: RFS Efficient Producer Data Report, and RFS2700: RFS Cellulosic Biofuel Producer Questionnaire.

    Respondents/affected entities: RIN Generators (producers and importers of renewable fuels), Obligated Parties (refiners and importers of gasoline and diesel transportation fuels), RIN Owners, Renewable Fuel Exporters, QAP Providers, and petitioners under the international aggregate compliance approach.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: The RFS program assigns mandatory reporting that is based upon activity.

    Estimated number of respondents: 19,542.

    Frequency of response: On occasion, quarterly, annual.

    Total estimated burden: 566,665 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $57,457,330 (per year), which includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24655 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0055; FRL-9985-86-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for the Secondary Lead Smelter Industry (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for the Secondary Lead Smelter Industry (EPA ICR No. 1686.11, OMB Control No. 2060-0296), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register, on June 29, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0055, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Secondary Lead Smelter Industry apply to existing facilities and new facilities that operate furnaces to reduce scrap lead metal and lead compounds to elemental lead. Specifically, the rule applies to secondary lead smelters that use blast, reverberatory, rotary, or electric smelting furnaces to recover lead metal from scrap lead, primarily from used lead-acid automotive-type batteries. New facilities include those that commenced construction or reconstruction after the date of proposal. In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR 63, subpart X.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Secondary lead smelters.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart X).

    Estimated number of respondents: 12 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, semiannually and annually.

    Total estimated burden: 21,700 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $2,630,000 (per year), which includes $251,000 annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in the total estimated burden and the number of responses from the most recently approved ICR due to several adjustments: (1) The overall number of sources decreased; and (2) there were several missing burden line items and inaccurate assumptions that were corrected since the previous renewal. In addition, the previous renewal had not accounted for any burden for dioxin/furan testing since that burden occurs every six years, which was added to this renewal. Third, this renewal includes time for each affected facility to review rule requirements each year. There is a decrease in the O&M costs from the most recently approved ICR due to an adjustment in the number of sources.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24650 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0033; FRL-9985-27-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Petroleum Refineries (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Petroleum Refineries (EPA ICR No. 1054.13, OMB Control No. 2060-0022), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register, on June 29, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0033, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Petroleum Refineries were proposed on June 11, 1973, promulgated on March 8, 1974, and amended on both September 12, 2012 and December 1, 2015. The 2015 amendment finalized technical clarifications to improve consistency and clarity and to address issues related to a 2008 industry petition for reconsideration. The 2012 amendment allowed the option for affected sources to comply with Subpart J by following the applicable provisions in the NSPS Subpart Ja rule. The affected sources are: (1) Fluid catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) catalyst regenerator or fuel gas combustion device (FGCD) other than a flare that commenced construction, reconstruction or modification after June 11, 1973 and on/or before May 14, 2007; (2) FGCD that is also a flare that commenced construction, reconstruction or modification after June 11, 1973 and on/or before June 24, 2008; or (3) any Claus sulfur recovery plant with a design capacity of more than 20 long tons per day sulfur feed which commenced construction, reconstruction or modification after October 4, 1976 and on/or before May 14, 2007.

    In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart J.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Petroleum refineries.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60, subpart J).

    Estimated number of respondents: 149 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.

    Total estimated burden: 15,800 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $2,500,000 (per year), which includes $826,000 annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance (O&M) costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in labor hours from the most-recently approved ICR due to an adjustment. The total hours include an hour allowance to allow each source to familiarize themselves with the requirements each year. Finally, there is slight increase in the O&M costs, as costs were adjusted from $2,005.00 to $2,016.00 using the Chemical Engineering Index.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24652 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9986-39-OARM] Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board; Membership AGENCY:

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given of the membership of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Performance Review Board for 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Debbi Hart, Director, Policy, Planning & Training Division, 3601M, Office of Human Resources, Office of Administration and Resources Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460 (202) 564-2011.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 4314(c)(1) through (5) of Title 5, U.S.C., requires each agency to establish in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more SES performance review boards. This board shall review and evaluate the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor, along with any recommendations to the appointment authority relative to the performance of the senior executive.

    Members of the 2018 EPA Performance Review Board are:

    Richard Buhl, Assistant Regional Administrator for Technical and Management Services, Region 8 Sheryl Bilbrey, Director, Office of Environmental Cleanup, Region 10 David Bloom, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief Financial Officer Wesley Carpenter, (Ex-Officio), Acting Director, Office of Human Resources, Office of Administration and Resources Management Katrina Cherry, Director, Office of Management and International Services, Office of International and Tribal Affairs Edward Chu, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 7 Diana Esher, Assistant Regional Administrator for Policy and Management, Region 3 Lynn Flowers, Associate Director for Science, Office of Science Policy, Office of Research and Development Sheila Frace, Deputy Director, Office of Wastewater Management, Office of Water Jeanneanne Gettle, Director, Water Protection Division, Region 4 Peter Grevatt, Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Office of Water Christopher Grundler, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation Debbi Hart, (Ex-Officio), Director, Policy, Planning and Training Division, Office Administration and Resources Management Randy Hill, Director, Enforcement Targeting and Data Division, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Kathleen Johnson, Director, Enforcement Division, Region 9 Deborah Jordan, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 9 Mark Kasman, Director, Office of Regional and Bilateral Affairs, Office of International and Tribal Affairs Richard Keigwin, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Arnold Layne, Deputy Director, Office of Pesticides Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Kenneth Lapierre, Assistant Regional Administrator for Policy and Management, Region 4 Matthew Leopard, Director, Office of Information Management, Office of Environmental Information David Lloyd, Director, Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization, Office of Land and Emergency Management Rohit Mathur, Senior Atmospheric Scientist, Office of Research and Development James McDonald, Assistant Regional Administrator for Management, Region 6 Albert McGartland, Director, National Center for Environmental Economics, Office of the Administrator Kenneth Moraff, Director, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Region 1 Ed Nam, Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 5 Jennifer Orme-Zaveleta, Deputy Assistant Administrator (Science), Office of Research and Development Howard Osborne, Associate Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief Financial Officer Elise Packard, Associate General Counsel, Civil Rights and Finance Law, Office of General Counsel Denise Polk, Director, Office of Grants and Debarment, Office of Administration and Resources Management Sylvia Quast, Regional Counsel—Region 9, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Mary Ellen Radzikowski, Deputy Director for Management, National Center for Environmental Research, Office of Research and Development Robin Richardson, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, Office of the Administrator Cecil Rodrigues, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 3 Gregory Sayles, Director, National Homeland Security Research Center, Office of Research and Development Lorie Schmidt, Principal Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel Nigel Simon, Director, Office of Program Management, Office of Land and Emergency Management Vicki Simons, (Ex-Officio), Director, Office of Civil Rights, Office of the Administrator Donna J. Vizian, (Ex-Officio), Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Administration and Resources Management Jeffrey Wells, Director, Office of Customer Advocacy Policy and Portfolio Management, Office of Environmental Information Pai-Yei Whung, Senior Research Scientist, Office of Research and Development Anahita Williamson, Director, Environmental Science and Assessment Division, Region 2 Helena Wooden-Aguilar, (Ex-Officio), Acting Deputy Chief of Staff, Office of the Administrator Dated: November 1, 2018. Donna J. Vizian, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Administration and Resources Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24741 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9986-43-OAR] Clean Air Act Advisory Committee; Notice of Charter Renewal AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of charter renewal.

    Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App.2, the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) is a necessary committee which is in the public interest. Accordingly, the CAAAC is being reinstated for a two-year period. The purpose of the CAAAC is to provide advice and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on policy issues associated with implementation of the Clean Air Act. Inquiries may be directed to Larry Weinstock, CAAAC Designated Federal Officer, U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mail Code 6103A), Washington, DC 20460, or by email to [email protected].

    Dated: November 5, 2018. William L. Wehrum, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24710 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0091; FRL-9986-10-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Engine Test Cells/Stands (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Engine Test Cells/Stands (EPA ICR No. 2066.07, OMB Control No. 2060-0483), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register on June 29, 2017, during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0091, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov, or in person, at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Engine Test Cells/Stands (40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPPP) apply to either new or reconstructed engine test cells/stands located at major source facilities that are being used for testing internal combustion engines. An engine test cell/stand is any apparatus used for testing uninstalled stationary or uninstalled mobile (motive) engines. A plant site that is a major source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions emits or has the potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 10 tons (9.07 megagrams) or more per year or any combination of HAPs at a rate of 25 tons (22.68 megagrams) or more per year. New facilities include those that commenced construction or reconstruction after the date of proposal. In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPPP.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of engine test cells/stands located at major source facilities that are being used for testing internal combustion engines.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPPP).

    Estimated number of respondents: 19 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.

    Total estimated burden: 2,150 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $204,000 (per year), which includes $6,200 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in the total estimated burden, number of responses, and Capital and O&M costs from the most-recently approved ICR due to several adjustments. First, based on consultations with internal Agency experts, there is an increase in the estimated number of new sources. This renewal reflects burden for an increase in the total number of sources and incorporates burden for one-time requirements for the new source. Second, this renewal includes time for each affected facility to review rule requirements each year.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24653 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0068; FRL-9986-05-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelting (EPA ICR No. 1856.11, OMB Control No. 2060-0414), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register on June 29, 2017, during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0068, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Primary Lead Smelting apply to existing and new facilities engaged in producing lead metal from ore concentrates. The category includes, but is not limited to, the following smelting processes: Sintering, reduction, preliminary treatment, refining and casting operations, process fugitive sources, and fugitive dust sources. New facilities include those that commenced construction or reconstruction after the date of proposal. In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart TTT.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities engaged in primary lead processing.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart TTT).

    Estimated number of respondents: 1 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially, quarterly and semiannually.

    Total estimated burden: 6,270 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $855,000 (per year), which includes $169,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase of 5 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to rounding of the total estimated burden to three significant digits.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24651 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [CC Docket No. 92-237; DA 18-1118] Next Meeting of the North American Numbering Council AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Commission released a public notice announcing the meeting of the North American Numbering Council (NANC). At this meeting, the NANC Working Groups will report on their progress in developing recommendations for the NANC's consideration. In addition, the NANC will continue its discussions on how to modernize and foster more efficient number administration in the United States. The NANC meeting is open to the public. The FCC will accommodate as many attendees as possible; however, admittance will be limited to seating availability.

    DATES:

    Tuesday, December 4, 2018, 9:30 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Requests to make an oral statement or provide written comments to the NANC should be sent to Carmell Weathers, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room 5-C162, Washington, DC 20554.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Carmell Weathers at (202) 418-2325 or [email protected] The fax number is: (202) 418-1413. The TTY number is: (202) 418-0484.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission will also provide audio coverage of the meeting. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Request for such accommodations should be submitted via email to [email protected] or by calling the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau @ (202) 418-0530 (voice) (202) 418-0432 (TTY). Such requests should include a detailed description of the accommodation needed. In addition, please include a way for the FCC to contact the requester if more information is needed to fill the request. Please allow at least five days advance notice for accommodation requests; last minute requests will be accepted but may not be possible to accommodate.

    Members of the public may submit comments to the NANC in the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System, ECFS, at www.fcc.gov/ecfs. Comments to the NANC should be filed in CC Docket No. 92-237.

    More information about the NANC is available at https://www.fcc.gov/about-fcc/advisory-committees/general/north-american-numbering-council. You may also contact Marilyn Jones, DFO of the NANC, at [email protected], or (202) 418-2357, Michelle Sclater, Alternate DFO, at [email protected], or (202) 418-0388; or Carmell Weathers, Special Assistant to the DFO, at [email protected], or (202) 418-2325.

    This is a summary of the Commission's document in CC Docket No. 92-237, DA 18-1118 released October 31, 2018. The complete text in this document is available for public inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863-2893, facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via the internet at http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is available on the Commission's website at http://www.fcc.gov.

    * The Agenda may be modified at the discretion of the NANC Chairman with the approval of the Designated Federal Officer (DFO).

    Federal Communications Commission. Marilyn Jones, Senior Counsel for Number Administration, Wireline Competition Bureau.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24680 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC (12th Floor).

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be open to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Correction and Approval of Minutes for October 25, 2018 Draft Advisory Opinion 2018-15: Wyden Draft Advisory Opinion 2018-13: OsiaNetwork LLC Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on Friends of Erik Paulsen (FEP) (A17-06) Management and Administrative Matters CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.

    Dayna C. Brown, Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24864 Filed 11-8-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”).

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The FTC intends to ask the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) to extend for an additional three years the current Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) clearance for the information collection requirements in the FTC Red Flags, Card Issuers, and Address Discrepancies Rules 1 (“Rules”). That clearance expires on November 30, 2018.

    1 16 CFR 681.1 (Duties regarding the detection, prevention, and mitigation of identity theft); 16 CFR 681.2 (Duties of card issuers regarding changes of address); 16 CFR 641.1 (Duties of users of consumer reports regarding address discrepancies).

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write “Red Flags Rule, PRA Comment, Project No. P095406” on your comment. File your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/RedFlagsPRA2 by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be addressed to Mark Eichorn, Assistant Director, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Bureau of Consumer Protection, (202) 326-3053, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Red Flags Rule, 16 CFR 681.1; Card Issuers Rule, 16 CFR 681.2; Address Discrepancy Rule, 16 CFR part 641.

    OMB Control Number: 3084-0137.

    Type of Review: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Abstract: The Red Flags Rule requires financial institutions and certain creditors to develop and implement written Identity Theft Prevention Programs. The Card Issuers Rule requires credit and debit card issuers to assess the validity of notifications of address changes under certain circumstances. The Address Discrepancy Rule provides guidance on what covered users of consumer reports must do when they receive a notice of address discrepancy from a nationwide consumer reporting agency. Collectively, these three anti-identity theft provisions are intended to prevent impostors from misusing another person's personal information for a fraudulent purpose.

    The Rules implement sections 114 and 315 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.

    The Commission received no relevant public comments on the Rules' information collection requirements and FTC staff's associated PRA burden analysis and estimates that appeared in an August 8, 2018 Federal Register Notice.2 That Notice discusses in greater detail staff's methodology behind the estimates restated here in summary form, while also providing an overview of the Rules and the statutes that underlie them.3

    2 83 FR 39096.

    3 This Federal Register Notice, however, corrects summary figures that had appeared in the prior Notice at Part II., page 39,097 (inadvertently carried over from the FTC's 2015 published PRA estimates). The corrections are not numerically material, however, and the calculation methodologies that appeared in the prior Notice were as intended. Further, in Part III. C. of the prior Notice, at page 39,099, 1,667 hours then intended to be shown as an estimate for address verification were omitted from the hours subtotal for Section 315 and, by extension, the aggregate estimated burden hours for the Rules. However, given statutory changes that had not then been appropriately considered, those hours had been tied to an overstatement of the relevant population affected, as explained further in footnote 9 here. Accordingly, ultimately the estimated burden related to address verification is de minimis.

    Pursuant to the OMB regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, that implement the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the FTC is providing a second opportunity for the public to comment on:

    (1) Whether the disclosure requirements are necessary, including whether the information will be practically useful; (2) the accuracy of our burden estimates, including whether the methodology and assumptions used are valid; (3) 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.

    Estimated Annual Burden (1,385,290 hours; $66,185,200, labor costs)

    A. Section 114: Red Flags and Card Issuers Rules:

    (1) Red Flags:

    (a) Estimated Number of Respondents: 157,585 4

    4 This figure comprises 6,278 financial institutions and 151,307 creditors (87,774 high-risk entities, excluding financial institutions + 63,533 low-risk creditors). The total number of financial institutions draws from FTC staff analysis of state credit unions and insurers within the FTC's jurisdiction using 2015 Census Bureau data (“Statistics of U.S. Businesses”) and other online industry data. The total number of creditors draws from FTC staff analysis of 2015 Census data and industry data for businesses or organizations that market goods and services to consumers or other businesses or organizations subject to the FTC's jurisdiction, reduced by entities not likely to: (1) Obtain credit reports, report credit transactions, or advance loans; and (2) entities not likely to have covered accounts under the Rule. Currently, no further updated Census data is available online to inform revised estimates. Thus, for instant purposes, the FTC will continue to draw upon the 2015 data.

    (i) High-Risk Entities: 94,052 5

    5 High-risk entities include, for example, financial institutions within the FTC's jurisdiction and utilities, motor vehicle dealerships, telecommunications firms, colleges and universities, and hospitals.

    (ii) Low-Risk Entities: 63,533 6

    6 Low-risk entities include, for example, public warehouse and storage firms, nursing and residential care facilities, automotive equipment rental and leasing firms, office supplies and stationery stores, fuel dealers, and financial transaction processing firms.

    (b) Estimated Hours Burden: 7

    7 See the August 8, 2018 Notice, 83 FR at 39098, for details underlying the Red Flags hours burden estimates.

    (i) High-Risk Entities: 1,222,676 hours (ii) Low-Risk Entities: 39,179 hours

    (2) Card Issuers Rule:

    (a) Estimated Number of Respondents: 16,742 8

    8 FTC staff estimates that the Rule affects as many as 16,742 card issuers within the FTC's jurisdiction. This includes, for example, state credit unions, general retail merchandise stores, colleges and universities, and telecoms.

    (b) Estimated Hours Burden: 66,968 hours

    (3) Combined Labor Cost Burden: $65,112,327

    B. Section 315—Address Discrepancy Rule:

    (1) Estimated Number of Respondents: 121,000 9

    9 In the August 8, 2018 Notice, the estimated number of businesses that would be required to comply with the Address Discrepancy Rule had been greatly overstated. 83 FR at 39099. The FTC Address Discrepancy Rule covers only users of consumer reports that are motor vehicle dealers described in section 1029(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act and that are predominantly engaged in the sale and servicing of motor vehicles, the leasing and servicing of them, or both. See 77 FR 22200, 22201 (Apr. 13, 2012). The FTC recently estimated that there are approximately 121,000 motor vehicle dealers, determined as follows: 86,442 car dealers per NAICS data (49,905 new car dealers, 36,537 used car dealers) + [3,191 Recreational Vehicle Dealers; 7,185 boat dealers; 24,157 motorcycle, ATV/All Other Motor Vehicle Dealers] = 120,975. 82 FR 12452 (March 3, 2017). By extension, the estimated number of respondents expected to perform address verification, which had always been secondary to the estimates concerning customer verification and very small relative to the overall population subject to this Rule, becomes de minimis with the corrective adjustment to the latter. Thus, the estimates now concern customer verification only.

    (2) Estimated Hours Burden: 56,467 hours 10

    10 Based on an estimated average of 28 minutes per respondent. See 83 FR at 39099.

    (3) Estimated Labor Cost Burden: $1,072,873 11

    11 Based on an estimated hourly wage of $19 for administrative support personnel (computer operators; data entry and information processing workers; word processors and typists).

    C. Capital/Non-Labor Costs for Sections 114 and 315.

    FTC staff believes that the Rules impose negligible capital or other non-labor costs, as the affected entities are likely to have the necessary supplies and/or equipment already (e.g., offices and computers) for the information collections described herein.

    IV. Request for Comment

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the FTC to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before December 13, 2018. Write “Red Flags Rule, PRA Comment, Project No. P095406” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public FTC website, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm.

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online, or to send them to the Commission by courier or overnight service. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/RedFlagsPRA2 by following the instructions on the web-based form. When this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that website.

    If you file your comment on paper, write “Red Flags Rule, PRA Comment, Project No. P095406” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail it to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

    Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov/, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your comment should not include any sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

    Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the public FTC website—as legally required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from the FTC website, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

    The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before December 13, 2018. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy. For supporting documentation and other information underlying the PRA discussion in this Notice, see http://www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/PRA/praDashboard.jsp.

    Comments on the information collection requirements subject to review under the PRA should additionally be submitted to OMB. If sent by U.S. mail, they should be addressed to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Trade Commission, New Executive Office Building, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Comments sent to OMB by U.S. postal mail, however, are subject to delays due to heightened security precautions. Thus, comments instead can also be sent by email to [email protected]

    Heather Hippsley, Deputy General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24682 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [Docket No. CDC-2018-0110; NIOSH-224] Barriers to Participation in the NIOSH Coal Workers Health Surveillance Program AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Request for information.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coal Workers' Health Surveillance Program (CWHSP or Program), administered by CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), is seeking information from coal miners, miner advocates, unions, industry stakeholders, and other interested parties about barriers to participating in health screening offered by the Program to inform efforts to improve participation.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments: Comments may be submitted electronically, through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, or by sending a hard copy to the NIOSH Docket Office, Robert A. Taft Laboratories, MS-C34, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45226. All written submissions received must include the agency name (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS) and docket number (CDC-2018-0110; NIOSH-224) for this action. All relevant comments, including any personal information provided, will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cara N. Halldin, NIOSH Coal Workers' Health Surveillance Program, Respiratory Health Division, 1095 Willowdale Road, MS HG900.2, Morgantown, WV 26505-2888; (304) 285-5754 (this is not a toll-free number); [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NIOSH Coal Workers' Health Surveillance Program was authorized by the Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), to detect dust-induced interstitial lung disease (black lung or coal workers' pneumoconiosis) and prevent its progression in individual miners, and obtain information about temporal and geographic trends across the population of coal miners. Through the Program, coal miners are offered periodic health screenings, including chest x-rays and spirometry examinations, at no cost to them. These screenings can potentially detect early signs of black lung. NIOSH has administered the Program since 1970. Since that time, the prevalence of radiographic evidence of pneumoconiosis among participating coal miners reached its lowest level in the late 1990s, but has steadily increased since 2000 and is now at a 25-year high. In the Appalachian coal mining states of Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia, as many as one in five underground coal miners with more than 25 years' tenure are thought to have radiographic evidence of pneumoconiosis.1 Participation by coal miners in the CWHSP is voluntary, and about 35 percent of active coal miners participate in health screenings offered by the Program.2

    1 Blackley DJ, Halldin CN, Laney AS [2018]. Continued increase in prevalence of coal workers' pneumoconiosis in the United States, 1970-2017. AJPH 108(9):1220-1222.

    2Id.

    Greater participation in the Program would provide more opportunities for early detection of pneumoconiosis in coal miners, providing those with early disease the ability to take action to reduce the chance for progression to severe lung disease. In order to identify ways to improve participation in the Program, NIOSH is seeking information from all interested parties, especially active coal miners, as well as miner advocates, unions, industry stakeholders, and healthcare providers of screening services for the CWHSP, to learn about the factors that keep miners from participating in the health screening examinations that are available to them.

    NIOSH is particularly interested in receiving information about the following questions:

    1. Are coal miners aware that periodic health screenings are available, at no cost to them, through the Coal Workers' Health Surveillance Program?

    2. Is lack of convenience of the screening—for example, screening locations or hours of availability—a barrier to participation? If yes, please describe those factors that may prevent miners from accessing CWHSP screenings.

    3. NIOSH's mobile surveillance unit travels to different locations to provide free black lung screenings, including chest x-rays and spirometry tests.3 Does the mobile unit provide a useful supplement to services offered by approved healthcare facilities engaged by mine operators? If yes, please explain why mobile outreach is a useful supplement. If no, or if mobile outreach could be improved, please provide recommendations on how it could become more useful to the coal mining community.

    3See https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/cwhsp/free-screening/wv.html.

    4. Do coal miners receive encouragement to participate (or discouragement from participating) in the CWHSP screenings from others such as employers, unions, or co-workers? If so, please describe.

    5. Are scheduling issues, such as the need to take unpaid time off from work or use vacation hours or non-work hours for health screenings, a barrier to miners' participation in health screenings? If yes, please explain the scheduling issue that is a barrier and provide recommendations for how it could be overcome.

    6. Does concern about the confidentiality of medical information pose a barrier to participation? If this is a barrier, then please provide recommendations or suggestions for how it can be overcome.

    7. Does concern that the early identification of dust-related lung disease might adversely affect a miner's career (e.g., prevent career advancement or the ability to get a new coal mining job) pose a barrier to participation? If this is a barrier, then please provide recommendations or suggestions for how it can be overcome.

    8. Does concern that early identification of dust-related lung disease might affect subsequent eligibility for compensation through Federal or State programs pose a barrier to participation? If this is a barrier, then please describe the specific compensation programs and how eligibility for them can be affected by early detection of dust-related lung disease. Please also provide recommendations or suggestions for how this barrier could be overcome.

    9. Does concern that personal finances will require a miner to continue working despite early identification of dust-related lung disease pose a barrier to participation? If this is a barrier, please provide recommendations or suggestions for how it can be overcome.

    10. Are there any other barriers to participation that NIOSH should be aware of?

    Interested parties may participate in this activity by submitting written views, opinions, recommendations, and data. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you do not wish to be disclosed. Although your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments will be on public display, NIOSH will review all submissions and may choose to redact or withhold submissions containing private or proprietary information such as Social Security numbers, medical information, and/or inappropriate language. Comments may be submitted on any topic related to this action. All public comments will be posted in the docket for this action at https://www.regulations.gov.

    John J. Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24700 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-19-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS-2416-N] Basic Health Program; Final Administrative Order AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of Final Administrative Order.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice serves to announce that a Final Administrative Order related to the Basic Health Program (BHP) was issued to the States of New York and Minnesota on August 24, 2018.

    DATES:

    The Final Administrative Order was effective August 24, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher Truffer, (410) 786-1264; Meg Barry, (410) 786-1536.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Provisions of the Notice

    The CMS Administrator issued a Final Administrative Order to set forth the revised payment methodology that applies to the Basic Health Program for 2018 only (HHS Revised BHP Payment Methodology). The Administrative Order is an agency action under 5 U.S.C. 551(13), issued pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 555(b) and (e).

    The HHS Revised BHP Payment Methodology modifies the existing methodology for 2018, which is set forth in the payment notice entitled “Basic Health Program; Federal Funding Methodology for Program Years 2017 and 2018” (81 FR 10091, February 29, 2016) (February 2016 Payment Notice). The modification involves the application of a Premium Adjustment Factor (PAF) that considers the premium increases in other states that became effective after the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), an operating division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), discontinued payments to issuers for cost-sharing reductions (CSRs) provided to enrollees in qualified health plans (QHPs) offered on health insurance Exchanges.

    On July 6, 2018, pursuant to an amended stipulated order issued in State of New York v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 18-cv-00683 (S.D.N.Y. filed Jan. 26, 2018), CMS issued a Draft Administrative Order on which New York and Minnesota (the States) had an opportunity to comment. The States each submitted comments on August 6, 2018. CMS considered those comments in issuing the Final Administrative Order, which adopts the HHS Revised BHP Payment Methodology for 2018 as set forth in the Draft Administrative Order.

    II. Collection of Information Requirements

    This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping, or third-party disclosure requirements. Consequently, review by the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) is not required.

    III. Addendum

    We are publishing the Final Administrative Order as an addendum to this Notice.

    Dated: November 2, 2018. Seema Verma, Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. BILLING CODE 4120-01-P EN13NO18.099 EN13NO18.100 EN13NO18.101 EN13NO18.102 EN13NO18.103 EN13NO18.104 EN13NO18.105 EN13NO18.106 EN13NO18.107 EN13NO18.108 EN13NO18.109 EN13NO18.110 EN13NO18.111 EN13NO18.112 EN13NO18.113 EN13NO18.114 EN13NO18.115 EN13NO18.116
    [FR Doc. 2018-24673 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-C
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket Nos. FDA-2017-N-0558; FDA-2017-N-1315; FDA-2011-N-0776; FDA-2018-N-3038; FDA-2018-N-0405; FDA-2014-N-1048; FDA-2011-N-0908; FDA-2011-N-0920; and FDA-2018-N-1857] Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget Approvals AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing a list of information collections that have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-7726, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following is a list of FDA information collections recently approved by OMB under section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). The OMB control number and expiration date of OMB approval for each information collection are shown in table 1. Copies of the supporting statements for the information collections are available on the internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Table 1—List of Information Collections Approved By OMB Title of collection OMB control
  • No.
  • Date approval
  • expires
  • Disclosures in Professional and Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion 0910-0860 9/30/2020 Experimental Study of Risk Information Amount and Location in Direct-to-Consumer Print Ads 0910-0861 9/30/2020 Reclassification Petitions for Medical Devices 0910-0138 9/30/2021 Request for Samples and Protocols 0910-0206 9/30/2021 Medical Device Recall Authority 0910-0432 9/30/2021 Food Safety, Health, and Diet Survey 0910-0345 10/31/2020 Medical Device Labeling Regulations 0910-0485 10/30/2021 GFI: Clinical Trial Sponsors on the Establishment and Operation of Clinical Trial Data Monitoring Committees 0910-0581 10/31/2021 Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food 0910-0751 10/31/2021 Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals 0910-0789 10/31/2021
    Dated: November 5, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24609 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4100] Drug Development Tool Process Under the 21st Century Cures Act and Prescription Drug User Fee Act VI; Public Meeting; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is announcing a public meeting entitled “Drug Development Tool Process under the 21st Century Cures Act and PDUFA VI.” This public meeting is intended to fulfill commitments made by FDA under the sixth authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA VI) and the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act) by soliciting comments on Drug Development Tool Qualification at FDA related to the qualification process under section 507 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act); discussing taxonomy for biomarkers and related concepts used in drug development; and planning activities to define a framework with appropriate standards and scientific approaches to support qualification for a specified context of use.

    DATES:

    The public meeting will be held on December 11, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public meeting by January 31, 2019. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for registration date and information.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public meeting will be held at FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 1503A (the Great Room), Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments may not be considered. For timely consideration we request that electronic comments be submitted on or before January 31, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on January 31, 2019. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4100 for “Drug Development Tools Qualification under the 21st Century Cures Act and PDUFA VI.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Valerie Jimenez, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Hillandale Bldg., Rm. 2156, Silver Spring, MD 20993; 301-796-1345, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The Drug Development Tool (DDT) provisions in section 507 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 357) were added in December 2016 by section 3011 of the Cures Act (Pub. L. 114-255). FDA's DDT programs include the Animal Model Qualification Program, the Biomarker Qualification Program, and the Clinical Outcome Assessment Qualification Program. These programs are designed to facilitate drug and biological product development by allowing FDA to qualify DDTs based on certain foundational scientific information, thereby minimizing duplication of research and development efforts. FDA committed to meet certain performance goals under PDUFA VI. This reauthorization, part of the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 signed by the President on August 18, 2017, includes a number of performance goals and procedures that are documented in the PDUFA VI Commitment Letter, which is available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/UCM511438.pdf. These goal commitments were developed in consultation with patient and consumer advocates, healthcare professionals, and other public stakeholders, as part of negotiations with regulated industry. Section I.J.6.b. of the commitment letter, “Enhancing Drug Development Tools Qualification Pathway for Biomarkers,” states that FDA will convene a public meeting to discuss taxonomy for biomarkers used in drug development and a framework with appropriate standards and scientific approaches to support biomarkers under the taxonomy, including scientific criteria to determine acceptance of a biomarker qualification submission and essential elements of a formal biomarker qualification plan. Since there are overlapping deliverables between the Cures Act and PDUFA VI, this public meeting will address and fulfill those deliverables.

    II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Meeting

    FDA is convening a public meeting to discuss and seek public input regarding the DDT qualification pathway for animal models, biomarkers, and clinical outcome assessments. This public meeting will describe the qualification process under section 507 of the FD&C Act and will discuss taxonomy used in drug development, which will include the scientific criteria to determine the acceptance of a qualification submission and essential elements of a full qualification plan. In addition, we will discuss ongoing activities to develop general evidentiary standards to support qualification by the three qualification programs.

    III. Participating in the Public Meeting

    Registration: To register for the public meeting, please visit the following website: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/drug-development-tool-process-under-the-21st-century-cures-legislation-tickets-50528044742. Please provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email, and telephone.

    Registration is free and based on space availability, with priority given to early registrants. Persons interested in attending this public meeting must register by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, November 30, 2018. Registrants will receive confirmation when they have been accepted. Early registration is recommended because seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization.

    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact [email protected] no later than Friday, November 30, 2018, by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time.

    Requests for Oral Presentations: There will be time allotted during the public meeting for open public comment. Signup for this session will be on a first-come, first-served basis; there will be a time limit on the day of the workshop. Individuals and organizations with common interests are urged to consolidate or coordinate their presentations and request time for a joint presentation. No commercial or promotional material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public meeting.

    Webcast Information: FDA plans to provide a free, live webcast of this public meeting. The link to the public meeting is https://collaboration.fda.gov/r7zu2p7t3ab, which will not be accessible until 45 minutes prior to the meeting.

    FDA plans to post archived webcasts after the meeting; archived webcasts will be available.

    If you have never attended a Connect Pro event before, test your connection at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. To get a quick overview of the Connect Pro program, visit https://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview. FDA has verified the website addresses in this document, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but websites are subject to change over time.

    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript of the public meeting is available, it will be accessible at https://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES).

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24656 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-2970] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Surveys and Interviews With Investigational New Drug Sponsors To Assess Current Communication Practices With Food and Drug Administration Review Staff Under the Sixth Authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, Fax: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-NEW and title “Surveys and Interviews with Investigational New Drug Sponsors to Assess Current Communication Practices with Food and Drug Administration Review Staff Under the Sixth Authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act.” Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-7726, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Surveys and Interviews With Investigational New Drug (IND) Sponsors To Assess Current Communication Practices With Food and Drug Administration Review Staff Under the Sixth Authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA VI) OMB Control Number 0910-NEW

    In Fiscal Year 2017, FDA published guidance on communications between FDA review staff and drug sponsors during the IND phase of drug development. As part of PDUFA VI, FDA committed to a third-party assessment of current IND-phase communication practices, which should reflect this guidance. The contractor for the assessment of IND communication practices is Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG).

    Therefore, in accordance with the PDUFA VI Commitment Letter, FDA proposes to have ERG conduct surveys and interviews with sponsors of up to 150 active commercial INDs as follows:

    • For each formal meeting between FDA review staff and active commercial IND sponsors during the assessment period, send a survey to the sponsor to solicit specific feedback about communication practices employed for that meeting. For the purpose of this assessment, formal meetings are Type A, B, B (End of Phase), and C meetings during the IND phase of drug development.

    • For each active commercial IND in the assessment, conduct an interview with the sponsor to obtain broader feedback about all communications with FDA review staff during the study period, including telephone and email interactions in addition to meetings.

    The purpose of this information collection is to understand active commercial IND sponsor perspectives on communication during drug development with a focus on what is working well, ongoing challenges and pain points, lessons learned, and opportunities for improvement. The contractor will develop anonymized aggregated summaries of survey and interview responses, analyze this information to identify common themes, consider these results along with IND data and feedback from FDA review staff to develop a set of findings and recommendations, and prepare a report to be published on FDA's website. The contractor will keep information collected private; ERG will not disclose personally identifying information to FDA or any other party.

    In the Federal Register of August 16, 2018 (83 FR 40771), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

    The number of commercial INDs with activity is approximately 4,000 per year. ERG will interview 1 to 3 sponsor representatives at a time for up to 150 INDs during the annual assessment period.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Type of respondent Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual responses Average burden
  • per response
  • Total hours
    IND sponsors: Surveys 150 1 150 0.17 (10 minutes) 25.50 IND sponsors: Interviews 450 1 450 1.5 675 Total 700.50 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    FDA estimates that it will take each IND sponsor a maximum of 10 minutes to complete a survey. Up to 150 respondents will take part in the survey, yielding a maximum burden of 25.5 hours. FDA estimates that it will take each IND sponsor up to 90 minutes to respond to requests for interviews and participate in interviews. Up to 450 respondents will take part in interviews, yielding a maximum burden of 675 hours. FDA's burden estimates are based on experience with information collections for similar types of PDUFA-related assessments.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24608 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4042] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Establishing and Maintaining Lists of U.S. Manufacturers/Processors With Interest in Exporting Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition-Regulated Products AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the collection of information that FDA uses to establish and maintain lists of U.S. manufacturers and processors with an interest in exporting products regulated by the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) to countries that require such lists to be maintained. The notice also solicits comments on changes to the electronic registry that will allow manufacturers and processors of CFSAN-regulated products to electronically request inclusion on the export lists.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 14, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of January 14, 2019. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4042 for “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Establishing and Maintaining Lists of Manufacturers/Processors With Interest in Exporting CFSAN-regulated Products.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Domini Bean, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-5733, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Establishing and Maintaining Lists of U.S. Manufacturers/Processors With Interest in Exporting CFSAN-Regulated Products OMB Control Number 0910-0509—Revision

    The United States exports a large volume and variety of foods in international trade. For certain food products, foreign governments may require assurances from the responsible authority of the country of origin of an imported food that the processor of the food is in compliance with applicable country of origin regulatory requirements. Some foreign governments establish additional requirements with which exporters are required to comply and ask for additional assurances from the responsible authority. When requested, FDA may provide this information in the form of lists which are provided to the foreign governments.

    For products subject to importing country listing requirements, FDA has historically maintained certain export lists of manufacturers/processors that: (1) Have expressed interest in exporting their products to these countries; (2) are subject to FDA's jurisdiction; and (3) are not the subject of a pending enforcement action (e.g., an injunction or seizure) or pending administrative action (e.g., a warning letter).

    FDA has generally published guidance documents for these lists under the authority of section 701(h) of the Federal, Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 371(h)), which authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to develop guidance documents with public participation presenting the views of the Secretary on matters under the jurisdiction of FDA.

    The guidance documents generally explain what information manufacturers/processors should submit to FDA to be considered for inclusion on the lists and what criteria FDA intends to use to determine eligibility for placement on the lists. The guidance documents also explain how FDA intends to update the lists and communicate any new information to the governments that requested the lists. Finally, the guidance documents note that the information is provided voluntarily by manufacturers/processors with the understanding that it may be posted on FDA's external website and that it will be communicated to, and possibly further disseminated by, the government that requested the list; thus, FDA considers the information on the lists to be information that is not protected from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4).

    Application for inclusion on each list is voluntary. However, some foreign governments may require inclusion on the list for acceptance of imported products. FDA recommends that U.S. manufacturers/processors that want to be placed on the export lists send FDA the following information: (1) Country to which the food manufacturer/processor wants to export product; (2) type of food product facility; (3) the Food Facility Registration number (the information collected by this module is approved under OMB control number 0910-0502), FDA Establishment Identifier number, or Dun & Bradstreet number for the facility; (4) name and address of the firm and the manufacturing plant; (5) name, telephone number, and email address of the contact person; (6) information on the products intended for export; (7) identities of agencies that inspected the plant; (8) date of last inspection, plant number, and copy of last inspection notice; and (9) if other than an FDA inspection, copy of last inspection report. We request that this information be updated every 2 years.

    In addition to the information above, some countries may require additional information such as documentation that the firm has been certified by a third-party certification body that it meets the requirements of the importing country. Other information may need to be submitted to be included on the lists depending on the requirements of the importing country. FDA plans to provide exporters with information about any such additional information required by a foreign country as a condition for entry and collect the other information to accommodate the importing countries' requirements.

    We use the information submitted by firms to determine their eligibility for placement on the export lists, which may be published on our website. The purpose of the lists is to help CFSAN-regulated industries meet the import requirements of foreign governments.

    FDA currently maintains export lists for the European Community and China covered under OMB control numbers 0910-0320 and 0910-0839, respectively. These export lists also serve to assist firms to meet the import requirements of foreign governments. OMB control numbers 0910-0509, 0910-0320, and 0910-0839 are very similar in that they allow FDA to collect information from firms for the purpose of establishing export lists for foreign governments that require these lists before allowing the subject goods to be imported. Thus, with this notice, FDA proposes to consolidate these collections of information for government efficiency and to allow the public to look to one OMB control number for all collections of information for CFSAN export lists. This collection of information is intended to cover all of CFSAN's existing export lists, as well as any additional export lists required by foreign countries.

    In 2016, FDA launched the Dairy Listing Module, an electronic registry system (Form FDA 3972) to facilitate applications for inclusion on the dairy export lists. FDA has expanded this system to accommodate applications for inclusion on export lists for CFSAN-regulated products, affording all firms the efficiencies of submitting information electronically. The expanded system is called the Export Listing Module (ELM). The ELM has data fields that allow firms to input the information identified above that FDA recommends providing. In addition, the ELM contains data fields such as “Additional Information” and “Additional Documents” that allow firms to submit any additional data or information (such as third-party certifications) that foreign governments may require. Screenshots of the ELM are available at https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/ImportsExports/Exporting/ucm496929.htm. If a firm is unable to submit an application via the ELM, it may contact CFSAN and request assistance.

    Description of Respondents: Respondents to this collection of information include U.S. manufacturers/processors subject to FDA/CFSAN jurisdiction that wish to export to certain foreign countries that require inclusion on export lists.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Activity Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual
  • responses
  • Average burden per response Total hours
    New requests to be placed on the lists 1,460 1 1,460 0.5 (30 minutes) 730 Third-party certification 370 1 370 21 7,770 Biennial update 2,505 1 2,505 0.5 (30 minutes) 1,253 Third-party certification biennial update 555 1 555 21 11,655 Occasional updates 300 1 300 0.5 (30 minutes) 150 Total 21,558 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The information collection reflects an increase in burden by 18,458 hours due to the consolidation of the information collections covered by OMB control numbers 0910-0839 and 0910-0320. Also, our current estimate of the number of foreign countries that may require us to establish lists in the next 3 years and the type of information they may require us to collect in order to maintain such lists has also resulted in an increase. At the same time, we have developed an electronic reporting portal that is expected to reduce the overall reporting time per submission. The portal will enhance the ability of firms to more efficiently request inclusion on export lists.

    We base our estimate on the number of manufacturers/processors that have submitted new written requests, biennial updates, and occasional updates over the past 10 years. The estimate of the number of burden hours it will take a manufacturer/processor to gather the information needed to be placed on the list or update its information is based on our experience with manufacturers/processors submitting similar requests. We believe that the information to be submitted will be readily available to manufacturers/processors. This collection is incorporating additional information collected to maintain lists of eligible exporters of CFSAN-regulated products who wish to export to foreign markets, including the European Union, Chile and China under OMB control numbers 0910-0320, “Request for Information from U.S. Processors that Export to the European Community” and 0910-0839, “Establishing and Maintaining Lists of U.S. Manufacturers/Processors with Interest in Exporting CFSAN-Regulated Products to China. ”

    We estimate that 1,460 firms will average 30 minutes (0.5 hour) to submit new requests for inclusion on the list, 2,505 firms will average 30 minutes (0.5 hour) to update their information every 2 years, and 300 firms will average 30 minutes (0.5 hour) to occasionally update their information in this system.

    Some firms will need to provide documentation that they obtained third-party certification to certify that they have met the requirements of the importing country. Currently, only China has this requirement. Based on our experience with this program, 370 firms will spend about 21 hours to complete the third-party certification for a total of 7,770 burden hours. During the biennial update, we estimate that about half of the 1,110 manufacturers/processors for which the importing country requires third-party certification will be recertified, meaning that 555 manufacturers/processors (1110 manufacturers/processors × 0.5) will get recertified each year. We estimate that it will take each such manufacturer/processor about 21 hours to complete the certification process for a total of 11,655 burden hours (555 manufacturers/processors × 21 hours).

    We calculate, therefore, that the total burden for this collection is 21,558 hours.

    Dated: November 2, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24618 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Comment Request; Information Collection Request Title: Maternal and Child Health Bureau Performance Measures for Discretionary Grant Information System (DGIS), OMB No. 0915-0298—Revision AGENCY:

    Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, HRSA announces plans to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR), described below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Prior to submitting the ICR to OMB, HRSA seeks comments from the public regarding the burden estimate, below, or any other aspect of the ICR.

    DATES:

    Comments on this ICR must be received no later than January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments to [email protected] or mail the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Room 14N136B, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and draft instruments, email [email protected] or call Lisa Wright-Solomon, the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer at (301) 443-1984.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the information request collection title for reference.

    Information Collection Request Title: Maternal and Child Health Bureau Performance Measures for Discretionary Grant Information System (DGIS), OMB No. 0915-0298—Revision

    Abstract: This Information Collection Request is for continued approval of performance measures for HRSA's Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) discretionary grants, specifically, the continued use of reporting requirements for grant programs administered by MCHB in accordance with the “Government Performance and Results Act of 1993” (Pub. L. 103-62). This Act requires the preparation of an annual performance plan covering each program activity set forth in the agency's budget, which includes establishment of measurable goals that may be reported in an annual financial statement to support the linkage of funding decisions with performance. Performance measures for MCHB discretionary grants were initially approved in 2003, and the latest approval was obtained in 2016 for significant revisions. Continued approval from OMB is currently being sought to continue the use of performance measures with minor revisions. Most of these measures are specific to certain types of programs and are not required of all grantees. The measures are categorized by domains (Adolescent Health, Capacity Building, Child Health, Children with Special Health Care Needs, Lifecourse/Crosscutting, Maternal/Women Health, and Perinatal/Infant Health). In addition, there are some program-specific measures. Grant programs are assigned domains based on their activities. HRSA is proposing to make changes to the DGIS to more closely align data collection forms with current program activities. These revisions will facilitate more accurate reporting of descriptive information related to Long-term Trainees in Maternal and Child Health, as well as activities related to Technical Assistance for programs. Proposed changes include the following:

    • Trainee Information (Long-term Trainees Only) form:

    ○ Changes will incorporate options and titles that were omitted from the final submission of the previous OMB package, providing clarification for the reporting of specific descriptive information about Long-term Trainees on the form.

    ○ Changes will list the following options for “Type”: “Non-Degree Seeking,” “Undergraduate,” “Masters,” “Doctoral,” Post-doctoral,” “Other.”

    ○ Changes will list the title “Student Status” next to the options for “Part-time student” and “Full-time student.”

    • Technical Assistance/Collaboration form:

    ○ Add a field asking for the “Total number of TA recipients.” This change will allow for better alignment with this data that was previously collected by program, but omitted due to a DGIS paper form error.

    ○ Add an “Other” category to List B under “Topic of Technical Assistance/Collaboration.” This change would facilitate more accurate data reporting by providing programs an additional category to choose from if their current Technical Assistance activities do not closely align with the existing categories in List B.

    Need and Proposed Use of the Information: The performance data collected through the DGIS serves several purposes, including grantee monitoring, program planning, performance reporting, and the ability to demonstrate alignment between MCHB discretionary programs and the Title V MCH Services Block Grant program. This revision will facilitate more accurate reporting of descriptive information related to Long-term Trainees in Maternal and Child Health, as well as activities related to Technical Assistance for programs.

    Likely Respondents: The grantees for Maternal and Child Health Bureau Discretionary Grant Programs.

    Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below.

    Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form Number of
  • respondents
  • Responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden
  • hours
  • Grant Report 700 1 700 36 25,200 Total 700 700 25,200

    HRSA specifically requests comments on (1) the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden, (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    Amy P. McNulty, Acting Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24659 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration National Practitioner Data Bank Guidebook AGENCY:

    Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HRSA's Division of Practitioner Data Bank (DPDB) announces the release of the revised user National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) Guidebook. NPDB is a confidential information clearinghouse created by Congress and intended to facilitate a comprehensive review of the professional credentials of health care practitioners, entities, providers, and suppliers. The NPDB Guidebook is the primary policy document explaining the statutes and regulations behind and operation of the NPDB. It serves as an essential reference for NPDB users, offering reporting and querying examples, explanations, definitions, and frequently asked questions.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Loewenstein, Director, DPDB, Bureau of Health Workforce, Health Resources and Services Administration, 301-443-2300, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    When the NPDB Guidebook was last revised in April 2015, substantial updates altered the regulatory scope, content, and display of the Guidebook. The new Guidebook incorporates information and infographics that augment or further clarify existing Guidebook topics and does not include any significant policy changes. The new NPDB Guidebook is now available at www.npdb.hrsa.gov.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. George Sigounas, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24694 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Lasker Clinical Research Scholars Program (Si2/R00 Clinical Trial Optional).

    Date: November 26, 2018.

    Time: 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Louis A. Rosenthal, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Rm. 3G42B, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9834, Bethesda, MD 20892-9834, (240) 669-5070, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Impact of Initial Influenza Exposure on Immunity in Infants (U01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed).

    Date: December 3-4, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Maryam Feili-Hariri, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852, 240-669-5026, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 2, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24622 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; NIMH HIV/AIDS Review (P30, T32).

    Date: November 30, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: David W. Miller, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd, Room 6140, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-443-9734, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; NIMH HIV/AIDS Research Education Applications (R25).

    Date: November 30, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Rebecca Steiner Garcia, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6149, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-443-4525, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.242, Mental Health Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 6, 2018. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24623 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics.

    Date: December 4-5, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Sergei Ruvinov, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4158, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1180, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Toxicology and Digestive, Kidney and Urological Systems AREA Review.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Aiping Zhao, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2188, MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892-7818, (301) 435-0682, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Cardiovascular Sciences.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Kimm Hamann, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4118A, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-5575, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Topics in Hepatology.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Julia Spencer Barthold, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-3073, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR15-359: Biomarker Studies for Diagnosing Alzheimer's Disease and Predicting Progression.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Mary G. Schueler, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5214, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-915-6301, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Fogarty HIV Research Training Programs in Low and Middle Income Country Institutions.

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Shalanda A. Bynum, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3206, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-755-4355, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Business: Neuroscience Assay, Diagnostics and Animal Model Development.

    Date: December 6-7, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn, Washington, DC, 1199 Vermont Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: Susan Gillmor, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-762-3076, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Business: Psycho/Neuropathology, Lifespan Development, and STEM Education.

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 10:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Elia E. Femia, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3108, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-7189, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience.

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Laurent Taupenot, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4188, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1203, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 6, 2018. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24625 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002] Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

    DATES:

    Each LOMR was finalized as in the table below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.

    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the final flood hazard information available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) David I. Maurstad, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. State and county Location and
  • case No.
  • Chief executive officer of community Community map repository Date of
  • modification
  • Community
  • No.
  • Alabama: Colbert (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) City of Muscle Shoals (17-04-1041P) The Honorable David H. Bradford, Mayor, City of Muscle Shoals, P.O. Box 2624, Muscle Shoals, AL 35662 Engineering Department, 2010 East Avalon Avenue, Muscle Shoals, AL 35662 Sept. 24, 2018 010047 Colbert (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) Unincorporated areas of Colbert County (17-04-1041P) The Honorable Daroll Bendall, Chairman, Colbert County Board of Commissioners, 201 North Main Street, Tuscumbia, AL 35674 Colbert County Courthouse, 201 North Main Street, Tuscumbia, AL 35674 Sept. 24, 2018 010318 Mobile (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Semmes (18-04-1945P) The Honorable David Baker, Mayor, City of Semmes, P.O. Box 1757, Semmes, AL 36575 City Hall, 7875 Moffett Road Unit #F, Semmes, AL 36575 Sept. 10, 2018 015016 Mobile (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated Areas of Mobile County (18-04-1945P) The Honorable Connie Hudson, Chair, Mobile County Board of Commissioners, 205 Government Street Mobile, AL 36644 Mobile County Engineering Department, 205 Government Street, Mobile, AL 36644 Sept. 10, 2018 015008 Colorado: Boulder (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Boulder (18-08-0166P) The Honorable Suzanne Jones, Mayor, City of Boulder, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306 Planning and Development Services Department, 1739 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302 Oct. 3, 2018 080024 Eagle (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Town of Basalt (17-08-1316P) Mr. Ryan Mahoney, Manager, Town of Basalt, 101 Midland Avenue, Basalt, CO 81621 Town Hall, 101 Midland Avenue, Basalt, CO 81621 Sep. 28, 2018 080052 Eagle (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Eagle County (17-08-1316P) The Honorable Kathy Chandler-Henry, Chair, Eagle County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 850, Eagle, CO 81631 Eagle County Building and Engineering Department, 500 Broadway Street, Eagle, CO 81631 Sep. 28, 2018 080051 El Paso (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of El Paso County (18-08-0013P) The Honorable Darryl Glenn, President, El Paso County, Board of Commissioners, 200 South Cascade Avenue, Suite 100, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Pikes Peak Regional Building Department, 2880 International Circle, Colorado Springs, CO 80910 Oct. 3, 2018 080059 Jefferson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Westminster (18-08-0279P) The Honorable Herb Atchison, Mayor, City of Westminster, 4800 West 92nd Avenue, Westminster, CO 80031 Engineering Department, 4800 West 92nd Avenue, Westminster, CO 80031 Sep. 21, 2018 080008 Jefferson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) Unincorporated areas of Jefferson County (18-08-0676X) The Honorable Libby Szabo, Chair, Jefferson County Board of Commissioners, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 Jefferson County Department of Planning and Zoning, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 Oct. 5, 2018 080087 Larimer (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Town of Wellington (17-08-1283P) The Honorable Troy Hamman, Mayor, Town of Wellington, P.O. Box 127, Wellington, CO 80549 Town Hall, 3735 Cleveland Avenue, Wellington, CO 80549 Oct. 9, 2018 080104 Larimer (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Larimer County (17-08-1283P) The Honorable Steve Johnson, Chairman, Larimer County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 1190, Fort Collins, CO 80522 Larimer County Engineering Department, 200 West Oak Street, Suite 3000, Fort Collins, CO 80522 Oct. 9, 2018 080101 Pitkin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Pitkin County (17-08-1316P) The Honorable Patti Clapper, Chair, Pitkin County Board of Commissioners, 530 East Main Street, Suite 302, Aspen, CO 81611 Pitkin County Building Department, 530 East Main Street, Suite 205, Aspen, CO 81611 Sep. 28, 2018 080287 Florida: Broward (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Fort Lauderdale (18-04-3005P) The Honorable Dean J. Trantalis, Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale, 100 North Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311 Building Services Department, 700 Northwest 19th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311 Oct. 3, 2018 125105 Broward (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Broward County (18-04-3005P) The Honorable Bertha Henry, Administrator, Broward County, 115 South Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Broward County Environmental Engineering and Permitting Division, 1 North University Drive, Plantation, FL 33324 Oct. 3, 2018 125093 Collier (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Naples (18-04-2880P) The Honorable Bill Barnett, Mayor, City of Naples, 735 8th Street South, Naples, FL 34102 Building Department, 295 Riverside Circle, Naples, FL 34102 Sep. 19, 2018 125130 Orange (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Orange County (17-04-3962P) The Honorable Teresa Jacobs, Mayor, Orange County, 201 South Rosalind Avenue, 5th Floor, Orlando, FL 32801 Orange County Stormwater Management Department, 4200 South John Young Parkway, Orlando, FL 32839 Oct. 4, 2018 120179 Osceola (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Osceola County (18-04-3037X) The Honorable Fred Hawkins, Jr., Chairman, Osceola County Board of Commissioners, 1 Courthouse Square, Suite 4700, Kissimmee, FL 34741 Osceola County Stormwater Department, 1 Courthouse Square, Suite 1400, Kissimmee, FL 34741 Sep. 28, 2018 120189 Sarasota (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Sarasota County (18-04-3583P) The Honorable Nancy C. Detert, Chair, Sarasota County Board of Commissioners, 1660 Ringling Boulevard, Sarasota, FL 34236 Sarasota County Planning and Development Services Department, 1001 Sarasota Center Boulevard, Sarasota, FL 34240 Oct. 1, 2018 125144 Kentucky: Hardin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Elizabethtown (18-04-2385P) The Honorable Edna Berger, Mayor, City of Elizabethtown, P.O. Box 550, Elizabethtown, KY 42702 Department of Stormwater Management, 200 West Dixie Avenue, Elizabethtown, KY 42702 Sep. 28, 2018 210095 Maryland: Baltimore (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Baltimore County (17-03-2477P) The Honorable Kevin Kamenetz, Baltimore County Executive, 400 Washington Avenue, Towson, MD 21204 Baltimore County Planning Department, 105 West Chesapeake Avenue, Suite 101, Towson, MD 21204 Sep. 19, 2018 240010 New Hampshire: Cheshire (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Town of Jaffrey (17-01-2389P) Mr. Jon Frederick, Manager, Town of Jaffrey, 10 Goodnow Street, Jaffrey, NH 03452 Town Hall, 10 Goodnow Street, Jaffrey, NH 03452 Sep. 28, 2018 330215 New Mexico: Bernalillo (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) Unincorporated areas of Bernalillo County (18-06-0450P) Ms. Julie Morgas Baca, Bernalillo County Manager, 1 Civic Plaza Northwest, Albuquerque, NM 87102 Bernalillo County Public Works Division, 2400 Broadway Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, NM 87102 Oct. 5, 2018 350001 North Carolina: Greene (FEMA Docket, No.: B-1848) Unincorporated areas of Greene County (18-04-2055P) The Honorable Bennie Heath, Chairman, Board of, Commissioners, 229 Kingold Boulevard, Suite D, Snow Hill, NC 28580 Greene County Department of Building Inspections, 104 Hines Street, Snow Hill, NC 28580 Oct. 5, 2018 370378 Pitt (FEMA Docket, No.: B-1848) Unincorporated areas of Pitt County (18-04-2055P) The Honorable Mark W. Owens, Jr., Chairman, Board of, Commissioners, 1717 West 5th Street, Greenville, NC 27834 Pitt County Planning Department, 1717 West 5th Street, Greenville, NC 27834 Oct. 5, 2018 370372 Watauga (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) Town of Boone (18-04-0473P) The Honorable Rennie Brantz, Mayor, Town of Boone, 567 West King Street, Boone, NC 28607 Planning and Inspections Department, 680 West King Street, Boone, NC 28607 Oct. 4, 2018 370253 Watauga (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) Unincorporated Areas of Watauga County (18-04-0473P) The Honorable John Welch, Chairman, Watauga County Board of Commissioners, 814 West King Street, Suite 205, Boone, NC 28607 Watauga County Planning and Inspections Department, 331 Queen Street, Suite A, Boone, NC 28607 Oct. 4, 2018 370251 North Dakota: Cass (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Fargo (17-08-1355P) The Honorable Tim Mahoney, Mayor, City of Fargo, 200 3rd Street North, Fargo, ND 58102 City Hall, 200 3rd Street North, Fargo, ND 58102 Sep. 18, 2018 385364 South Dakota: Codington (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Watertown (18-08-0263P) The Honorable Sarah Caron, Mayor, City of Watertown, P.O. Box 910, Watertown, SD 57201 Engineering Department, 23 2nd Street Northeast, Watertown, SD 57201 Sep. 28, 2018 460016 Codington (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Codington County (18-08-0263P) The Honorable Myron Johnson, Chairman, Codington County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 910, Watertown, SD 57201 Codington County Extension Complex, Zoning Office, 1910 West Kemp Avenue, Watertown, SD 57201 Sep. 28, 2018 460260 Minnehaha (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Dell Rapids (17-08-1525P) The Honorable Tom Earley, Mayor, City of Dell Rapids, P.O. Box 10, Dell Rapids, SD 57022 City Hall, 302 East 4th Street, Dell Rapids, SD 57022 Oct. 1, 2018 460059 Minnehaha (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Minnehaha County (17-08-1525P) The Honorable Cindy Heiberger, Chair, Minnehaha County, Board of Commissioners, 415 North Dakota Avenue, Sioux Falls, SD 57104 Minnehaha County Planning and Zoning Department, 415 North Dakota Avenue, Sioux Falls, SD 57104 Oct. 1, 2018 460057 Texas: Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of San Antonio (18-06-0004P) The Honorable Ron Nirenberg, Mayor, City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966, San Antonio, TX 78283 Transportation and Capital Improvements Department, Storm Water Division, 1901 South Alamo Street, 2nd Floor, San Antonio, TX 78204 Sep. 24, 2018 480045 Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Bexar County (18-06-0004P) The Honorable Nelson W. Wolff, Bexar County Judge, 101 West Nueva Street, 10th Floor, San Antonio, TX 78205 Bexar County Public Works Department, 233 North Pecos-La Trinidad Street, Suite 420, San Antonio, TX 78207 Sep. 24, 2018 480035 Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Allen (18-06-0216P) The Honorable Stephen Terrell, Mayor, City of Allen, 305 Century Parkway, Allen, TX 75013 Engineering Department, 305 Century Parkway, Allen, TX 75013 Sep. 21, 2018 480131 El Paso (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of El Paso (17-06-3843P) Mr. Tommy Gonzalez, Manager, City of El Paso, 300 North Campbell Street, El Paso, TX 79901 City Hall, 801 Texas Avenue, El Paso, TX 79901 Sep. 24, 2018 480214 Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Houston (17-06-3450P) The Honorable Sylvester Turner, Mayor, City of Houston, P.O. Box 1562, Houston, TX 77251 Floodplain Management Department, 1002 Washington Avenue, 3rd Floor, Houston, TX 77002 Sep. 24, 2018 480296 Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) City of Hunter's Creek Village (17-06-3450P) The Honorable Jim Pappas, Mayor, City of Hunter's Creek Village, 1 Hunters Creek Place, Houston, TX 77024 City Hall, 1 Hunters Creek Place, Houston, TX 77024 Sep. 24, 2018 480298 Hidalgo (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Hidalgo County (18-06-0700P) The Honorable Ramon Garcia, Hidalgo County Judge, 100 East Cano Street, 2nd Floor, Edinburg, TX 78539 Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1, 902 North Doolittle Road, Edinburg, TX 78542 Oct. 5, 2018 480334 Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) City of Fort Worth (18-06-0617P) The Honorable Betsy Price, Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 200 Texas Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102 Transportation and Public Works Department, 200 Texas Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102 Oct. 9, 2018 480596 Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) City of Saginaw (18-06-0328P) The Honorable Todd Flippo, Mayor, City of Saginaw, 333 West McLeroy Boulevard, Saginaw, TX 76179 Public Works Department, 205 Brenda Lane, Saginaw, TX 76179 Oct. 4, 2018 480610 Virginia: Fauquier (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Fauquier County (17-03-1930P) Mr. Paul S. McCulla, Fauquier County Administrator, 10 Hotel Street, Suite 204, Warrenton, VA 20186 Fauquier County Zoning and Development Services Department, 29 Ashby Street, 3rd Floor, Warrenton, VA 20186 Sep. 20, 2018 510055 Loudoun (FEMA Docket No.: B-1840) Unincorporated areas of Loudoun County (18-03-0512P) Mr. Tim Hemstreet, Loudoun County Administrator, P.O. Box 7000, Leesburg, VA 20177 Loudoun County Department of Development, 1 Harrison Street Southeast, Leesburg, VA 20175 Sep. 28, 2018 510090 West Virginia: Preston (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845) Unincorporated areas of Preston County (18-03-0988P) The Honorable T. Craig Jennings, President, Preston County Commission, 106 West Main Street, Suite 202, Kingwood, WV 26537 Preston County Office of Emergency Management, 300 Rich Wolfe Drive, Kingwood, WV 26537 Oct. 9, 2018 540160
    [FR Doc. 2018-24628 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3408-EM]; [Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Emergency and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an emergency for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (FEMA-3408-EM), dated October 23, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued October 23, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated October 23, 2018, the President issued an emergency declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as follows:

    I have determined that the emergency conditions in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands resulting from Typhoon Yutu beginning on October 24, 2018, and continuing, are of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant an emergency declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (“the Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such an emergency exists in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

    You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the Stafford Act, to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, and to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in the designated areas. Specifically, you are authorized to provide assistance for emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal emergency assistance and administrative expenses.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Benigno Bern Ruiz, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared emergency.

    The following areas of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have been designated as adversely affected by this declared emergency:

    The municipalities of Rota, Saipan, Tinian, and the Northern Islands for emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program. The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant. Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24675 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4393-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] North Carolina; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of North Carolina (FEMA-4393-DR), dated September 14, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued October 25, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of North Carolina is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 14, 2018.

    Chatham County for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance, including direct federal assistance).

    Durham and Guilford Counties for Individual Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.
    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24630 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4404-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (FEMA-4404-DR), dated October 26, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued October 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated October 26, 2018, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands resulting from Super Typhoon Yutu beginning on October 24, 2018, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and assistance for emergency protective measures (Category B) under the Public Assistance program in the designated areas, Hazard Mitigation throughout the Commonwealth, and any other forms of assistance under the Stafford Act that you deem appropriate subject to completion of Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDAs). Direct Federal assistance is authorized.

    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. For a period of 30 days, you are authorized to fund assistance for emergency protective measures, including direct Federal assistance, at 100 percent of the total eligible costs.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Benigno Bern Ruiz, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    The municipalities of Rota, Saipan, Tinian, and the Northern Islands for Individual Assistance.

    The municipalities of Rota, Saipan, Tinian, and the Northern Islands for emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

    All areas within the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24676 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4390-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Minnesota; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Minnesota (FEMA-4390-DR), dated September 5, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 2, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Minnesota is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 5, 2018.

    Kanabec County for Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24691 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4401-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Virginia; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Virginia (FEMA-4401-DR), dated October 15, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued October 18, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Virginia is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 15, 2018.

    The counties of Charles City, Halifax, King William, and Northumberland and the independent city of Franklin for Public Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24678 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4402-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Wisconsin; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Wisconsin (FEMA-4402-DR), dated October 18, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 1, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Wisconsin is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 18, 2018.

    Marquette County for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24674 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4401-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Virginia; Major Disaster and Related Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the Commonwealth of Virginia (FEMA-4401-DR), dated October 15, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    The declaration was issued October 15, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated October 15, 2018, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia resulting from Hurricane Florence during the period of September 8-21, 2018, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster exists in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.

    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the Commonwealth. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford Act.

    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Donald L. Keldsen, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

    The following areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Henry, King and Queen, Lancaster, Nelson, Patrick, Pittsylvania, and Russell Counties and the Independent Cities of Newport News, Richmond, and Williamsburg for Public Assistance.

    All areas within the Commonwealth of Virginia are eligible for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24677 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4399-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Florida; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Florida (FEMA-4399-DR), dated October 11, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued October 23, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Florida is hereby amended to include permanent work under the Public Assistance program for those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 11, 2018.

    Bay, Calhoun, Gadsden, Gulf, Jackson, and Liberty Counties for Public Assistance [Categories C-G] (already designated for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24629 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1860] Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings.

    DATES:

    Comments are to be submitted on or before February 11, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1860, to Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).

    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.

    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) David I. Maurstad, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Community Community map repository address Jefferson County, Alabama and Incorporated Areas Project: 12-04-1070S Preliminary Date: April 26, 2018 City of Argo Argo City Hall, 100 Blackjack Road, Trussville, AL 35173. City of Bessemer City Hall, 1700 3rd Avenue North, Bessemer, AL 35020. City of Birmingham Department of Planning, Engineering, and Permits, 710 North 20th Street, 5th Floor, Birmingham, AL 35203. City of Brighton City Hall, 3700 Main Street, Brighton, AL 35020. City of Clay Clay City Hall, 2441 Old Springville Road, Birmingham, AL 35215. City of Helena Municipal Building, 816 Highway 52 East, Helena, AL 35080. City of Homewood City Hall, 2850 19th Street South, Homewood, AL 35209. City of Hoover City Hall, 100 Municipal Lane, Hoover, AL 35216. City of Irondale City Hall, 101 20th Street South, Irondale, AL 35210. City of Leeds Department of Inspection Services, 1404 9th Street Northeast, Leeds, AL 35094. City of Lipscomb Lipscomb City Hall, 5512 Avenue H, Lipscomb, Bessemer, AL 35020. City of Mountain Brook City Hall, 56 Church Street, Mountain Brook, AL 35213. City of Trussville City Hall, 131 Main Street, Trussville, AL 35173. City of Vestavia Hills City Hall, 1032 Montgomery Highway, Vestavia Hills, AL 35216. Unincorporated Areas of Jefferson County Jefferson County Land Development Office, 716 Richard Arrington Jr. Boulevard North, Room 260, Birmingham, AL 35203. Shelby County, Alabama and Incorporated Areas Project: 12-04-1070S Preliminary Date: April 26, 2018 City of Birmingham Department of Planning, Engineering, and Permits, 710 North 20th Street, 5th Floor, Birmingham, AL 35203. City of Helena Municipal Building, 816 Highway 52 East, Helena, AL 35080. City of Hoover City Hall, 100 Municipal Lane, Hoover, AL 35216. City of Pelham City Hall, 3162 Pelham Parkway, Pelham, AL 35124. City of Vestavia Hills City Hall, 1032 Montgomery Highway, Vestavia Hills, AL 35216. Town of Indian Springs Village Town Hall, 2635 Cahaba Valley Road, Indian Springs Village, AL 35124. Unincorporated Areas of Shelby County Shelby County Engineer's Office, 506 Highway 70, Columbiana, AL 35051. St. Clair County, Alabama and Incorporated Areas Project: 12-04-1070S Preliminary Date: April 26, 2018 City of Leeds Department of Development Services, 1404 9th Street Northeast, Leeds, AL 35094. City of Moody City Hall, 670 Park Avenue, Moody, AL 35004. City of Trussville City Hall, 131 Main Street, Trussville, AL 35173. Unincorporated Areas of St. Clair County St. Clair County Road Department, 31588 U.S. Highway 231, Ashville, AL 35953. Metropolitan Government of Louisville and Jefferson County, Kentucky and Incorporated Areas Project: 10-04-7840S Preliminary Date: February 28, 2018 Metropolitan Government of Louisville and Jefferson County Louisville/Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District, 700 West Liberty Street, Louisville, KY 40203. Brazoria County, Texas and Incorporated Areas Project: 16-06-1963S Preliminary Date: June 30, 2017 and June 29, 2018 City of Alvin Public Services Facility Building Engineering Department, 1100 West Highway 6, Alvin, TX 77511. City of Angleton City Secretary's Office, 121 South Velasco Street, Angleton, TX 77515. City of Brazoria City Hall, 201 South Main Street, Brazoria, TX 77422. City of Brookside Village City Hall, 6243 Brookside Road, Brookside Village, TX 77581. City of Clute City Hall, 108 East Main Street, Clute, TX 77531. City of Danbury City Hall, 6102 5th Street, Danbury, TX 77534. City of Freeport City Hall, 200 West 2nd Street, Freeport, TX 77541. City of Hillcrest Village Hillcrest Village City Hall, 106 West Blackstone Lane, Alvin, TX 77511. City of Iowa Colony City Hall, 12003 County Road 65, Rosharon, TX 77583. City of Lake Jackson City Hall, 25 Oak Drive, Lake Jackson, TX 77566. City of Liverpool City Hall, 8901 Calhoun Street, Liverpool, TX 77577. City of Manvel City Hall, 20025 Highway 6, Manvel, TX 77578. City of Oyster Creek City Hall, 3210 FM 523, Oyster Creek, TX 77541. City of Pearland Engineering and Capital Projects Department Engineering Division, 3519 Liberty Drive, Pearland, TX 77581. City of Richwood City Hall, 1800 Brazosport Boulevard North, Richwood, TX 77531. City of Sandy Point Brazoria County West Annex Building, 451 North Velasco Street, Suite 210, Angleton, TX 77515. City of Surfside Beach City Hall, 1304 Monument Drive, Surfside Beach, TX 77541. City of Sweeny City Hall, 102 West Ashley Wilson Road, Sweeny, TX 77480. City of West Columbia City Hall, 512 East Brazos Avenue, West Columbia, TX 77486. Town of Holiday Lakes City Hall, 195 North Texas Avenue, Holiday Lakes, TX 77515. Town of Quintana Town Hall, 814 North Lamar Street, Quintana, TX 77541. Unincorporated Areas of Brazoria County Brazoria County West Annex Building, 451 North Velasco Street, Suite 210, Angleton, TX 77515. Village of Bailey's Prairie Bailey's Prairie Floodplain Administrator's Office, 201 South Velasco Street, Angleton, TX 77515. Village of Bonney Brazoria County West Annex Building, 451 North Velasco Street, Suite 210, Angleton, TX 77515. Village of Jones Creek City Hall, 7207 Stephen F. Austin Road, Jones Creek, TX 77541. Grand County, Utah and Incorporated Areas Project: 17-08-0649S Preliminary Date: May 29, 2018 Unincorporated Areas of Grand County Grand County Courthouse, 125 East Center Street, Moab, UT 84532.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24627 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4390-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001] Minnesota; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of Minnesota (FEMA-4390-DR), dated September 5, 2018, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    This amendment was issued November 2, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is now June 15 to July 12, 2018.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    Brock Long, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24693 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket No. DHS-2018-0042] Next Generation First Responder (NGFR) AGENCY:

    Science and Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice of information collection; new request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) Next Generation First Responder (NGFR) program seeks to develop and integrate next-generation technologies by testing and evaluating first responder technologies during integration demonstration events. During these events, first responder participants use prototype technologies in a fictional scenario—such as a missing person case, an active shooter event, or a chemical spill—and are asked to share their feedback on how the technology worked in the context of their emergency response to the scenario, including whether the technologies made them more effective, efficient or safe.

    The information collected during these events will help provide insight about how to improve technologies for first responders and will help DHS define whether or not the event was successful. Additionally, the feedback and evaluation DHS receives will be used in knowledge products that will then be distributed to other state and local first responder organizations.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and accepted until January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-2018-0042, at:

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

    Mail and hand delivery or commercial delivery: Science and Technology Directorate, ATTN: Chief Information Office—Mary Cantey, 245 Murray Drive, Mail Stop 0202, Washington, DC 20528.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number DHS-2018-0042. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    DHS/S&T/NGFR Program Manager: Sridhar Kowdley, [email protected] or 202-254-8804 (Not a toll free number).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DHS, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. DHS is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. DHS is especially interested in public comments addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology? Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Next Generation First Responder Technology Evaluation Survey.

    Type of Review: New.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Law Enforcement, Firefighters.

    Frequency of Collection: Quarterly.

    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 900.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 225.

    Gregg Piermarini, Chief Technology Officer/Deputy CIO, Science and Technology Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24707 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9F-P
    INTER-AMERICAN FOUNDATION Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    November 19, 2018, 1:30 p.m.—5:10 p.m.

    PLACE:

    Offices of Baker/McKenzie LLP, 815 Connecticut Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006.

    STATUS:

    Meeting of the Board of Directors and Advisory Council, open to the public, portion closed to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Approval of Past Meeting Minutes President's Report Management Report Advisory Council Executive Session Adjournment PORTIONS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC:

    Executive session closed to the public as provided for by 22 CFR 1004.4(b) & (f) CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Paul Zimmerman, General Counsel, (202) 683-7118.

    Paul Zimmerman, General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24837 Filed 11-8-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7025-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092; 91200-FF09M20300-189-FXMB123109EAGLE] Updated Collision Risk Model Priors for Estimating Eagle Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Reopening of the comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) uses a collision risk model (CRM) to predict the number of golden and bald eagles that may be killed at new wind facilities. The model incorporates existing information on eagle exposure and collision probability in the form of prior distributions (priors). The Service has updated the priors for both species of eagle and, on June 21 of this year, announced the availability of a report of the analysis conducted to generate the new priors (83 FR 28858). The notice solicited public comments on how the Service should use the new bald eagle priors. Today's notice reopens the comment period for 30 days, and provides additional information requested by commenters.

    DATES:

    To ensure consideration of written comments, they must be submitted on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit written comments by one of the following methods:

    Electronically: Go to the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092, which is the docket number for this notice, and follow the directions for submitting comments.

    By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092; Division of Policy, Performance, and Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see Request for Information below for more information).

    We request that you send comments by only one of the methods described above. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Availability of Comments section below for more information).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ken Richkus, at 703-358-1780 (telephone), or [email protected] (email). Individuals who are hearing impaired or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8337 for TTY assistance.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) uses a collision risk model (CRM) to predict the number of golden and bald eagles that may be killed at new wind facilities (USFWS 2013; New et al. 2015). The CRM incorporates existing knowledge of eagle use around a proposed wind facility (exposure) and the probability of an eagle colliding with an operating turbine (collision probability).

    The CRM is constructed using a Bayesian framework, and as such incorporates existing information on eagle exposure and collision probability in the form of prior distributions (priors). The priors are formally combined with site-specific data on exposure and the amount of hazardous area and operational time for a site to estimate the expected number of annual eagle collision fatalities.

    The Service recently updated the priors for both species of eagle using all available data that meet specific criteria, substantially more data than were available when the original priors were established. We released a report of the analysis undertaken to generate the updated priors and announced the availability of the report in a June 21, 2018, Federal Register notice published on (83 FR 28858). In that notice we asked for public input on options for how we should apply the new bald eagle priors. Several of the comments we received during the initial comment period requested that the Service provide the values for the shape and rate parameters of the gamma and beta distributions described in the referenced report. In response to these comments, we have posted an updated version of the report that provides those parameter values on the Service's website at: https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managedspecies/eaglemanagement.php. You can also find the report on the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS-HQ-MB-2017-0092.

    Because the bald eagle collision prior is based on data from only 14 sites that do not span the range of bald eagle density conditions that exist across the country, the prior may not be as representative as it would be if data from a wider range of location had been available. Given this uncertainty, the Service is considering three alternatives for how to incorporate species-specific priors for bald eagles into the CRM and fatality modeling process:

    (1) Use the updated species-specific priors, and use the 80th quantile of the CRM fatality estimates as the initial permitted take number for permits, as is the current practice.

    (2) Use the updated species-specific priors, but because the status of bald eagles is secure, adopt a risk-tolerant policy for bald eagles and select a more liberal quantile on the CRM fatality distribution as the initial permitted take number for this species.

    (3) Given the limitations in data available to inform the bald eagle priors, initiate an expert elicitation process to further refine the bald eagle priors.

    Under any of these scenarios, the Service would use data submitted under permits to make updates to the priors in the future.

    Alternative 1 would mean that for a similar level of eagle use observed at a project site, the Service would use higher fatality estimates for bald eagles than for golden eagles. Alternative 2 would be a decision by the Service to be more `risk-tolerant' for bald eagles. This would mean that initial fatality predictions would be lower, however it would also likely mean that more permits would have to be amended to increase the permitted take over time (i.e., the Service would be underestimating take more often). Alternative 3 would be a decision by the Service that more information is needed to understand the potential variability of exposure and collision probability for bald eagles. Such a process could result in either higher or lower (or more variable) priors. We are soliciting input from the public on these three alternatives. We are not seeking input on the CRM itself, which has been peer-reviewed and been the subject of multiple rounds of public comment in the past.

    Public Availability of Comments

    Written comments we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that the entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety.

    Dated: October 29, 2018. Andrea Travnicek, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Water and Science, Exercising the authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24718 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-55-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R4-ES-2018-N107; FXES11140400000-189-FF04E00000] Endangered Species; Recovery Permit Applications AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of permit applications; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have received applications for permits to conduct activities intended to enhance the propagation or survival of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. We invite the public and local, State, Tribal, and Federal agencies to comment on these applications. Before issuing any of the requested permits, we will take into consideration any information that we receive during the public comment period.

    DATES:

    We must receive written data or comments on the applications by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Reviewing Documents: Documents and other information submitted with the applications are available for review, subject to the requirements of the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act. Submit a request for a copy of such documents to Karen Marlowe (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Submitting Comments: If you wish to comment, you may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office, Ecological Services, 1875 Century Boulevard, Atlanta, GA 30345 (Attn: Karen Marlowe, Permit Coordinator).

    Email: [email protected] Please include your name and return address in your email message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that we have received your email message, contact us directly at the telephone number listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Karen Marlowe, Permit Coordinator, 404-679-7097 (telephone), [email protected] (email), or 404-679-7081 (fax). Individuals who are hearing or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 for TTY assistance.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    We invite review and comment from local, State, and Federal agencies and the public on applications we have received for permits to conduct certain activities with endangered and threatened species under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and our regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR part 17. With some exceptions, the ESA prohibits activities that constitute take of listed species unless a Federal permit is issued that allows such activities. The ESA's definition of “take” includes hunting, shooting, harming, wounding, or killing, and also such activities as pursuing, harassing, trapping, capturing, or collecting.

    A recovery permit issued by us under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA authorizes the permittee to conduct activities with endangered or threatened species for scientific purposes that promote recovery or for enhancement of propagation or survival of the species. These activities often include such prohibited actions as capture and collection. Our regulations implementing section 10(a)(1)(A) for these permits are found at 50 CFR 17.22 for endangered wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.32 for threatened wildlife species, 50 CFR 17.62 for endangered plant species, and 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plant species.

    Permit Applications Available for Review and Comment

    Proposed activities in the following permit requests are for the recovery and enhancement of propagation or survival of the species in the wild. The ESA requires that we invite public comment before issuing these permits. Accordingly, we invite local, State, Tribal, and Federal agencies and the public to submit written data, views, or arguments with respect to these applications. The comments and recommendations that will be most useful and likely to influence agency decisions are those supported by quantitative information or studies.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Permit application
  • No.
  • Applicant Species/numbers Location Activity Type of take Permit action
    TE 676379-6 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL Hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), and Leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) sea turtles Florida, Mississippi, and Texas Turtle Excluder Device (TED) certification trials and nest surveys and excavation Conduct nest surveys, locate egg chambers, screen and mark nests, monitor nests for hatching, and excavate nests. Remove Kemp's ridley sea turtle hatchlings from wild to rear in captivity for a period of 1-2 years for use in TED certification trials Renewal and Amendment. TE 97308A-1 John L. Harris, Scott, AR 19 species of freshwater mussels Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin Presence/absence surveys, population estimate surveys, and DNA sampling Remove from substrate, handle, identify, collect tissue swabs, return to substrate, and salvage relic shells Renewal. TE 48576B-1 Carson Wood, Castle Hayne, NC Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina Population management and monitoring Capture, band, monitor nest cavities, construct and monitor artificial nest cavities and restrictors, and salvage Renewal. TE 86956C-0 Robert Davis, Tallahassee, FL 16 species of freshwater mussels Alabama, Florida, and Georgia Presence/absence surveys Remove from the substrate, handle, identify, and return to substrate New. TE 041314-6 U.S. Army, Fort Polk, LA Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and Louisiana pine snake (Pituophis ruthveni) Fort Polk Military Base, Fort Polk, Louisiana. Red-cockaded woodpecker translocation activities also in Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas Population management and monitoring and screening for disease Red-cockaded woodpecker: Capture, band, translocate, monitor nest cavities, construct and monitor artificial nest cavities and restrictors. Louisiana pine snake: capture, handle, measure, weigh, PIT-tag, swab, remove radio transmitters, and collect blood, fecal, and shed skin samples Renewal and Amendment. TE 88796C-0 Geological Survey of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL Watercress darter (Etheostoma nuchale) Watercress Darter National Wildlife Refuge, Bessemer, Alabama Presence/absence and population surveys Capture with seine nets, identify, and release New. TE 89030C-0 Mark Strong, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 25 species of plants Lake Wales Ridge National Wildlife Refuge, Florida Collect genomic tissue samples and herbarium vouchers Collect leaf tissue samples and a single branch or small above-ground portion of the plant New. TE 171594-1 Craig Martin, Wetland Sciences, Inc., Pensacola, FL Alabama beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus ammobates), Choctawhatchee beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus allophrys), and Perdido Key beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus trissyllepsis) Alabama and Florida Presence/absence surveys Capture, identify, and release Renewal and Amendment. TE 97394A-3 Zachary Couch, Pleasureville, KY Gray bats (Myotis grisescens), Indiana bats (Myotis sodalis), Northern long-eared bats (Myotis septentrionalis), and Virginia big-eared bats (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus) Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming Presence/absence surveys, population monitoring, and studies to document habitat use Enter hibernacula or maternity roost caves, capture with mist nets or harp traps, handle, identify, band, radio-tag, light-tag, collect hair samples, wing-punch, and salvage Renewal. TE 02200B-1 Atlanta Botanical Garden, Atlanta, GA Helonias bullata (Swamp pink), Platanthera integrilabia (White fringeless orchid), Sarracenia oreophila (Green pitcher plant), Spiraea virginiana (Virginia spiraea), Trillium persistens (Persistent trillium), Trillium reliquum (Relict trillium), and Xyris tennesseensis (Tennessee yellow-eyed grass) Federal lands in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee Long-term storage, artificial propagation, and ex situ safeguarding Remove and reduce to possession (collect) seeds Renewal and Amendment. TE 35594A-3 Alabama Power Company, Birmingham, AL Gray bats (Myotis grisescens), Indiana bats (Myotis sodalis), Northern long-eared bats (Myotis septentrionalis), Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus alabamensis) Alabama Presence/absence surveys, population monitoring, upper respiratory tract disease testing, and DNA analysis Bats: Capture with mist-nets, handle, identify, band, and radio-tag. Gopher tortoise: Add authorization to trap, attach radio transmitters, and collect blood. Black Warrior waterdog: Trap, handle, identify, and collect tail sample Amendment.
    Authority

    We publish this notice under section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Leopoldo Miranda, Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Southeast Region.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24607 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [18X.LLES964000.L14400000.FR0000; FLES-58597] Notice of Proposed Withdrawal Extension and Opportunity for Public Meeting for the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge; Florida AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary of the Interior proposes to extend the duration of Public Land Order (PLO) No. 5683 for an additional 40-year term. PLO No. 5683 withdrew 37.50 acres of public land from settlement, sale, location, or entry under the general land laws, including the mining laws, but not from leasing under the mineral leasing laws and reserved under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior as part of the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge (PINWR), administered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). This Notice gives an opportunity for the public to comment on the petition/application for the proposed withdrawal extension and to request a public meeting.

    DATES:

    For a period until February 11, 2019, all persons who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with the proposed withdrawal extension may do so in writing.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to the BLM Southeastern States District Office, Attn: Victoria Craft, 273 Market Street, Flowood, MS 39232 or by email to: [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sally Spencer, phone: 202-912-7700; email: [email protected]. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The withdrawal created by PLO No. 5683 (44 FR 53084, 1979), will expire on September 11, 2019, unless extended. The USFWS has filed a petition/application requesting extension of the withdrawal created by the PLO for an additional 40-year term. The PLO withdrew the following described public land from settlement, sale, location, or entry under the general land laws, including the mining laws, but not from leasing under the mineral leasing laws, and reserved them as part of the PINWR:

    Tallahassee Meridian, Florida T. 31 S, R. 39 E, Sec. 9, lot 9

    The land withdrawn by PLO No. 5683 are located in Indian River County (formerly a portion of Brevard County), Florida.

    The purpose of the withdrawal extension is to continue to provide an upland buffer zone between the existing refuge and the adjacent privately held land. The withdrawn land is home to PINWR's Centennial Trail, Boardwalk, and Observation Pavilion, which were developed in recognition of the 2003 Centennial Celebration of the National Wildlife Refuge System, at the home of the first National Wildlife Refuge. The PINWR contains 5,400 acres and is visited by over 100,000 people annually who come to experience nature and learn about the Refuge.

    The use of a right-of-way, interagency agreement, or cooperative agreement would not provide adequate protection for the wildlife habitat and unique resource values within the PINWR.

    No additional water rights would be needed to fulfill the purpose of the requested withdrawal extension.

    There are no suitable alternative sites since the lands described herein contain the natural and biological resources of interest for protection.

    All persons who wish to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with the proposed withdrawal extension may present their views in writing to the BLM Eastern States, at the address indicated above. Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the address stated above, during regular business hours, 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifiable information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personally identifiable information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Notice is hereby given that an opportunity for a public meeting is afforded in connection with the proposed withdrawal extension. All interested persons who desire a public meeting for the purpose of being heard on the proposed withdrawal extension must submit a written request to the District Manager, BLM Southeastern States District Office at the address provided in the ADDRESSES section, within 90 days from the date of publication of this Notice. If the authorized officer determines that a public meeting will be held, a Notice of the date, time, and place will be published in the Federal Register and local newspapers and posted on the BLM website at: www.blm.gov at least 30 days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    All statements received will be considered before any recommendation concerning the proposed extension is submitted to the Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management for final action. This withdrawal extension proposal will be processed in accordance with the regulations set forth in 43 CFR 2310.4.

    Authority:

    43 CFR 2310.3-1.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Ryan K. Zinke, Secretary of the Interior.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24717 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-GJ-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0026717; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, KS AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Kansas State Historical Society has completed an inventory of human remains, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request to the Kansas State Historical Society. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the Kansas State Historical Society at the address in this notice by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Dr. Robert J. Hoard, Kansas State Historical Society, 6425 SW 6th Avenue, Topeka, KS 66615-1099, telephone 785-272-8681, Ext. 269, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains under the control of the Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, KS. The human remains were removed from Barber, Cowley, Marion, Rice, and Sumner Counties, KS.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Kansas State Historical Society professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco, and Tawakonie), Oklahoma.

    History and Description of the Remains

    On or before 1985, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from portions of site 14BA401, the JJ Lemon Ranch site (UBS 2001-22) in Barber County, KS, by an artifact collector in Pratt, KS. In 2001, the collector showed his collection to Kansas State Historical Society staff, who identified and took possession of the human remains—cranial fragments, a mandible fragment with teeth, three vertebrae, and two fragments of a femur—all of which belong to a single, 45-55-year-old male. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    The site is affiliated with the Middle Ceramic (ca. A.D. 1100-1400) Pratt complex based on diagnostic artifacts observed at the site. The Pratt complex material culture recovered from the site—charred corn cobs, small triangular Washita points, beveled knives, bison scapula hoes, other bone tools, and attributes of ceramic vessel sherds—is representative of the people who are ancestral to the Great Bend aspect and, ultimately, to the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes, as asserted by Brosowske and Bevitt in the volume Kansas Archaeology (Hoard and Banks 2006:180-205), as well as by others. Previously recovered human remains from this site were repatriated to the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes in 1999 (Federal Register March 12, 1999, vol. 64, no. 48, pp. 12349-12351).

    In 1969, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was removed from 14SR303, the Buresh site (UBS 2000-12) in Sumner County, KS. Kansas State Historical Society staff excavated the site to save information from the site before it was destroyed by collectors. A human occipital belonging to an adult was recovered from a large basin-shaped feature containing charcoal, tools, and other cultural debris. These human remains were not noted during the excavation, but were found only later, during analysis of the Kansas State Historical Society collections. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    The site dates to ca. A.D. 1100. The material culture recovered from the site—charred corn cobs, small triangular Washita points, beveled knives, bison scapula hoes, other bone tools, and sherds from globular jars with decorated lips and rims—is consistent with the Washita focus, whose people are considered to be ancestral to the Great Bend aspect and, ultimately, to the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes, as asserted by Brosowske and Bevitt in the volume Kansas Archaeology (Hoard and Banks 2006:180-205), as well as by others.

    In 1986, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from 14MN328, the Mem site (UBS 2001-26) in advance of highway construction. The collections from the site, including ceramic vessel sherds and side-notched arrow pints, are consistent with the Great Bend aspect. Subsequent analysis of collections from the investigations recovered a human deciduous incisor belonging to a single individual. No associated funerary objects are present.

    The Great Bend aspect, ca. A.D. 1350-1700, is widely understood to be ancestral to the modern-day Wichita and Affiliated Tribes. This understanding is based on radiocarbon dates, geographic region, material culture, oral tradition, and historical documents such as the entradas of Coronado and Oñate in A.D. 1541 and 1601, respectively, as well as historical continuity into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This evidence is strongly asserted in Waldo Wedel's 1959 publication An Introduction to Kansas Archeology and in many subsequent archeological publications.

    In 1977, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from 14RC2, the Major site (UBS 2001-32) in Rice County, KS. A private individual excavated a trash pit at the site, and subsequently donated the collection to the Kansas State Historical Society. The collections from the site, including ceramic vessel sherds and side-notched arrow pints, are consistent with the Great Bend aspect. The collection included a mandible fragment with four teeth, belonging to a single adult individual. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1977 and 1978, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from 14RC8, the Tobias site (UBS 2011-01) in Rice County, KS. Research excavations by the Kansas State Historical Society led to the collection of extensive amounts of cultural material with a clear affiliation to the ancestral Wichita Great Bend aspect. An adult human tooth was recovered from this collection in 2011. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 2005, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from 14RC410, the Little River site (UBS 2005-08) in Rice County, KS. Excavations in advance of the construction of a water treatment plant encountered a human burial. Because artifacts consistent with the Great Bend aspect were present at the site, the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes were contacted, and the burial was left in place. During subsequent analysis of the site collection, small, fragmentary remains belonging to two individuals were discovered. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    Between 1994 and 1996, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from 14CO1, the Larcom-Haggard site (UBS 2015-08), in Cowley County, KS. Kansas State Historical Society staff excavated this Great Bend aspect site in advance of highway construction. Representatives of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes were actively consulted during investigations. Subsequent analysis of the materials collected led to the discovery of a single human deciduous incisor. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    Between 1994 and 1996, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from 14CO3, the County Club site (UBS 2006-05), in Cowley County, KS. Kansas State Historical Society staff excavated this Great Bend aspect site in advance of highway construction. Representatives of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes were actively consulted during investigations. Subsequent analysis of the materials collected led to the discovery of a single human deciduous incisor. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    Between 1994 and 1996, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from 14CO332, the Havelock site (UBS 2001-20), in Cowley County, KS. Kansas State Historical Society staff excavated this Great Bend aspect site in advance of highway construction. Representatives of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes were actively consulted during investigations. Subsequent analysis of the materials collected led to the discovery of a single human deciduous incisor. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    Determinations Made by the Kansas State Historical Society

    Officials of the Kansas State Historical Society have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 10 individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Robert J. Hoard, Kansas State Historical Society, 6425 SW 6th Avenue, Topeka, KS 66615-1099, telephone 785-272-8681, Ext. 269, email [email protected], by December 13, 2018. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains to the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma may proceed.

    The Kansas State Historical Society is responsible for notifying the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma that this notice has been published.

    Dated: October 9, 2018. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24663 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA- NPS0026787; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: University of Arkansas Museum Collections, Fayetteville, AR AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The University of Arkansas Museum Collections has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the University of Arkansas Museum Collections. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the University of Arkansas Museum Collections at the address in this notice by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Mary Suter, University of Arkansas Museum Collections, Biomass Building 125, 2435 North Hatch Avenue, Fayetteville, AR 72704, telephone (479) 575-3456, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the University of Arkansas Museum Collections, Fayetteville, AR. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from multiple locations in Arkansas.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the University of Arkansas Museum Collections professional staff in consultation with representatives of The Quapaw Tribe of Indians.

    History and Description of the Remains

    In 1966, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from Roland Mound (3AR30) in Arkansas County, AR. The human remains are those of an adult of unknown sex. The human remains were excavated by James A. Scholtz for the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1967, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from the Dumond Site (3AR40) in Arkansas County, AR. These remains were excavated by James A. Scholtz for the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The one associated funerary object, a pottery vessel, is currently missing from the museum's collections.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the McDuffie Site (3CG21) in Craighead County, AR. These human remains were donated to the museum by a collector in 1967. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1929, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from an unknown site in Conway County, AR. The individual was an adult of unknown sex. Accession records for these remains and associated artifact are incomplete. No known individuals were identified. The one associated funerary object is an engraved long-necked tripod bottle.

    In 1933, human remains representing, at minimum, 40 individuals were removed from Togo/Neely's Ferry Site (3CS24) in Cross County, AR. The human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 196 associated funerary objects are: One deer antler tine, one arrow point, one bone awl, two modified gar jaws, one bone bead, 31 shell beads, 13 mammal bone fragments, 32 fish bones, 19 ceramic bottles, 15 ceramic bowls, one lot of charred corn cobs, one stone disc, one ceramic disc, two marine shell ear spools, one effigy bottle, one effigy bowl, one bird effigy bowl, one snake effigy bowl, 19 fish hook fragments, one fired clay object, nine ceramic jars, one deer mandible, one pebble, one shell tempered clay pipe, three deer scapula fragments, one shell ornament, 34 mussel shell fragments, and one pot sherd. An additional three associated funerary objects are currently missing from the museum's collections. They are one shell ear plug, one bone ring, and one gar scale.

    In 1933, human remains representing, at minimum, 104 individuals were removed from the Vernon Paul Site (3CS25) in Cross County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 692 associated funerary objects are six deer antler fragments, two arrow points, one sample of ashes, 11 bone awls, five beads, 171 shell beads, 15 animal bone fragments, 44 ceramic bottles, 51 ceramic bowls, 56 fragments of turtle shell, three stone celts, one piece of charcoal, two unmodified cobbles, one cache of charred corn, three ceramic discoidals, one stone discoidal, seven shell ear plugs, 13 effigy bowls, one antler tool, one sample of gravel, one hammer stone, one piece of hematite, 20 ceramic jars, two fish bone needles, one lot pebbles, one bone pin, two pipes, two ceramic cylinders, 151 fragments of a turtle shell rattle, two turtle scapulae, 14 mussel shell fragments, 79 shell-tempered body sherds, and 21 shell tempered rim sherds. One additional associated funerary object is currently missing from the museum's collections. It is one lot of pot sherds.

    In 1950, 1967, and another unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, seven individuals were removed from the Rose Mound Site (3CS27) in Cross County, AR. The human remains removed in 1950 were excavated by the University of Arkansas as part of a Field School. The human remains from 1967 were donated to the University of Arkansas Museum. Human remains from one of the listed individuals were donated to the University of Arkansas at an unknown date and transferred to the control of the University of Arkansas Museum in 2006. No known individuals were identified. The five associated funerary objects are five fragments of copper.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Delta Site (3CS69) in Cross County, AR and donated to the University of Arkansas Museum in 1966. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1967, human remains representing, at minimum, 17 individuals were removed from the Wapanocca Mound Site (3CT9) in Crittenden County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 49 associated funerary objects are: Nine ceramic bottles, 10 ceramic bowls, two effigy bowls, seven ceramic jars, one mano, three mussel shells, seventeen sherds. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1932 and at an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, 37 individuals were removed from the Banks Site (3CT13) in Crittenden County, AR. The human remains removed from the site in 1932 were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. In 1960 the University of Arkansas received a donation of additional human remains from this site. No known individuals were identified. The one associated funerary object is a ceramic bottle.

    In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, eight individuals were removed from the Barton Ranch Site (3CT18) in Crittenden County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The nine associated funerary objects are three bottles, one bowl, two effigy bowls, and two jars.

    In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, 42 individuals were removed from the Golightly Place Site (3CT19) in Crittenden County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 129 associated funerary objects are: Three deer antler, three arrow points, one sample of ash, three bone awls, 12 ceramic bottles, 17 ceramic bowls, two discoidals, 10 effigy vessels, one hammer stone, eight jars, one lump of tempered clay, 44 pebbles, four mussel shells, 18 fragments of turtle bone and shell, and two pot sherds. An additional two associated funerary objects are currently missing from the museum's collections. They are one ceramic bottle and one ceramic bowl.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Belle Mead Site (3CT30) in Crittenden County, AR. These human remains were donated to the University of Arkansas, Department of Anthropology and entered the University of Arkansas Museum collections in 2006. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1967, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Glover Site (3CT37) in Crittenden County, AR. These remains and associated objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the Warner Smith Place Site (3CT44) in Crittenden County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The two associated funerary objects are one clay pipe and one ceramic bottle.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the McClure Site (3CW34) in Crawford County, AR, and donated to the University of Arkansas Museum in 1962. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the Toltec Mounds Site (3LN42) in Lonoke County, AR. These human remains were donated to the University of Arkansas Museum in 1966. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, 16 individuals were removed from the Middle Nodena Site (3MS3) in Mississippi County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 22 associated funerary objects are: Seven ceramic bottles, one effigy bottle, seven ceramic bowls, one effigy bowl, two ceramic jars, and four pot sherds.

    In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, 92 individuals were removed from the Upper Nodena Site (3MS4) in Mississippi County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 143 associated funerary objects are: Two arrow points, seven bone awls, 33 shell beads, 25 ceramic bottles, 18 ceramic bowls, eight celts, two ceramic discoidals, three marine shell ear plugs, two effigy bottles, eight effigy bowls, three effigy jars, 11 ceramic jars, one stone pendant, one mussel shell, 18 pot sherds, and one sphere of burned clay.

    In 1953, human remains representing, at minimum, 15 individuals were removed from the Gant Site (3MS11) in Mississippi County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The six associated funerary objects are: Two ceramic bottles, two ceramic bowls, one ceramic jar, and one pot sherd.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, 106 individuals were removed from the Golden Lake Site (3MS60) in Mississippi County, AR. No known individuals were identified. These human remains were donated to the University of Arkansas, Department of Anthropology and entered the University of Arkansas Museum collections in 2006. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1933, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed from the Tschudy Lumber Company Site (3PO1) in Poinsett County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 17 associated funerary objects are: Seven pot sherds, nine fire cracked rock pieces, and one ceramic bowl.

    In 1933, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the Norris Place Site (3PO3) in Poinsett County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The four associated funerary objects are: Two ceramic bowls, one ceramic bottle, and one ceramic jar.

    In 1933, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual was removed from the Cart's Camp Site (3PO4) in Poinsett County, AR. These human remains were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the St. Francis Site in St. Francis County, AR. These human remains were purchased by the University of Arkansas Museum in 1959. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1961 and at an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the Castile Landing Site (3SF12) in St. Francis County, AR. The human remains removed in 1961 were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. The human remains of the remaining individuals were donated to the University of Arkansas, Department of Anthropology and entered the University of Arkansas Museum collections in 2006. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, seven individuals were removed from the Manley Site (3SF25) in St. Francis County, AR. These human remains were donated to the University of Arkansas, Department of Anthropology and entered the University of Arkansas Museum collections in 2006. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from the Hollingsworth Place Site (3WH2) in White County, AR. These human remains were donated to the University of Arkansas Museum in 1964. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed from the Charles Figley/Lost Hill Site (3WH34) in White County, AR. These human remains were donated to the University of Arkansas Museum in 1966. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the Churchman Place Site on the Black River in an unknown county in Arkansas. Accession records for this collection are incomplete. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    At an unknown date, human remains representing, at minimum, one individual were removed from the JB Redmann Site (3PO42) in Poinsett County, AR. Accession records for this collection are incomplete. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    In 1932, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from the Randolph Landing Site in Tipton County, TN. These human remains were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The two associated funerary objects are one ceramic bowl and one ceramic jar.

    In 1933, human remains representing, at minimum, 206 individuals were removed from the Hazel Site (3PO6) in Poinsett County, AR. These human remains and associated funerary objects were excavated by the University of Arkansas Museum. No known individuals were identified. The 1148 associated funerary objects are: One abrader, three antler fragments, one arrow point, two bone awls, one ground stone axe, one raccoon baculum, 30 bone beads, two ceramic beads, four crinoid beads, 435 shell beads, four bird bone fragments, three deer bone fragments, 118 fish bones, four unidentified animal bone fragments, 80 bottles, 84 bowls, one piece of burned clay, one mass of burned clay, wood and animal bone, two pieces of charcoal, one lot of charred plant remains including basketry, one sample of red clay, one sample of white clay, one burned clay hearth, one copper ornament, two pieces of sheet copper, one corn cob, nine daub fragments, three ceramic discoidals, one ear plug, six shell ear plugs, one stone ear plug, two effigy bottles, 12 effigy bowls, one effigy jar, one effigy pipe, five fragments of a shell gorget, 43 jars, one chipped stone knife, one bone needle, one shell pendant, 21 bone pin fragments, two clay pipes, 26 mussel shell pieces, 215 pot sherds, two soil samples, one textile fragment, one piece of copper and textile, three beaver teeth, three turtle shell fragments, and two twigs. An additional 76 associated funerary objects are currently missing from the museum's collections. They are: One antler tine, one lot of charcoal and shell, one bird bill awl, two bone awls, six shell ear plugs, one lot of beads, seven shell beads, two pieces of modified animal bone, eight ceramic bottles, 11 ceramic bowls, one lot of charred wood and grass, one effigy bottle, three effigy bowls, two bone needles, one ceramic sphere, one clay pipe, one piece of sheet copper, 19 mussel shell pieces, one pot sherd, five ceramic vessels, and one sample of soil.

    During the Mississippi period (A.D. 950-1541) in the Mississippi valley, distinctive local groups emerge in the archeological record that correspond in geographical extent and cultural cohesiveness to present-day groups that include the Quapaw. Quapaw communities occupied villages located around the confluence of the Arkansas and Mississippi Rivers at the time of late 17th century French exploration. Based on the archeological context for these sites and what is presently known about the peoples who pre-date the historic Quapaw people, the University of Arkansas Museum Collections has determined the human remains and associated funerary objects listed here are culturally affiliated with The Quapaw Tribe of Indians.

    Determinations Made by the University of Arkansas Museum

    Officials of the University of Arkansas Museum have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 736 individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 2,426 objects described and included in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and The Quapaw Tribe of Indians.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Mary Suter, University of Arkansas Museum, Biomass Building 125, 2435 N Hatch Ave., Fayetteville, AR 72704, telephone (479) 575-3456, email [email protected], by December 13, 2018. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to The Quapaw Tribe of Indians may proceed.

    The University of Arkansas Museum Collections is responsible for notifying The Quapaw Tribe of Indians that this notice has been published.

    Dated: October 12, 2018. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24660 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0026666; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: University of California, Davis, Davis, CA AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The University of California, Davis, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the University of California, Davis. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the University of California, Davis at the address in this notice by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Megon Noble, NAGPRA Project Manager, University of California, Davis, 433 Mrak Hall, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, telephone (530) 752-8501, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, that meet the definition of unassociated funerary objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    Sometime before 1904, 13 cultural items were removed from a cremation knoll on Mameluke Hill in El Dorado County, CA. A schoolteacher and her son removed the cultural items from the cremation knoll and gave them to Mr. C. Hart Merriam in 1904. In 1962, C. Hart Merriam's daughter sold the collections accumulated by her father to the University of California, Davis. The 13 unassociated funerary objects are 11 sets of trade beads, one set of barita beads, and one stone amulet.

    C. Hart Merriam noted that the cultural items show evidence of burning, and were collected from a cremation knoll. Cremation is the historically documented burial practice of Nisenan peoples. Merriam affiliated the cultural items with the Nisenan. Mameluke Hill is located in the historically documented aboriginal territory of the Nisenan, who are today represented by the Ione Band of Miwok Indians of California; Jackson Band of Miwuk Indians (previously listed as the Jackson Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California); Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Shingle Springs Rancheria (Verona Tract), California; United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria of California; and the Wilton Rancheria, California, hereafter referred to as “The Tribes.” The glass trade beads date to the historic period.

    Determinations Made by the University of California, Davis

    Officials of the University of California, Davis have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), the 13 cultural items described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony and are believed, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have been removed from a specific burial site of a Native American individual.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the unassociated funerary objects and The Tribes.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Megon Noble, NAGPRA Project Manager, University of California, Davis, 433 Mrak Hall, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, telephone (530) 752-8501, email [email protected], by December 13, 2018. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the unassociated funerary objects to The Tribes may proceed.

    The University of California, Davis is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published.

    Dated: October 4, 2018. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24661 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-NPS0026715; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: Historic Westville, Inc., Columbus, GA AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Historic Westville, Inc. has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is no cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to Historic Westville, Inc. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Historic Westville, Inc. at the address in this notice by December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Terra Martinez, Historic Westville, Inc., 1130 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Columbus, GA 31906, telephone (706) 940-0057, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of Historic Westville, Inc., Columbus, GA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from unknown parts of northern Georgia and southern Tennessee.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the Historic Westville, Inc. professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma; Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Cherokee Nation; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Poarch Band of Creek Indians (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); Seminole Tribe of Florida (previously listed as the Seminole Tribe of Florida (Dania, Big Cypress, Brighton, Hollywood & Tampa Reservations)); The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; The Seminole Nation of Oklahoma; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma, hereafter referred to as “The Consulted Tribes.”

    History and Description of the Remains

    In 1985, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were donated to Historic Westville, Inc. along with approximately 13,000 other Native American artifacts and reproductions. The collection was donated by Dr. Austin Flint. All attempts by the staff of Historic Westville to reach Dr. Flint or his descendants have been unsuccessful. Documentation of the donation consists of a handwritten inventory done by an appraiser preceding the donation and a signed deed of gift. The collection was re-discovered by current staff in 2016. The four individuals include one subadult of indeterminate sex based on the mandible fragment with unerupted teeth and three individuals of indeterminate age and sex. The 150 associated funerary objects are: 37 beads, 27 gorgets and possible gorgets, 34 celts and possible celts, 18 turtle and mollusk shells, 21 clay pots that may be reproductions, five flutes that are possible reproductions, five large decorated sherds, one pipe, one mask that is a possible reproduction, and one unknown ceramic.

    Consulting archeologists identified a percentage of the collection to aid in determining point of origin for the collection. A 5% random sampling of over 1,000 project points revealed that over 80% originated from Georgia and Tennessee. A 20% sampling of pottery sherds also verified that over 80% of the sherds were from Georgia and Tennessee.

    Determinations Made by Historic Westville, Inc.

    Officials of Historic Westville, Inc. have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice are Native American based on their inclusion in a collection of over 13,000 Native American artifacts.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of four individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 150 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribe.

    • According to the final judgement of the Indian Claims Commission or the Court of Federal Claims, the land from which the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed is aboriginal land of the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Catawba Indian Nation (aka Catawba Tribe of South Carolina); Cherokee Nation; Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; Poarch Band of Creeks (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa; Seminole Tribe of Florida (previously listed as the Seminole Tribe of Florida (Dania, Big Cypress, Brighton, Hollywood & Tampa Reservation)); Shawnee Tribe; The Chickasaw Nation; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; The Seminole Nation of Oklahoma; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma, hereafter referred to as “The Tribes.”

    • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects may be to The Tribes.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Terra Martinez, Historic Westville, Inc., 1130 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Columbus, GA 31906, telephone (706) 940-0057, email [email protected], by December 13, 2018. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to The Tribes may proceed.

    Historic Westville, Inc. is responsible for notifying The Tribes and The Consulted Tribes that this notice has been published.

    Dated: October 9, 2018. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24664 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled Certain Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and Components Thereof, DN 3346; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing pursuant to the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov, and will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000.

    General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at United States International Trade Commission (USITC) at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission has received an amended complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Juul Labs, Inc., on October 26, 2018. The original complaint was filed on October 3, 2018 and a notice of receipt of complaint; solicitation of comments relating to the public interest was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2018. The amended complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain electronic nicotine delivery systems and components thereof. The complaint names as respondents: J Well France S.A.S. of France; Bo Vaping of Garden City, NY; MMS Distribution LLC of Rock Hill, NY; The Electric Tobacconist, LLC of Boulder, CO; Vapor 4 Life Holdings, Inc. of Northbrook, IL; Eonsmoke, LLC of Clifton, NJ; ZLab S.A. of Uruguay; Ziip Lab Co., Limited of China; Shenzhen Yibo Technology Co., Ltd. of China; XFire, Inc. of Stafford, TX; ALD Group Limited of China; Flair Vapor LLC of South Plainfield, NJ; Shenzhen Joecig Technology Co., Ltd. of China; Myle Vape Inc. of Jamaica, NY: Vapor Hub International, Inc. of Simi Valley, CA; Limitless Mod Co. of Simi Valley, CA; Asher Dynamics, Inc. of Chino; CA; Ply Rock of Chino, CA; Infinite-N Technology Limited of China; King Distribution LLC of Elmwood Park, NJ; and Keep Vapor Electronic Tech. Co., Ltd. of China. The amended complaint alleges infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,070,669; 10,076,139; 10,045,568; 10,058,130 and 10,104,915. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders and impose a bond during the 60-day review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

    Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments, not to exceed five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments, on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

    In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

    (i) explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

    (ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

    (iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

    (iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

    (v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

    Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues should be filed no later than by close of business nine calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Complainant may file a reply to any written submission no later than the date on which complainant's reply would be due under § 210.8(c)(2) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.8(c)(2)).

    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to § 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3346”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures.1 ) Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).

    1 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf.

    Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel,2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.3

    2 All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

    3 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): https://edis.usitc.gov.

    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: October 30, 2018. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24679 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1387-1391 (Final)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin From Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan; Determinations

    On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that an industry in the United States is not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of polyethylene terephthalate (“PET”) resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan that have been found by the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”).2 3

    1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).

    2 83 FR 48278-48289 (September 24, 2018).

    3 Whether the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded is not an issue in these investigations.

    Background

    The Commission, pursuant to section 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)), instituted these investigations effective September 26, 2017, following receipt of petitions filed with the Commission and Commerce by DAK Americas LLC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Indorama Ventures USA, Inc., Decatur, Alabama; M&G Polymers USA, LLC, Houston, Texas; and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America, Lake City, South Carolina. The Commission scheduled the final phase of the investigations following notification of preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of PET resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission's investigations and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of June 6, 2018 (53 FR 26306). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on September 13, 2018, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel.

    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to section 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on November 6, 2018. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4835 (November 2018), entitled Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Brazil, Indonesia, Korea, Pakistan, and Taiwan: Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1387-1391 (Final).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 6, 2018. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24621 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION Sunshine Act: Notice of Agency Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Thursday, November 15, 2018.

    PLACE:

    Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street (All visitors must use Diagonal Road Entrance), Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Share Insurance Fund Quarterly Report.

    2. 2019-2020 NCUA Budget.

    3. NCUA Rules and Regulations, Fidelity Bonds.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

    Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24836 Filed 11-8-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Request for Information on Update to the 2016 Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development Strategic Plan AGENCY:

    National Coordination Office (NCO) for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD); submitted by the National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for information.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014, Federal agencies must update the Federal cybersecurity research and development (R&D) strategic plan every four years. The NITRD NCO seeks public input for the 2019 update of the Federal cybersecurity R&D strategic plan. The updated plan will be used to guide and coordinate federally funded research in cybersecurity, including cybersecurity education and workforce development, and the development of consensus-based standards and best practices in cybersecurity.

    DATES:

    To be considered, submissions must be received on or before 11:59 p.m. (ET) on January 15, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submissions to this notice may be sent by any of the following methods:

    (a) Email: [email protected] Submissions should include “RFI Response: Federal Cybersecurity R&D Strategic Plan” in the subject line of the message.

    (b) Fax: 202-459-9673, Attn: Tomas Vagoun.

    (c) Mail: NCO/NITRD, Attn: Tomas Vagoun, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA.

    Instructions: Response to this RFI is voluntary. Submissions must not exceed 25 pages in 12-point or larger font, with a page number provided on each page. Responses should include the name of the person(s) or organization(s) providing the submission.

    Responses to this RFI may be posted online at http://www.nitrd.gov. Therefore, we request that no business-proprietary information, copyrighted information, or personally identifiable information be submitted in response to this RFI.

    In accordance with FAR 15.202(3), responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Federal Government to form a binding contract. Responders are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tomas Vagoun at [email protected] or 202-459-9674, or by mailing to NCO/NITRD, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014 (https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-113publ274/pdf/PLAW-113publ274.pdf) requires that every four years the applicable Federal agencies, working through the National Science and Technology Council and the Networking and Information Technology R&D (NITRD) program, develop and update a Federal cybersecurity research and development strategic plan.

    The most recent version of the strategic plan was released in February 2016 (https://www.nitrd.gov/pubs/2016-Federal-Cybersecurity-Research-and-Development-Strategic-Plan.pdf). This strategic plan identifies four categories of defensive capabilities (deter, protect, detect, adapt) and six critical dependent areas (scientific foundations, risk management, human aspects, transition to practice, workforce development, and infrastructure for research) as the structure for focusing and coordinating Federal cybersecurity R&D activities. The quadrennial strategic plan update (to be released by end of 2019) will leverage this structure.

    On behalf of Federal agencies and the NITRD Cyber Security and Information Assurance Interagency Working Group, the NCO for NITRD seeks public input on Federal priorities in cybersecurity R&D. Responders should consider a 10-year time frame when characterizing the challenges, prospective research activities, and desired outcomes. Responders are asked to answer one or more of the following questions:

    1. What innovative, transformational technologies have the potential to greatly enhance the security, reliability, resiliency, and trustworthiness of the digital infrastructure, and to protect consumer privacy?

    2. What progress has been made against the goals of the 2016 Federal Cybersecurity R&D Strategic Plan? Are there mature private-sector solutions that address the deficiencies raised in the 2016 Strategic Plan? What areas of research or topics of the 2016 Strategic Plan no longer need to be prioritized for federally funded basic research?

    3. What areas of research or topics of the 2016 Strategic Plan should continue to be a priority for federally funded research and require continued Federal R&D investments?

    4. What challenges or objectives not included in the 2016 Strategic Plan should be strategic priorities for federally funded R&D in cybersecurity? Discuss what new capabilities would be desired, what objectives should guide such research, and why those capabilities and objectives should be strategic priorities.

    5. What changes to cybersecurity education and workforce development, at all levels of education, should be considered to prepare students, faculty, and the workforce in the next decade for emerging cybersecurity challenges, such as the implications of artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and the Internet of Things on cybersecurity?

    6. What other research and development strategies, plans, or activities, domestic or in other countries, should inform the U.S. Federal cybersecurity R&D strategic plan?

    Following the receipt of comments, the NITRD Cyber Security and Information Assurance Interagency Working Group under the National Science and Technology Council will consider the input provided when updating the Federal cybersecurity R&D strategic plan.

    Submitted by the National Science Foundation on behalf of the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) National Coordination Office (NCO) on November 7, 2018.

    Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24668 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-0609; NRC-2018-0225] Exemption; Issuance: Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC; Medical Radioisotope Production Facility AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Exemption; issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an exemption to Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC (NWMI) from the requirement that an application for an NRC license to possess and use special nuclear material for processing and fuel fabrication, scrap recovery or conversion of uranium hexafluoride, or for the conduct of any other activity which the NRC has determined will significantly affect the quality of the environment (and the associated environmental report), be submitted at least 9 months prior to commencement of construction of the plant or facility in which the activity will be conducted.

    DATES:

    This exemption is being issued on November 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0225 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0225. Address questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Tiktinsky, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-8740, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    NWMI is the holder of Construction Permit No. CPMIF-002 (issued on May 9, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18037A308) under Part 50 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)), which authorizes NWMI to construct a medical radioisotope production facility (RPF) in Columbia, Missouri. The facility would fabricate low-enriched uranium (LEU) targets and ship them to a network of U.S. research reactors for irradiation, receive irradiated LEU targets, disassemble and dissolve irradiated LEU targets, and recover and purify Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99). These processes would take place in a single RPF building divided into two separate areas where processes subject to different regulatory regimes would take place. The processes involved in the production area, which include receipt of irradiated LEU targets, LEU target disassembly and dissolution, and Mo-99 recovery and purification, are subject to the NRC licensing requirements of 10 CFR part 50. The processes involved in target fabrication that NWMI plans to perform in a separate area of the RPF would be subject to the separate NRC licensing requirements of 10 CFR part 70.

    NWMI submitted an environmental report with its construction permit application, providing environmental information about all of the processes that would occur in both portions of the RPF. In accordance with Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR part 51, the NRC staff prepared an environmental impact statement (EIS), NUREG-2209, “Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction Permit for the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility,” dated May 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17130A862) assessing the potential impacts of the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the proposed RPF on the quality of the human environment and reasonable alternatives. The construction and operation impacts from the portion of the RPF in which 10 CFR part 70 target fabrication activities would occur were evaluated as a connected action to the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit. A 10 CFR part 50 construction permit was issued to NWMI on May 9, 2018.

    II. Request/Action

    The exemption request from NWMI was submitted by letter dated December 18, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17362A040), as supplemented by a letter dated March 12, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18088A175). NWMI is requesting an exemption from the requirement that the application (and associated environmental report required by 10 CFR part 51) for 10 CFR part 70 activities be submitted at least 9 months prior to commencement of construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF. The activities that will be subject to the 10 CFR part 70 license application are described in the construction permit application that NWMI previously submitted to the NRC under 10 CFR part 50 for an RPF to be constructed in Columbia, Missouri. NWMI Preliminary Safety Analyses Report, Chapter 19, “Environmental Report” Corvallis, OR, Revision 0A dated June 2015 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML15210A123, ML15210A128, ML15210A129, and ML15210A131).

    The NRC evaluated the environmental impacts from the 10 CFR part 70 target fabrication activities in the RPF as part of its EIS supporting NWMI's 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application. The exemption would allow NWMI to initiate construction of the 10 CFR part 70 components of the RPF upon the issuance of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit for the RPF even if the 10 CFR 70.21(f) timing requirement is not met.

    III. Discussion

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 70.17(a), the Commission may, upon application of any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant such exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR part 70 as it determines are authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and are otherwise in the public interest.

    Authorized by Law

    The applicant has stated that the requested exemption from the requirement to submit an application and associated environmental report at least 9 months prior to the commencement of construction of the RPF, including 10 CFR part 70 components (i.e., the target fabrication facility), will enable it to initiate construction of the entire RPF based upon the environmental review for the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit. The applicant has also stated there have been no significant changes to the environmental information that was previously submitted to the NRC as part of the 10 CFR part 50 construction permit application. NWMI also stated that it will submit the application and environmental report required by 10 CFR 70.21(f) as part of a consolidated operating license application for both the 10 CFR part 50 Production Facility and to possess and use special nuclear material for the 10 CFR part 70 target fabrication facility activities.

    The staff evaluated the environmental impacts of the RPF, including the 10 CFR part 70 target fabrication activities as a connected action, in the EIS dated May 31, 2017 (NUREG-2209, “Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction Permit for the Northwest Medical Isotopes Radioisotope Production Facility”, ADAMS Accession No. ML17130A862). The staff concludes, as documented in the EIS, that after weighing the environmental, economic, technical, and other benefits against environmental and other costs, and considering reasonable alternatives, the NRC staff's recommendation, unless safety issues mandate otherwise, is the issuance of a construction permit to NWMI.

    The NRC regulation, 10 CFR 70.17, allows the NRC to grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR part 70 provided certain findings are made. Granting the applicant's proposed exemption is not otherwise inconsistent with NRC regulations or other applicable laws. As explained below, the proposed exemption will not endanger life or property, or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest.

    NWMI indicates that it will submit an environmental report with its application for an operating license for the entire RPF which the NRC will be able to review for any significant new information. The NRC will not make a decision on an application to operate the production portion of the facility under 10 CFR part 50 or a license to possess and use special nuclear material for target fabrication under 10 CFR part 70 until after the NRC has completed a NEPA review based on NWMI's proposed application and environmental report, and made the appropriate regulatory findings. Therefore, the exemption is authorized by law.

    Will Not Endanger Life or Property or the Common Defense and Security

    Construction of the facility has not yet begun. Since the exemption request relates to the timing of when construction may begin, the proposed exemption would not: (a) Impact the probabilities of evaluated accidents; (b) affect margins of safety; (c) affect effectiveness of programs contained in licensing documents; (d) increase effluents; (e) increase occupational radiological exposures; or (f) impact operations or decommissioning activities. The proposed exemption also will not have an impact on common defense and security since the exemption only relates to the timing of construction. NWMI's construction permit does not authorize possession of any nuclear material at the RPF.

    Based on its evaluation, the NRC staff has determined that this exemption will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security.

    Otherwise in the Public Interest

    The NRC staff has determined that granting the proposed exemption would allow for efficient construction of the NWMI RPF at an earlier date. The purpose of the NWMI RPF is to produce medical isotopes and help meet the U.S. goal of establishing a domestic supply of Mo-99 as stated in the American Medical Isotopes Production Act, 42 U.S.C. 2065 et seq. Accordingly, the NRC staff has determined that granting the requested exemption is otherwise in the public interest.

    IV. Environmental Consideration

    As required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental assessment (EA) that analyzes the environmental impacts of the proposed exemption in accordance with NEPA. Based on that EA, the NRC staff has determined not to prepare an EIS for the proposed exemption, and has issued a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). The EA and FONSI were published in the Federal Register on August 29, 2018 (83 FR 44068-44070).

    V. Conclusion

    Accordingly, the NRC has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 70.17, the exemption is authorized by law, will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest. Therefore, the NRC hereby grants NWMI an exemption from the 10 CFR 70.21(f) requirement to submit a 10 CFR part 70 application, and the associated environmental report, 9 months prior to the commencement of construction, to allow NWMI to begin construction of the 10 CFR part 70 portions of the facility along with the rest of the RPF.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of November 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    LaDonna Suggs, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety, Safeguards, and Environmental Review, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24312 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of a modified system of records.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) is revising the notice for Privacy Act system-of-records OSHRC-4.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by OSHRC on or before December 13, 2018. The revised system of records will become effective on that date, without any further notice in the Federal Register, unless comments or government approval procedures necessitate otherwise.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] Include “PRIVACY ACT SYSTEM OF RECORDS” in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 606-5417.

    Mail: One Lafayette Centre, 1120 20th Street NW, Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as mailing address.

    Instructions: All submissions must include your name, return address, and email address, if applicable. Please clearly label submissions as “PRIVACY ACT SYSTEM OF RECORDS.”

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ron Bailey, Attorney-Advisor, Office of the General Counsel, via telephone at (202) 606-5410, or via email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4), requires federal agencies such as OSHRC to publish in the Federal Register notice of any new or modified system of records. As detailed below, OSHRC is revising Payroll and Related Records, OSHRC-4, to (1) eliminate the agency's regional offices in Denver, CO and Atlanta, GA as system locations; (2) account for changes in the names of the pertinent office and positions within the agency; (3) account for changes in how time and attendance records are processed (paper records are no longer maintained); (4) revise the category of records to more accurately reflect the types of information maintained; (5) revise the method by which records are retrieved (folders are organized only by name, and not social security number), stored, and safeguarded; and (6) update the reference to the applicable General Records Schedule for disposal of records. In addition, OSHRC has previously relied on blanket routine uses to describe the circumstances under which records may be disclosed. Going forward, as revised notices are published for new and modified systems of records, a full description of the routine uses—rather than a reference to blanket routine uses—will be included in each notice. This is simply a change in format that has not resulted in any substantive changes to the routine uses for this system of records.

    The notice for OSHRC-4, provided below in its entirety, is as follows.

    SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER:

    Payroll and Related Records, OSHRC-4.

    SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:

    None.

    SYSTEM LOCATION:

    (1) Paper and electronic files are maintained by the Office of the Executive Director, OSHRC, 1120 20th Street NW, Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457; (2) pursuant to an interagency agreement, payroll records are stored electronically by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Finance Center (NFC), P.O. Box 60000, New Orleans, LA 70160-0001.

    SYSTEM MANAGER(S):

    Human Resources Specialist, OSHRC, 1120 20th Street NW, Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457; (202) 606-5100.

    AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:

    5 U.S.C. 301, 5516, 5517, 5520; 26 U.S.C. 6011, 6109; 29 U.S.C. 661; 44 U.S.C. 3101.

    PURPOSE(S) OF THE SYSTEM:

    Records are used by OSHRC and NFC employees to maintain adequate payroll information for OSHRC employees and Commission members.

    CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:

    This system of records covers current and former employees of OSHRC and Commission members.

    CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:

    The records maintained in this system, and the categories of records referenced therein, are as follows. (1) direct deposit records that include the employee's name and signature, address, and telephone number; the type of depositor account selected for direct deposit, and the account and routing numbers; and a voided check; (2) tax records that include the employee's name and signature, social security number, marital status, and home address; the number of allowances for which the employee qualifies; and further information which may be required on state, county, or city withholding certificates; (3) employee retirement estimates that include the employee's name and social security number; (4) records maintained pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act that include the employee's name, signature, and job description; identity of certain family members and, if a child, date of birth; and medical information pertinent to leave requests; and (5) records necessary for payroll processing by NFC, including those pertaining to time and attendance and leave records, that may include some or all of the information specified above, as well as additional information concerning deductions, salary and benefits.

    RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

    Information in this system either comes from the individual to whom it applies or is derived from information compiled by OSHRC employees performing administrative duties.

    ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

    In addition to disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b), all or a portion of the records or information contained in this system of records may be disclosed as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) under the circumstances or for the purposes described below, to the extent such disclosures are compatible with the purposes for which the information was collected:

    (1) To the Department of Justice (DOJ), or to a court or adjudicative body before which OSHRC is authorized to appear, when any of the following entities or individuals—(a) OSHRC, or any of its components; (b) any employee of OSHRC in his or her official capacity; (c) any employee of OSHRC in his or her individual capacity where DOJ (or OSHRC where it is authorized to do so) has agreed to represent the employee; or (d) the United States, where OSHRC determines that litigation is likely to affect OSHRC or any of its components—is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and OSHRC determines that the use of such records by DOJ, or by a court or other tribunal, or another party before such tribunal, is relevant and necessary to the litigation.

    (2) To an appropriate agency, whether federal, state, local, or foreign, charged with investigating or prosecuting a violation or enforcing or implementing a law, rule, regulation, or order, when a record, either on its face or in conjunction with other information, indicates a violation or potential violation of law, which includes civil, criminal or regulatory violations, and such disclosure is proper and consistent with the official duties of the person making the disclosure.

    (3) To a federal, state, or local agency maintaining civil, criminal or other relevant enforcement information, such as current licenses, if necessary to obtain information relevant to an OSHRC decision concerning the hiring, appointment, or retention of an employee; the issuance, renewal, suspension, or revocation of a security clearance; the execution of a security or suitability investigation; the letting of a contract; or the issuance of a license, grant or other benefit.

    (4) To a federal, state, or local agency, in response to that agency's request for a record, and only to the extent that the information is relevant and necessary to the requesting agency's decision in the matter, if the record is sought in connection with the hiring, appointment, or retention of an employee; the issuance, renewal, suspension, or revocation of a security clearance; the execution of a security or suitability investigation; the letting of a contract; or the issuance of a license, grant or other benefit by the requesting agency.

    (5) To an authorized appeal grievance examiner, formal complaints manager, equal employment opportunity investigator, arbitrator, or other duly authorized official engaged in investigation or settlement of a grievance, complaint, or appeal filed by an employee, only to the extent that the information is relevant and necessary to the case or matter.

    (6) To OPM in accordance with the agency's responsibilities for evaluation and oversight of federal personnel management.

    (7) To officers and employees of a federal agency for the purpose of conducting an audit, but only to the extent that the record is relevant and necessary to this purpose.

    (8) To OMB in connection with the review of private relief legislation at any stage of the legislative coordination and clearance process, as set forth in Circular No. A-19.

    (9) To a Member of Congress or to a person on his or her staff acting on the Member's behalf when a written request is made on behalf and at the behest of the individual who is the subject of the record.

    (10) To the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records management inspections and such other purposes conducted under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.

    (11) To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when: (a) OSHRC suspects or has confirmed that there has been a breach of the system of records; (b) OSHRC has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed breach there is a risk of harm to individuals, OSHRC, the Federal Government, or national security; and (c) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with OSHRC's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed breach or to prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    (12) To NARA, Office of Government Information Services (OGIS), to the extent necessary to fulfill its responsibilities in 5 U.S.C. 552(h), to review administrative agency policies, procedures and compliance with FOIA, and to facilitate OGIS' offering of mediation services to resolve disputes between persons making FOIA requests and administrative agencies.

    (13) To another federal agency or federal entity, when OSHRC determines that information from this system of records is reasonably necessary to assist the recipient agency or entity in (a) responding to a suspected or confirmed breach or (b) preventing, minimizing, or remedying the risk of harm to individuals, the recipient agency or entity (including its information systems, programs, and operations), the Federal Government, or national security, resulting from a suspected or confirmed breach.

    (14) To the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for investigation, and to private attorneys, pursuant to a power of attorney.

    (15) To the IRS, a copy of an employee's Department of the Treasury Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement.

    (16) To state, city, or other local jurisdictions which are authorized to tax the employee's compensation, a copy of an employee's Form W-2. The record will be provided in accordance with a withholding agreement between the state, city, or other local jurisdiction and the Department of the Treasury pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5516, 5517, and 5520, or in response to a written request from an appropriate official of the taxing jurisdiction. The request must include a copy of the applicable statute or ordinance authorizing the taxation of compensation and should indicate whether the authority of the jurisdiction to tax the employee is based on place of residence, place of employment, or both.

    (17) To a city, copies of executed city tax withholding certifications, pursuant to a withholding agreement between the city and the Department of the Treasury (5 U.S.C. 5520), and in response to written requests from an appropriate city official to OSHRC's Office of the Executive Director.

    (18) To NFC to effect issuance of paychecks via electronic fund transfers (EFT) to employees, and distribution of allotments and deductions to financial and other institutions, and for other authorized purposes.

    (19) To the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board to update Section 401K type records and benefits; to the Social Security Administration to establish social security records and benefits; to the Department of Labor, Office of Worker's Compensation to process compensation claims; to the Department of Defense to adjust military retirement; to health insurance carriers to process insurance claims; and to the Department of Veterans Affairs for the purpose of evaluating veteran's benefits to which the individual may be entitled.

    (20) To other federal agencies to effect salary or administrative offsets, or for other purposes connected with the collection of debts owed to the United States, pursuant to sections 5 and 10 of the Debt Collection Act of 1982, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996.

    (21) To other federal, state, local or foreign agencies conducting computer matching programs to help eliminate fraud and abuse and to detect unauthorized overpayments made to individuals. When disclosures are made as part of computer matching programs, OSHRC will comply with the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, and the Computer Matching and Privacy Protections Amendments of 1990.

    (22) To the Office of Child Support Enforcement, Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services, the names, social security numbers, home addresses, dates of birth, dates of hire, quarterly earnings, employer identifying information, and state of hire of employees for the purpose of locating individuals to establish paternity, identifying sources of income, and for other child support enforcement actions as required by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, 42 U.S.C. 653(n).

    (23) To “consumer reporting agencies” as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a(f)) or the Federal Claims Collection Act of 1966 (31 U.S.C. 3701(a)(3)) in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(f).

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORAGE OF RECORDS:

    Records are stored on paper in file cabinets at OSHRC's National Office in Washington, DC, and electronically on an access-restricted shared OSHRC drive. Records are also stored electronically on the NFC's personnel/payroll system.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETRIEVAL OF RECORDS:

    Records are retrieved manually and electronically by name.

    POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETENTION AND DISPOSAL OF RECORDS:

    Records are retained and disposed of in accordance with NARA's General Records Schedule 2.4.

    ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL, AND PHYSICAL SAFEGUARDS:

    Paper records are maintained in locked file cabinets, and access is limited to personnel who require access to perform their official functions. Access to electronic records maintained on an OSHRC shared drive is restricted to personnel who require access to perform their official functions.

    OSHRC records electronically transmitted to its contractor, NFC, are stored on servers in a secured federal complex with access codes, security codes, and/or security guards. Access to networks and data requires a valid username and password and is further restricted to personnel who have the need to know the information for the performance of their official duties.

    RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:

    Individuals who wish to gain access to their records should notify: Privacy Officer, OSHRC, 1120 20th Street NW, Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457. For an explanation on how such requests should be drafted, refer to 29 CFR 2400.6 (procedures for requesting records).

    CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:

    Individuals who wish to contest their records should notify: Privacy Officer, OSHRC, 1120 20th Street NW, Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457. For an explanation on the specific procedures for contesting the contents of a record, refer to 29 CFR 2400.8 (Procedures for requesting amendment), and 29 CFR 2400.9 (Procedures for appealing).

    NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:

    Individuals interested in inquiring about their records should notify: Privacy Officer, OSHRC, 1120 20th Street NW, Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457. For an explanation on how such requests should be drafted, refer to 29 CFR 2400.5 (notification), and 29 CFR 2400.6 (procedures for requesting records).

    EXEMPTIONS PROMULGATED FOR THE SYSTEM:

    None.

    HISTORY:

    April 14, 2006, 71 FR 19556; August 4, 2008, 73 FR 45256; October 5, 2015, 80 FR 60182; and September 28, 2017, 82 FR 45324.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. Nadine N. Mancini, General Counsel, Senior Agency Official for Privacy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24690 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7600-01-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Temporary Emergency Committee of the Board of Governors; Sunshine Act Meeting FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

    83 FR 55761.

    PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:

    Tuesday, November 13, 2018, at 10:30 a.m.; and Wednesday, November 14, 2018, at 8:30 a.m.

    PLACE:

    Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, in the Benjamin Franklin Room.

    STATUS:

    Tuesday, November 13, 2018, at 10:30 a.m.; Wednesday, November 14, 2018, at 8:30 a.m.—Open.

    CHANGES IN THE MEETING:

    Two agenda items combined and additional information added related to public comment period.

    REVISED MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Tuesday, November 13, 2018, at 10:30 a.m. (Closed)

    1. Strategic Issues.

    2. Financial Matters.

    3. Compensation and Personnel Matters.

    4. Executive Session—Discussion of prior agenda items and Board governance.

    Wednesday, November 14, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. (Open)

    1. Remarks of the Chairman of the Temporary Emergency Committee of the Board.

    2. Remarks of the Postmaster General and CEO.

    3. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meetings.

    4. Committee Reports.

    5. FY2018 10K and Financial Statements and Approval of Annual Report and Comprehensive Statement.

    6. FY2019 IFP and Financing Resolution.

    7. FY2020 Appropriations Request.

    8. Quarterly Service Performance Report.

    9. Approval of Annual Report and Comprehensive Statement.

    10. Draft Agenda for February meetings.

    A public comment period will begin immediately following the adjournment of the open session on November 14, 2018. During the public comment period, which shall not exceed 30 minutes, members of the public may comment on any item or subject listed on the agenda for the open session above. Registration of speakers at the public comment period is required. No more than three minutes shall be allotted to each speaker. The time allotted to each speaker will be determined after registration closes. Participation in the public comment period is governed by 39 CFR 232.1(n).

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Acting Secretary of the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20260-1000. Telephone: (202) 268-4800.

    Michael J. Elston, Acting Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24835 Filed 11-8-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    PRESIDIO TRUST Notice of Receipt of and Availability for Public Comment on an Application for Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Site; The Presidio of San Francisco, California AGENCY:

    The Presidio Trust.

    ACTION:

    Public notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the Presidio Trust's receipt of and availability for public comment on an application from GTE Mobilnet of California d/b/a Verizon Wireless for installation of a wireless telecommunications facilities site (“Project”) in The Presidio of San Francisco. The proposed location of the Project is in the vicinity of 386 Moraga Avenue.

    The Project involves (i) installing a new 70-foot monopole to accommodate nine panel antenna panels, and (ii) placing the associated radio equipment on a concrete pad within a 20-foot by 20-foot fenced area. Power and telecommunications service will be brought to the site by underground trench.

    Comments: Comments on the proposed project must be sent to Steve Carp, Presidio Trust, 103 Montgomery Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129-0052, and be received by December 11, 2018. A copy of Verizon's application is available upon request to the Presidio Trust.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Carp, 103 Montgomery Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129-0052. Email: [email protected]. Telephone: 415.561.5300.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. Steve Carp, Legal Analyst.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24698 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-4R-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84544; File No. SR-NYSE-2018-51] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Section 303A.00 of the Manual To Change the Threshold for Qualifying as a Smaller Reporting Company To Qualify for Certain Exemptions From the Compensation Committee Requirements November 6, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on October 26, 2018, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 303A.00 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual (the “Manual”) to change the threshold for listed companies to benefit from the exemptions from the NYSE 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 www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    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.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The SEC recently adopted 4 amendments to the definition of “smaller reporting company” set forth in Item 10(f)(1) of Regulation S-K,5 Rule 12b-2 under the Act 6 and Rule 405 under the Securities Act of 1933.7 The amendments raise the smaller reporting company cap from less than $75 million in public float to less than $250 million and also include as smaller reporting companies issuers with less than $100 million in annual revenues if they also have either no public float or a public float that is less than $700 million. The amendments became effective on September 10, 2018. The Exchange estimates that a consequence of the SEC rule changes is that a significantly larger number of its listed companies will qualify for smaller reporting company status than was previously the case.

    4 Release Nos. 33-10513 and 34-83550 (June 28, 2018); 83 FR 31992 (July 10. 2018).

    5 17 CFR 229.10(F)(1).

    6 17 CFR 240.12b-2.

    7 17 CFR 230.405.

    Smaller reporting companies are entitled to avail themselves of certain exemptions from the NYSE's compensation committee requirements.8 Section 303A.00 includes a provision describing the period within which a company must comply with all applicable compensation committee requirements after it ceases to be a smaller reporting company.9 This provision currently states explicitly that a smaller reporting company must have less than $75 million in public float. In light of the recent changes to the SEC's rules with respect to smaller reporting companies, the Exchange proposes to delete this reference to the $75 million public float cap and revise the provision to state simply that a smaller reporting company that fails to meet the requirements for smaller reporting company status as of the last business day of its second fiscal quarter will cease to be a smaller reporting company as of the beginning of the following fiscal year. The effect of this amendment will be to change the threshold for listed companies to be eligible to benefit from the exemptions from the NYSE 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.

    8 Specifically, listed companies that satisfy the definition of smaller reporting company are not required to comply with (i) the enhanced requirements with respect to the independence of compensation committee members set forth in Section 303A.02(a)(ii) and the second paragraph of the Commentary to Section 303A.02(a) of the Manual; or (ii) the requirements set forth under Section 303A.05(c)(iv) of the Manual with respect to the analysis of the independence of any compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser to the compensation committee. Listed smaller reporting companies must comply with all other applicable Exchange corporate governance requirements, including all other applicable compensation committee requirements.

    9 Under the SEC rules set forth above with respect to smaller reporting companies, a company tests its status as a smaller reporting company on an annual basis at the end of its most recently completed second fiscal quarter (the “Smaller Reporting Company Determination Date”). A smaller reporting company ceases to be a smaller reporting company as of the beginning of the fiscal year following the Smaller Reporting Company Determination Date. The compensation committee of a company that has ceased to be a smaller reporting company as of its Smaller Reporting Company Determination Date [sic] must comply with Section 303A.05(c)(iv) as of six months from the date it ceases to be a smaller reporting company and must have: One member of its compensation committee that meets the independence standard of Section 303A.02(a)(ii) and the second paragraph of the commentary to Section 303A.02(a) 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.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,10 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 11 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. As noted above, the effect of the proposed rule change is to change the threshold for listed companies to benefit from the exemptions from the NYSE 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. 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 12 and the Exchange believes that its own proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act for the same reasons.

    10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    12See footnote 4, supra.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    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 rule change 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 NYSE 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.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.14 Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    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) 15 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    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:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2018-51 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2018-51. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-NYSE-2018-51, and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.16

    16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24637 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84542; File No. SR-Phlx-2018-67] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to New Derivative Securities Products November 6, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 24, 2018, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Phlx Rule 803 related to derivative securities traded under unlisted trading privileges (“UTP”) to remove the requirement in Rule 803(o)(3) for the Exchange to file with the Commission a Form 19b-4(e) for each “new derivative securities product” as defined in Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act 3 (“Derivative Security”) traded under UTP and renumber the remaining provisions of Rule 803(o) to maintain an organized rule structure. The Exchange has designated this rule change as “non-controversial” under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 4 and provided the Commission with the notice required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.5

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e)

    4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    5 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Rule 803 related to derivative securities traded under UTP by removing the requirement in Rule 803(o)(3) for the Exchange to file with the Commission a Form 19b-4(e) for each Derivative Security, and renumbering the remaining rules of Rule 803(o) to maintain an organized rule structure, as described below.

    Rule 803(o)(3) sets forth the requirement for Phlx to file with the Commission a Form 19b-4(e) with respect to each Derivative Security that is traded under UTP. However, Phlx believes that it should not be necessary to file a Form 19b-4(e) with the Commission if it begins trading a Derivative Security on a UTP basis, because Rule 19b- 4(e)(1) under the Act refers to the “listing and trading” of a “new derivative securities product.”

    The Exchange believes that the requirements of that rule refers [sic] to when an exchange lists and trades a Derivative Security, and not when an exchange seeks only to trade such product on a UTP basis pursuant to Rule 12f-2 under the Act.6 Therefore, Phlx proposes to delete the requirement in current Rule 803(o)(3) for Phlx to file a Form 19b-4(e) with the Commission with respect to each Derivative Security it begins trading on a UTP basis. In addition, as a result of the deletion of current Rule 803(a)(1) Phlx proposes to renumber current Rule 803(o)(4), as Rule 803(o)(3).

    6 17 CFR 240.12f-2.

    2. Statutory Basis

    Phlx believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6(b) 7 of the Act in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 8 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Specifically, eliminating the requirement to file a Form 19b-4(e) for each Derivative Security the Exchange begins trading on a UTP basis removes an unnecessary regulatory requirement thereby providing for a more efficient process for adding Derivative Securities to trading on the Exchange on a UTP basis.

    7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    In addition, the Exchange notes that a substantially identical proposed rule change by NYSE National, Inc. (“NYSE National”) was recently approved by the Commission.9 In particular, the Commission noted in the approval order that it “believes that the filing of a Form 19b-4(e) is not required when an Exchange is trading a new derivative securities product on a UTP basis only” 10 and also found that the NYSE National's proposed rule change is “consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.” 11

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83289 (May 17, 2018), 83 FR 23968 (May 23, 2018) (Order Approving File No. SR-NYSENAT-2018-02).

    10See supra note 9 at page 23975 at footnote 149.

    11See supra note 9 at page 23975-6.

    With respect to the renumbering of current Rule 803(o)(4) as Rule 803(o)(3), the Exchange believes that this change is consistent with the Act because they [sic] will allow the Exchange to maintain a clear and organized rule structure, thus preventing investor confusion.

    For these reasons, Phlx believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Phlx does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, removing the requirement to file a Form 19b-4(e) will serve to enhance competition by providing for the efficient addition of Derivative Securities for trading under UTP on Phlx. To the extent that a competitor marketplace believes that the proposed rule change places it at a competitive disadvantage, it may file with the Commission a proposed rule change to adopt the same or similar rule.

    In addition, the proposal to renumber the current Rules [sic] 803(o)(4) as Rule 803(o)(3) does not impact competition in any respect since it merely maintains a clear and organized rule structure.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; or (iii) become operative prior to 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 12 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.13

    12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    13 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. Waiving the 30-day delay would permit the Exchange to more efficiently add Derivative Securities to the Exchange under UTP without the unnecessary requirement to file a 19b-4(e) with the Commission. The Commission also notes that because Phlx is adopting a rule that is substantially identical to a similar NYSE National rule, the proposed change does not present any new or novel issues. Thus, the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest and hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.14

    14 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    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:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2018-67 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2018-67. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-Phlx-2018-67 and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.15

    15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24636 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84545; File No. SR-Phlx-2018-68] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Rule 3400 Series November 6, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 25, 2018, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Rule 3400 Series concerning the Order Audit Trail System to make conforming and technical changes.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange is proposing to amend the Rule 3400 Series concerning the Order Audit Trail System to: (1) Renumber the Rule 3400 Series to conform it to the numbering convention used by the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) and FINRA; (2) amend Rule 7410A to expand two existing exemptions and to make technical changes to text under the rule; (3) incorporate by reference FINRA Rules 7430, 7440 and 7450 in Rules 7430A, 7440A and 7450A, respectively, and make conforming changes thereto; and (4) delete Rule 3407.3

    3 The Exchange is filing a request for an exemption under Section 36 of the Act from the rule filing requirements of Section 19(b) of the Act for certain rules included in this proposal, and will implement the changes proposed herein upon approval of the exemption request.

    The Exchange's Rule 3400 Series imposes an obligation on Exchange members to record in electronic form and report to FINRA on a daily basis certain information with respect to orders originated, received, transmitted, modified, canceled, or executed by members in Nasdaq- and Exchange-listed stocks. FINRA's Order Audit Trail System (“OATS”) captures this order information and integrates it with quote and transaction information to create a time-sequenced record of orders, quotes, and transactions. This information is used by FINRA staff to conduct surveillance and investigations of members for potential violation of Exchange rules and federal securities laws.

    The Exchange adopted the Rule 3400 Series to copy Nasdaq and FINRA OATS rules, where appropriate. As a general principle, the Exchange endeavors to keep its rules that are corresponding to FINRA rules as closely worded and structured as possible to the FINRA rules on which they are based, including FINRA's OATS rules under the FINRA Rule 7000 Series. In certain instances, the Exchange has not copied a FINRA OATS rule because it is not relevant. For example, the Exchange has not copied FINRA Rule 7410(o)(2), which concerns an exception to the definition of a Reporting Member relating to members operating on equities floors, because the Exchange does not operate an equities floor. Generally, the Exchange also seeks to keep the Rule 3400 Series consistent with Nasdaq's Rule 7400A Series, the substance of which is identical to the related rules of the Exchange. The proposed changes will harmonize Exchange rules with analogous Nasdaq and FINRA rules, which have changed since the Exchange first adopted its rules.

    First Change

    The Exchange is proposing to renumber the Rule 3400 Series to a new Rule 7000A Series, which is identical to how Nasdaq presents its OATS rules. The Exchange does not currently have a Rule 7000A Series and the Exchange is proposing to follow the numbering convention used by FINRA and NASDAQ. As part of this change, the Exchange is also updating cross references in the Rule 7000A Series.

    Second Change

    The Exchange is amending renumbered Rule 7410A to make several changes to conform it to the rules of Nasdaq. The Exchange is proposing to add new text noting that the terms under the rule have the same meaning as those defined in the Exchange's By-Laws and rules, unless otherwise noted, which is identical to Nasdaq's Rule 7410A(a). The Exchange is also amending Rule 7410A to make technical changes that harmonize the definitions of “Index Arbitrage Trade,” “Program Trade,” and “Proprietary Trading Firm” with the definitions of those terms in the Nasdaq rules.4

    4 The Exchange is not adopting the definition of “NMS Stock” found under Nasdaq Rule 7410A(j). The term is not used in the Exchange's OATS rules. In addition, the term is not used in the Nasdaq OATS rules. The term is used in FINRA Rule 7410(k) defining “Order Audit Trail System, whereas the Exchange and Nasdaq instead reference Exchange and Nasdaq listed securities under Exchange renumbered Rule 7410A(k) and Nasdaq listed securities under Nasdaq Rule 7410A(l).

    The Exchange is also proposing to adopt the same limited exemption from OATS order data recordation requirements for Exchange members that are registered market makers in standardized options on any market. Renumbered Rule 7410A(j) defines the term “Order” as any oral, written, or electronic instruction to effect a transaction in an equity security listed on the Exchange or Nasdaq that is received by a member from another person for handling or execution, or that is originated by a department of a member for execution by the same or another member, other than any such instruction to effect a proprietary transaction originated by a trading desk in the ordinary course of a member's market making activities in an Exchange-listed equity security. The Exchange is proposing to adopt the limited exemption currently available under Nasdaq's analogous definition of “Order,” 5 which excludes from the definition a bona fide hedge transaction involving a Nasdaq-listed equity security originated by a trading desk in the ordinary course of the member's options market making activities.6 As noted by Nasdaq in adopting the exemption, OATS was designed to provide an accurate, time-sequenced record of orders and transactions, beginning with the receipt of an equity order at the first point of contact between the broker-dealer and the customer or counterparty and further documenting the life of the equity order through the process of execution.7 The proposed rule change does not impact the customer protection orientation of OATS since, by definition, bona fide hedging transactions in equity securities that are undertaken by options market makers do not involve customer orders in those equity securities. Rather, bona fide hedging transactions in equity securities are undertaken by an options market maker to hedge against the firm risk that it creates through its conduct as a registered options market maker. Accordingly, bona fide hedge transactions do not implicate customer protection issues, and requiring reporting of such transactions would not provide a regulatory benefit. It is also very expensive for firms that are not currently FINRA members or that do not currently trade Exchange or Nasdaq equities to develop and maintain the compliance systems and compliance staff required to continuously monitor the daily transmission of OATS data. For these reasons, the Exchange is proposing to adopt such an exemption, available to its options market makers.

    5See Nasdaq Rule 7410A(k).

    6 The Exchange notes that Nasdaq capitalizes the term “Bona Fide Hedge Transaction” in Nasdaq Rule 7410A(k), although the term is not defined in Nasdaq's rules. The Exchange believes that capitalizing the term was an error and is therefore not capitalizing the term in Rule 7410A(j).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59369 (February 6, 2009), 74 FR 7278 (February 13, 2009) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-097).

    The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 7410A(n)(1) to harmonize the rule with FINRA Rule 7410(o)(1)(A) and Nasdaq Rule 7410A(o)(1)(A). Rule 7410A(n) provides the definition of “Reporting Member Organization,” which means a member organization that receives or originates an order and has an obligation to record and report information under renumbered Rules 7440A and 7450A. The Rule also provides an exception to the general definition if the member organization meets four conditions. The first condition in subparagraph (n)(1), which is the only condition at issue in this proposal, is that currently the member organization engages in a non-discretionary order routing process, pursuant to which it immediately routes, by electronic or other means, all of its orders to a single receiving Reporting Member Organization. On May 12, 2014, FINRA amended FINRA Rule 7410(o)(1)(A) to allow a member to satisfy this condition by permitting a member to alternatively route its orders to two receiving Reporting Members, if two related requirements were met.8 First, the orders must be routed by the member to each receiving Reporting Member on a pre-determined schedule approved by FINRA. Second, the orders must be routed by the member to two receiving Reporting Members pursuant to the schedule for a time period not to exceed one year. FINRA noted in adopting the change that the rule was intended to accommodate introducing firms that transition to a different clearing firm over time and, during the transition, route their orders two different clearing firms, both of which report the introducing firm's information to OATS during the transition time. Nasdaq recently amended its rule to incorporate this change.9 The Exchange believes that this additional limited exception is appropriate for its member organizations, which likewise may encounter a transition to a clearing firm whereby they would no longer be eligible for the exception to the definition of Reporting Member Organization. Accordingly, the Exchange is proposing to adopt the FINRA rule text under renumbered Rule 7410A(n)(1)(B).

    8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72191 (May 20, 2014), 79 FR 30219 (May 27, 2014) (SR-FINRA-2014-024).

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83115 (April 26, 2018), 83 FR 19384 (May 2, 2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2018-030).

    Third Change

    The Exchange is proposing to incorporate by reference FINRA Rules 7430, 7440 and 7450 in Rules 7430A, 7440A and 7450A, respectively, and make conforming changes thereto.10 Current Rule 3403 concerns synchronization of Member Organization business clocks and is substantially identical to FINRA Rule 4590(a). Nasdaq Rule 7430A requires Nasdaq members to comply with FINRA Rule 4590 as if such rule were part of Nasdaq's rules and provides that references to “the FINRA By-Laws or other FINRA rules” shall be construed as references to “the Nasdaq Rules,” for purposes of Nasdaq Rule 7430A. The Exchange is proposing to conform its rule text to that of Nasdaq.11

    10 The Exchange is proposing to add text to Rules 7440A and 7450A, which notes that Exchange and FINRA are parties to the FINRA Regulatory Contract pursuant to which FINRA has agreed to perform certain functions on behalf of the Exchange, and also notes that members are complying with Rules 7440A and 7450A by complying with FINRA Rules 7440 and 7450, respectively. Nasdaq places the same text under Nasdaq Rules 7440A(a) and 7450A(a), respectively.

    11 The Exchange is not including text from Nasdaq Rule 7440A(a) and 7450A(a), which notes that members are complying with these rules by complying with the related FINRA rules, in Rules 7440A(a) and 7450A(a). The Exchange believes these sentences are duplicative of the first sentence of Rules 7440A(a) and 7450A(a).

    With respect to Rule 7440A, the Exchange is proposing to copy Nasdaq Rule 7440A and incorporate by reference FINRA Rule 7440. Current Rule 3404 is meant to copy FINRA Rule 7440; however, FINRA amended FINRA Rule 7440 subsequent to the Exchange adopting Rule 3404 and the Exchange did not update its rule to reflect these changes. Specifically, FINRA amended Rules 7440(a)(2),12 (a)(4),13 (b)(9),14 (b)(19),15 (b)(21),16 (c)(1)(H),17 (c)(2)(A)(viii) and

    12See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71623 (February 27, 2014), 79 FR 12558 (March 5, 2014) (SR-FINRA-2013-050).

    13See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63784 (January 27, 2011), 76 FR 5850 (February 2, 2011) (SR-FINRA-2010-052).

    14See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63032 (October 4, 2010), 75 FR 62439 (October 8, 2010) (SR-FINRA-2010-043).

    15See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77523 (April 5, 2016), 81 FR 21427 (April 11, 2016) (SR-FINRA-2016-006).

    16See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77164 (February 17, 2016), 81 FR 9043 (February 23, 2016) (SR-FINRA-2015-048).

    17See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66021 (December 21, 2011), 76 FR 81551 (December 28, 2011) (SR-FINRA-2011-063).

    (ix),18 (c)(3)(A)(ix) and (x),19 (c)(4)(A)(x) and (xi),20 (c)(5)(A)(x) and (xi),21 (c)(6)(k) and (l),22 and (d)(4).23 The Exchange believes that these changes are appropriate for the reasons described by FINRA when it adopted the changes, and because adopting these changes will harmonize the Exchange's rules with those of Nasdaq and FINRA. Last and consistent with Nasdaq Rule 7440A(b), the Exchange is proposing to add new Rule 7440A(c), which provides that references to certain FINRA Rules are to be construed as references to certain Rules of the Exchange. Specifically, Rule 7440A(c)(1) provides that references to Rules FINRA Rules 7420 through 7460 shall be construed as references to Rules 7420A through 7460A.24 Rule 7440A(c)(2) provides that references to FINRA Rules 5320, 7440, and 7450 shall be construed as references to Rules 765, 7440A, and 7450A, respectively.

    18See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63032 (October 4, 2010), 75 FR 62439 (October 8, 2010) (SR-FINRA-2010-043).

    19Id.

    20Id.

    21Id.

    22Id.

    23See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77164 (February 17, 2016), 81 FR 9043 (February 23, 2016) (SR-FINRA-2015-048).

    24 The Exchange notes that Nasdaq Rules 7440A(b)(1) and (2) do not state that certain rules referenced under Nasdaq Rule 7440A are FINRA rules. The Exchange is making it clear under Rules 7440A(c)(1) and (2) that the rules referenced under Rule 7440A are FINRA rules.

    Current Rule 3405 concerns order data transmission requirements and is meant to copy FINRA Rule 7450. Unlike Nasdaq, which incorporated by reference FINRA Rule 7450 into Nasdaq Rule 7450A, the Exchange instead adopted actual rule text that copied the requirements of FINRA Rule 7450 under Rule 3405. The Exchange is proposing to adopt the approach followed by Nasdaq by incorporating by reference the FINRA rule. Specifically, the Exchange is incorporating by reference FINRA Rule 7450 into Rule 7450A, amending existing paragraphs (a)-(d) to conform them to Nasdaq's Rule 7450A(a)-(d), and deleting paragraphs (e) and (f), which are no longer needed since the Exchange is incorporating by reference FINRA Rule 7450. The Exchange notes that FINRA amended FINRA Rule 7450 subsequent to the Exchange adopting Rule 3405; however, the Exchange did not update its rule to reflect these changes. Specifically, FINRA amended Rule 7450(b),25 which concerns the method and timing of transmitting data and which is covered under Rule 3405(e). The changes made by FINRA provided greater specificity to the timing of certain reports required by the rule. The Exchange believes that the changes to FINRA Rule 7450(b) are appropriate for the reasons described by FINRA when it adopted the changes, and because adopting these changes will harmonize the Exchange's rules with those of Nasdaq and FINRA. Last, the Exchange notes that renumbered Rule 7450A(b) requires both Proprietary Trading Firms as well as their associated persons to comply with FINRA Rule 7450 in limited circumstances, whereas Nasdaq's Rule 7450A only requires compliance by Proprietary Trading Firms. The Exchange believes that this is an omission in the Nasdaq rule and is accordingly not adjusting the Exchange rule.

    25See note 16, supra.

    Fourth Change

    The Exchange is proposing to delete current Rule 3407, which will be renumbered Rule 7470A and held in reserve. Current Rule 3407 provided an exemption from the order recording and data transmission requirements of current Rules 3404 and 3405, which are OATS rules applicable to manual orders. To qualify for the exemption, a member must have met the following criteria: (1) The member and current control affiliates and associated persons of the member have not been subject within the last five years to any final disciplinary action, and within the last ten years to any disciplinary action involving fraud; (2) the member has annual revenues of less than $2 million; (3) the member does not conduct any market making activities in equity securities listed on the Exchange; (4) the member does not execute principal transactions with its customers (with a limited exception for principal transactions executed pursuant to error corrections); and (5) the member does not conduct clearing or carrying activities for other firms. The exemption was limited to a maximum time of two years although a member was able to request an additional exemption prior to the expiration of a grant of existing exemptive relief. The exemptive authority provided by the rule permitted the Exchange to grant relief to members that meet certain criteria in situations where, for example, the reporting of order information would be unduly burdensome for the member or where temporary relief from the OATS Rules, in the form of additional time to achieve compliance, would permit the members to avoid unnecessary expense or hardship. The exemption has not been requested by any Exchange member to date and the Exchange does not believe that Exchange members are likely to need the exemption, since the vast majority of such members to which the rule applies are electronic proprietary trading firms that would not qualify for the exemption. Moreover, Nasdaq does not have an analogous rule, having eliminated similar text recently for the same reasons.26 Thus, the Exchange is proposing to eliminate the rule text under Rule 3407 from its rule book, renumber the rule to Rule 7470A, and hold the rule in reserve.

    26Id.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,27 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,28 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest, by harmonizing the Exchange's OATS rules with those of FINRA, on which they are based, and with those of Nasdaq, which they should largely match. Consequently, the proposed change will conform Exchange Rules to changes made to corresponding FINRA and Nasdaq rules, thus promoting consistent regulatory standards with respect to rules that FINRA enforces pursuant to its Regulatory Services Agreements with the Exchange and Nasdaq. With respect to the proposed amendment to Rule 7410A(n)(1), the exemption will provide Exchange members with the same flexibility to transition to a new clearing firm that both Nasdaq and FINRA members currently enjoy. The rule is intended to accommodate introducing firms that transition to a different clearing firm over time and, during the transition, route their orders to two different clearing firms, both of which report the introducing firm's information to OATS during the transition time. Adopting the new and amended rule text under Rule 7410A will also align the Exchange rulebook with Nasdaq's and FINRA's, thereby reducing complexity from FINRA's work under a regulatory services agreement with the Exchange.

    27 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    28 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that adopting the new limited exception to the definition of “Order” is consistent with the Act because it provides a very narrow exemption from reporting transactions that are done to manage risk and facilitate options market making. Bona fide hedging transactions in equity securities that are undertaken by options market makers do not involve customer orders in those equity securities and thus do not implicate customer protection issues. Moreover, information regarding bona fide hedging transactions retained by a registered Phlx Options Market market maker is otherwise available to FINRA and Phlx Regulation through the Exchange's electronic delivery systems, upon request. This information includes trade reporting data, including order time and sales data captured by the Exchange system.

    With respect to the proposed technical corrections to the rules, the Exchange believes that these changes are consistent with the Act because they will prevent investor confusion that may be caused by including in the Rules incorrect rule citations, defunct rule text and expired exemptions

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change aligns the Exchange's rules with those of Nasdaq and FINRA, which will assist FINRA in its oversight work done pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. The proposed changes also provide uniform standards with which market participants must comply. Consequently, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes implicate competition at all.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 29 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.30

    29 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    30 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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 to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    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:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-Phlx-2018-68 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2018-68. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-Phlx-2018-68, and should be submitted on or before December 4, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.31

    31 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24638 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Investment Company Act Release No. 33289; File No. 812-14855] Stellus Capital Investment Corporation, et al. November 6, 2018. AGENCY:

    Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Notice of application for an order (“Order”) under sections 17(d) and 57(i) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions otherwise prohibited by sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act.

    SUMMARY OF APPLICATION:

    Applicants request an order to permit certain business development companies and certain closed-end management investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each other and with affiliated investment funds and accounts. The Order would supersede the prior order.1

    1 Stellus Capital Investment Corporation, et al., Investment Company Act Rel. Nos. 30739 (Sep. 30, 2013) (notice) and 30754 (Oct. 23, 2013) (order).

    APPLICANTS:

    Stellus Capital Investment Corporation (the “Company”); Stellus Credit Master Fund I, LLC, Stellus Credit VCOC Fund I, LLC, Stellus Credit Master Fund II, LLC, and Stellus Credit VCOC Fund II, LLC (collectively, “Existing Affiliated Funds”); Stellus Capital SBIC LP, Stellus Capital SBIC GP, LLC, SCIC-Consolidated Blocker, Inc., SCIC-CC Blocker 1, Inc., SCIC-ERC Blocker 1, Inc., SCIC-SKP Blocker 1, Inc., SCIC-APE Blocker 1, Inc., SCIC-HUF Blocker 1, Inc., and SCIC- Hollander Blocker 1, Inc. (collectively, “Existing Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries”); and Stellus Capital Management, LLC (“SCM” and collectively with the Company, the Existing Affiliated Funds and the Existing Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries, the “Applicants”).

    FILING DATES:

    The application was filed on December 19, 2017 and amended on September 17, 2018.

    HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING:

    An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on December 3, 2018, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

    ADDRESSES:

    Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F St. NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: 4400 Post Oak Parkway, Suite 2200, Houston, TX 77027.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara T. Heussler, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-6990, or Andrea Ottomanelli Magovern, Branch Chief, at (202) 551-6821 (Chief Counsel's Office, Division of Investment Management).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

    Introduction

    1. The Applicants request an Order of the Commission under sections 17(d) and 57(i) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act to permit, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the application (the “Conditions”), a Regulated Fund 2 and one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one or more Affiliated Funds 3 to enter into Co-Investment Transactions with each other. “Co-Investment Transaction” means any transaction in which one or more Regulated Funds (or its Wholly-Owned Investment Sub, defined below) participated together with one or more Affiliated Funds and/or one or more other Regulated Funds in reliance on the Order. “Potential Co-Investment Transaction” means any investment opportunity in which a Regulated Fund (or its Wholly-Owned Investment Sub) could not participate together with one or more Affiliated Funds and/or one or more other Regulated Funds without obtaining and relying on the Order.4

    2 “Regulated Fund” means the Company and any Future Regulated Fund. “Future Regulated Fund” means a closed-end management investment company (a) that is registered under the Act or has elected to be regulated as a business development company (“BDC”) and (b) whose investment adviser is an Adviser. “Adviser” means SCM together with any future investment adviser that (i) controls, is controlled by or is under common control with SCM, (ii) is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”), and (iii) is not a Regulated Fund or a subsidiary of a Regulated Fund.

    3 “Affiliated Fund” means any Existing Affiliated Fund, any Future Affiliated Fund or any Stellus Proprietary Account. “Future Affiliated Fund” means any entity (a) whose investment adviser is an Adviser, (b) that would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1), 3(c)(5)(C) or 3(c)(7) of the Act, and (c) that intends to participate in the program of co-investments described in the application. “Stellus Proprietary Account” means any direct or indirect, wholly- or majority-owned subsidiary of SCM that is formed in the future that, from time to time, may hold various financial assets in a principal capacity.

    4 All existing entities that currently intend to rely on the Order have been named as Applicants and any existing or future entities that may rely on the Order in the future will comply with the terms and Conditions set forth in the application.

    Applicants

    2. The Company is a closed-end management investment company incorporated in Maryland that has elected to be regulated as a BDC under the Act.5 The Company's Board 6 currently consists of seven members, of which four members are Independent Directors.7

    5 Section 2(a)(48) defines a BDC to be any closed-end investment company that operates for the purpose of making investments in securities described in section 55(a)(1) through 55(a)(3) and makes available significant managerial assistance with respect to the issuers of such securities.

    6 “Board” means the board of directors (or the equivalent) of the applicable Regulated Fund.

    7 “Independent Director” means a member of the Board of any relevant entity who is not an “interested person” as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act. No Independent Director of a Regulated Fund will have a financial interest in any Co-Investment Transaction, other than indirectly through share ownership in one of the Regulated Funds.

    3. SCM, a Delaware limited liability company that is registered under the Advisers Act, serves as the investment adviser to the Company pursuant to an investment advisory agreement. SCM also serves as investment adviser to each Existing Affiliated Fund.

    4. Applicants represent that each Existing Affiliated Fund is a separate and distinct legal entity and each would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1), 3(c)(5)(C) or 3(c)(7) of the Act.

    5. Applicants state that a Regulated Fund may, from time to time, form one or more Wholly-Owned Investment Subs.8 Such a subsidiary may be prohibited from investing in a Co-Investment Transaction with a Regulated Fund (other than its parent) or any Affiliated Fund because it would be a company controlled by its parent Regulated Fund for purposes of section 57(a)(4) and rule 17d-1. Applicants request that each Wholly-Owned Investment Sub be permitted to participate in Co-Investment Transactions in lieu of the applicable parent Regulated Fund that owns it and that the Wholly-Owned Investment Sub's participation in any such transaction be treated, for purposes of the Order, as though the parent Regulated Fund were participating directly. Applicants represent that this treatment is justified because a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub would have no purpose other than serving as a holding vehicle for the Regulated Fund's investments and, therefore, no conflicts of interest could arise between the parent Regulated Fund and the Wholly-Owned Investment Sub. The Board of the parent Regulated Fund would make all relevant determinations under the Conditions with regard to a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub's participation in a Co-Investment Transaction, and the Board would be informed of, and take into consideration, any proposed use of a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub in the Regulated Fund's place. If the parent Regulated Fund proposes to participate in the same Co-Investment Transaction with any of its Wholly-Owned Investment Subs, the Board of the parent Regulated Fund will also be informed of, and take into consideration, the relative participation of the Regulated Fund and the Wholly-Owned Investment Sub.

    8 “Wholly-Owned Investment Sub” means an entity (i) that is wholly-owned by a Regulated Fund (with such Regulated Fund at all times holding, beneficially and of record, 100% of the voting and economic interests); (ii) whose sole business purpose is to hold one or more investments on behalf of such Regulated Fund (and, in the case of a SBIC Subsidiary (defined below), maintains a license under the SBA Act (defined below) and issues debentures guaranteed by the SBA (defined below)); (iii) with respect to which such Regulated Fund's Board has the sole authority to make all determinations with respect to the entity's participation under the Conditions; and (iv) that would be an investment company but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act. “SBIC Subsidiary” means a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub that is licensed by the Small Business Administration (the “SBA”) to operate under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended, (the “SBA Act”) as a small business investment company. The Existing Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries are Wholly-Owned Investment Subs.

    Applicants' Representations A. Allocation Process

    6. Applicants state that SCM is presented with hundreds of investment opportunities each year on behalf of its clients and SCM determines how to allocate those opportunities in a manner that, over time, is fair and equitable to all of its clients. Such investment opportunities may be Potential Co-Investment Transactions.

    7. Applicants represent that SCM has established processes for allocating initial investment opportunities, opportunities for subsequent investments in an issuer and dispositions of securities holdings reasonably designed to treat all clients fairly and equitably. Further, Applicants represent that these processes will be extended and modified in a manner reasonably designed to ensure that the additional transactions permitted under the Order will both (i) be fair and equitable to the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds and (ii) comply with the Conditions.

    8. If the requested Order is granted, the Adviser will establish, maintain and implement policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that when such opportunities arise, the Adviser to the relevant Regulated Funds is promptly notified and receives the same information about the opportunity as any other Adviser considering the opportunity for its clients. In particular, consistent with Condition 1, if a Potential Co-Investment Transaction falls within the then-current Objectives and Strategies 9 and any Board-Established Criteria 10 of a Regulated Fund, the policies and procedures will require that the Adviser to such Regulated Fund receive sufficient information to allow such Adviser's investment committee to make its independent determination and recommendations under the Conditions.

    9 “Objectives and Strategies” means a Regulated Fund's investment objectives and strategies, as described in its most current registration statement on Form N-2, other current filings with the Commission under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) or under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and its most current report to stockholders.

    10 “Board-Established Criteria” means criteria that the Board of a Regulated Fund may establish from time to time to describe the characteristics of Potential Co-Investment Transactions regarding which the Adviser to such Regulated Fund should be notified under Condition 1. The Board-Established Criteria will be consistent with the Regulated Fund's Objectives and Strategies. If no Board-Established Criteria are in effect, then the Regulated Fund's Adviser will be notified of all Potential Co-Investment Transactions that fall within the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies. Board-Established Criteria will be objective and testable, meaning that they will be based on observable information, such as industry/sector of the issuer, minimum EBITDA of the issuer, asset class of the investment opportunity or required commitment size, and not on characteristics that involve a discretionary assessment. The Adviser to the Regulated Fund may from time to time recommend criteria for the Board's consideration, but Board-Established Criteria will only become effective if approved by a majority of the Independent Directors. The Independent Directors of a Regulated Fund may at any time rescind, suspend or qualify its approval of any Board-Established Criteria, though Applicants anticipate that, under normal circumstances, the Board would not modify these criteria more often than quarterly.

    9. The Adviser to each applicable Regulated Fund will then make an independent determination of the appropriateness of the investment for the Regulated Fund in light of the Regulated Fund's then-current circumstances. If the Adviser to a Regulated Fund deems the Regulated Fund's participation in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction to be appropriate, it will formulate a recommendation regarding the proposed order amount for the Regulated Fund.

    10. Applicants state that, for each Regulated Fund and Affiliated Fund whose Adviser recommends participating in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction, such Adviser's investment committee will approve an investment amount to be allocated to each Regulated Fund and/or Affiliated Fund participating in the Potential Co-Investment Transaction. Applicants state further that, each proposed order amount may be reviewed and adjusted, in accordance with the Adviser's written allocation policies and procedures, by the Adviser's investment committee.11 The order of a Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund resulting from this process is referred to as its “Internal Order.” The Internal Order will be submitted for approval by the Required Majority of any participating Regulated Funds in accordance with the Conditions.12

    11 The reason for any such adjustment to a proposed order amount will be documented in writing and preserved in the records of each Adviser.

    12 “Required Majority” means a required majority, as defined in section 57(o) of the Act. In the case of a Regulated Fund that is a registered closed-end fund, the Board members that make up the Required Majority will be determined as if the Regulated Fund were a BDC subject to section 57(o).

    11. Applicants acknowledge that some of the Affiliated Funds may not be funds advised by an Adviser because they are Stellus Proprietary Accounts. Applicants do not believe these Stellus Proprietary Accounts should raise issues under the Conditions because the allocation policies and procedures of the Advisers provide that investment opportunities are offered to client accounts before they are offered to Stellus Proprietary Accounts.

    12. If the aggregate Internal Orders for a Potential Co-Investment Transaction do not exceed the size of the investment opportunity immediately prior to the submission of the orders to the underwriter, broker, dealer or issuer, as applicable (the “External Submission”), then each Internal Order will be fulfilled as placed and to the extent there is excess amount available to invest, a Stellus Proprietary Account shall be permitted to invest. If, on the other hand, the aggregate Internal Orders for a Potential Co-Investment Transaction exceed the size of the investment opportunity immediately prior to the External Submission, then the allocation of the opportunity will be made pro rata on the basis of the size of the Internal Orders and the Stellus Proprietary Accounts shall not be permitted to invest.13 If, subsequent to such External Submission, the size of the opportunity is increased or decreased, or if the terms of such opportunity, or the facts and circumstances applicable to the Regulated Funds' or the Affiliated Funds' consideration of the opportunity, change, the participants will be permitted to submit revised Internal Orders in accordance with written allocation policies and procedures that the Advisers will establish, implement and maintain.14

    13 Each Adviser will maintain records of all proposed order amounts, Internal Orders and External Submissions in conjunction with Potential Co-Investment Transactions. Each applicable Adviser will provide the Eligible Directors with information concerning the Affiliated Funds' and Regulated Funds' order sizes to assist the Eligible Directors with their review of the applicable Regulated Fund's investments for compliance with the Conditions. “Eligible Directors” means, with respect to a Regulated Fund and a Potential Co-Investment Transaction, the members of the Regulated Fund's Board eligible to vote on that Potential Co-Investment Transaction under section 57(o) of the Act.

    14 However, if the size of the opportunity is decreased such that the aggregate of the original Internal Orders would exceed the amount of the remaining investment opportunity, then upon submitting any revised order amount to the Board of a Regulated Fund for approval, the Adviser to the Regulated Fund will also notify the Board promptly of the amount that the Regulated Fund would receive if the remaining investment opportunity were allocated pro rata on the basis of the size of the original Internal Orders. The Board of the Regulated Fund will then either approve or disapprove of the investment opportunity in accordance with condition 2, 6, 7, 8 or 9, as applicable.

    B. Follow-On Investments

    13. Applicants state that from time to time the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds may have opportunities to make Follow-On Investments 15 in an issuer in which a Regulated Fund and one or more other Regulated Funds and/or Affiliated Funds previously have invested.

    15 “Follow-On Investment” means an additional investment in the same issuer, including, but not limited to, through the exercise of warrants, conversion privileges or other rights to purchase securities of the issuer.

    14. Applicants propose that Follow-On Investments would be divided into two categories depending on whether the prior investment was a Co-Investment Transaction or a Pre-Boarding Investment.16 If the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds have previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer, then the terms and approval of the Follow-On Investment would be subject to the Standard Review Follow-Ons described in Condition 8. If the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds have not previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer but hold a Pre-Boarding Investment, then the terms and approval of the Follow-On Investment would be subject to the Enhanced-Review Follow-Ons described in Condition 9. All Enhanced Review Follow-Ons require the approval of the Required Majority. For a given issuer, the participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds need to comply with the requirements of Enhanced-Review Follow-Ons only for the first Co-Investment Transaction. Subsequent Co-Investment Transactions with respect to the issuer would be governed by the requirements of Standard Review Follow-Ons.

    16 “Pre-Boarding Investments” are investments in an issuer held by a Regulated Fund as well as one or more Affiliated Funds and/or one or more other Regulated Funds that were acquired prior to participating in any Co-Investment Transaction: (i) In transactions in which the only term negotiated by or on behalf of such funds was price in reliance on one of the JT No-Action Letters (defined below); or (ii) in transactions occurring at least 90 days apart and without coordination between the Regulated Fund and any Affiliated Fund or other Regulated Fund.

    15. A Regulated Fund would be permitted to invest in Standard Review Follow-Ons either with the approval of the Required Majority under Condition 8(c) or without Board approval under Condition 8(b) if it is (i) a Pro Rata Follow-On Investment 17 or (ii) a Non-Negotiated Follow-On Investment.18 Applicants believe that these Pro Rata and Non-Negotiated Follow-On Investments do not present a significant opportunity for overreaching on the part of any Adviser and thus do not warrant the time or the attention of the Board. Pro Rata Follow-On Investments and Non-Negotiated Follow-On Investments remain subject to the Board's periodic review in accordance with Condition 10.

    17 A “Pro Rata Follow-On Investment” is a Follow-On Investment (i) in which the participation of each Affiliated Fund and each Regulated Fund is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer or security, as appropriate, immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment, and (ii) in the case of a Regulated Fund, a majority of the Board has approved the Regulated Fund's participation in the pro rata Follow-On Investments as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund. The Regulated Fund's Board may refuse to approve, or at any time rescind, suspend or qualify, its approval of Pro Rata Follow-On Investments, in which case all subsequent Follow-On Investments will be submitted to the Regulated Fund's Eligible Directors in accordance with Condition 8(c).

    18 A “Non-Negotiated Follow-On Investment” is a Follow-On Investment in which a Regulated Fund participates together with one or more Affiliated Funds and/or one or more other Regulated Funds (i) in which the only term negotiated by or on behalf of the funds is price and (ii) with respect to which, if the transaction were considered on its own, the funds would be entitled to rely on one of the JT No-Action Letters. “JT No-Action Letters” means SMC Capital, Inc., SEC No-Action Letter (pub. avail. Sept. 5, 1995) and Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, SEC No-Action Letter (pub. avail. June 7, 2000).

    C. Dispositions

    16. Applicants propose that Dispositions 19 would be divided into two categories. If the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds holding investments in the issuer have previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer, then the terms and approval of the Disposition would be subject to the Standard Review Dispositions described in Condition 6. If the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds have not previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer but hold a Pre-Boarding Investment, then the terms and approval of the Disposition would be subject to the Enhanced Review Dispositions described in Condition 7. Subsequent Dispositions with respect to the same issuer would be governed by Condition 6 under the Standard Review Dispositions.20

    19 “Disposition” means the sale, exchange or other disposition of an interest in a security of an issuer.

    20 However, with respect to an issuer, if a Regulated Fund's first Co-Investment Transaction is an Enhanced Review Disposition, and the Regulated Fund does not dispose of its entire position in the Enhanced Review Disposition, then before such Regulated Fund may complete its first Standard Review Follow-On in such issuer, the Eligible Directors must review the proposed Follow-On Investment not only on a stand-alone basis but also in relation to the total economic exposure in such issuer (i.e., in combination with the portion of the Pre-Boarding Investment not disposed of in the Enhanced Review Disposition), and the other terms of the investments. This additional review is required because such findings were not required in connection with the prior Enhanced Review Disposition, but they would have been required had the first Co-Investment Transaction been an Enhanced Review Follow-On.

    17. A Regulated Fund may participate in a Standard Review Disposition either with the approval of the Required Majority under Condition 6(d) or without Board approval under Condition 6(c) if (i) the Disposition is a Pro Rata Disposition 21 or (ii) the securities are Tradable Securities 22 and the Disposition meets the other requirements of Condition 6(c)(ii). Pro Rata Dispositions and Dispositions of a Tradable Security remain subject to the Board's periodic review in accordance with Condition 10.

    21 A “Pro Rata Disposition” is a Disposition (i) in which the participation of each Affiliated Fund and each Regulated Fund is proportionate to its outstanding investment in the security subject to Disposition immediately preceding the Disposition; and (ii) in the case of a Regulated Fund, a majority of the Board has approved the Regulated Fund's participation in pro rata Dispositions as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund. The Regulated Fund's Board may refuse to approve, or at any time rescind, suspend or qualify, its approval of Pro Rata Dispositions, in which case all subsequent Dispositions will be submitted to the Regulated Fund's Eligible Directors.

    22 “Tradable Security” means a security that meets the following criteria at the time of Disposition: (i) It trades on a national securities exchange or designated offshore securities market as defined in rule 902(b) under the Securities Act; (ii) it is not subject to restrictive agreements with the issuer or other security holders; and (iii) it trades with sufficient volume and liquidity (findings as to which are documented by the Advisers to any Regulated Funds holding investments in the issuer and retained for the life of the Regulated Fund) to allow each Regulated Fund to dispose of its entire position remaining after the proposed Disposition within a short period of time not exceeding 30 days at approximately the value (as defined by section 2(a)(41) of the Act) at which the Regulated Fund has valued the investment.

    D. Delayed Settlement

    18. Applicants represent that under the terms and Conditions of the application, all Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds participating in a Co-Investment Transaction will invest at the same time, for the same price and with the same terms, conditions, class, registration rights and any other rights, so that none of them receives terms more favorable than any other. However, the settlement date for an Affiliated Fund in a Co-Investment Transaction may occur up to ten business days after the settlement date for the Regulated Fund, and vice versa.23 Nevertheless, in all cases, (i) the date on which the commitment of the Affiliated Funds and Regulated Funds is made will be the same even where the settlement date is not and (ii) the earliest settlement date and the latest settlement date of any Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund participating in the transaction will occur within ten business days of each other.

    23 Applicants state this may occur for two reasons. First, when the Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund is not yet fully funded because, when the Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund desires to make an investment, it must call capital from its investors to obtain the financing to make the investment, and in these instances, the notice requirement to call capital could be as much as ten business days. Second, where, for tax or regulatory reasons, an Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund does not purchase new issuances immediately upon issuance but only after a short seasoning period of up to ten business days.

    E. Holders

    19. Under Condition 15, if an Adviser, its principals, or any person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Adviser or its principals, and the Affiliated Funds (collectively, the “Holders”) own in the aggregate more than 25 percent of the outstanding voting shares of a Regulated Fund (the “Shares”), then the Holders will vote such Shares as directed by an independent third party when voting on matters specified in the Condition. Applicants believe that this Condition will ensure that the Independent Directors will act independently in evaluating Co-Investment Transactions, because the ability of an Adviser or its principals to influence the Independent Directors by a suggestion, explicit or implied, that the Independent Directors can be removed will be limited significantly. The Independent Directors shall evaluate and approve any independent party, taking into account its qualifications, reputation for independence, cost to the shareholders, and other factors that they deem relevant.

    Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit participation by a registered investment company and an affiliated person in any “joint enterprise or other joint arrangement or profit-sharing plan,” as defined in the rule, without prior approval by the Commission by order upon application. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act are applicable to Regulated Funds that are registered closed-end investment companies.

    2. Similarly, with regard to BDCs, section 57(a)(4) of the Act generally prohibits certain persons specified in section 57(b) from participating in joint transactions with the BDC or a company controlled by the BDC in contravention of rules as prescribed by the Commission. Section 57(i) of the Act provides that, until the Commission prescribes rules under section 57(a)(4), the Commission's rules under section 17(d) of the Act applicable to registered closed-end investment companies will be deemed to apply to transactions subject to section 57(a)(4). Because the Commission has not adopted any rules under section 57(a)(4), rule 17d-1 also applies to joint transactions with Regulated Funds that are BDCs.

    3. Co-Investment Transactions are prohibited by either or both of rule 17d-1 and section 57(a)(4) without a prior exemptive order of the Commission to the extent that the Affiliated Funds and the Regulated Funds participating in such transactions fall within the category of persons described by rule 17d-1 and/or section 57(b), as applicable, vis-à-vis each participating Regulated Fund. Each of the participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds may be deemed to be affiliated persons vis-à-vis a Regulated Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(3) by reason of common control because (i) the Adviser manages each of the Affiliated Funds and may be deemed to control any Future Regulated Fund and any Future Affiliated Fund, and (ii) the Adviser manages the Company pursuant to its investment advisory agreement. Thus, each of the Affiliated Funds could be deemed to be a person related to the Company in a manner described by section 57(b) and related to Future Regulated Funds in a manner described by rule 17d-1; and therefore the prohibitions of rule 17d-1 and section 57(a)(4) would apply respectively to prohibit the Affiliated Funds from participating in Co-Investment Transactions with the Regulated Funds. In addition, because the Stellus Proprietary Accounts are controlled by SCM and, therefore, may be under common control with the Company, any future Advisers, and any Future Regulated Funds, the Stellus Proprietary Accounts could be deemed to be persons related to the Regulated Funds (or a company controlled by the Regulated Funds) in a manner described by section 57(b) and also prohibited from participating in the Co-Investment Program.

    4. In passing upon applications under rule 17d-1, the Commission considers whether the company's participation in the joint transaction is consistent with the provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and the extent to which such participation is on a basis different from or less advantageous than that of other participants.

    5. Applicants state that in the absence of the requested relief, in many circumstances the Regulated Funds would be limited in their ability to participate in attractive and appropriate investment opportunities. Applicants state that, as required by rule 17d-1(b), the Conditions ensure that the terms on which Co-Investment Transactions may be made will be consistent with the participation of the Regulated Funds being on a basis that it is neither different from nor less advantageous than other participants, thus protecting the equity holders of any participant from being disadvantaged. Applicants further state that the Conditions ensure that all Co-Investment Transactions are reasonable and fair to the Regulated Funds and their shareholders and do not involve overreaching by any person concerned, including the Advisers. Applicants state that the Regulated Funds' participation in the Co-Investment Transactions in accordance with the Conditions will be consistent with the provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and would be done in a manner that is not different from, or less advantageous than, that of other participants.

    Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that the Order will be subject to the following Conditions:

    1. Identification and Referral of Potential Co-Investment Transactions.

    (a) The Advisers will establish, maintain and implement policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that each Adviser is promptly notified of all Potential Co-Investment Transactions that fall within the then-current Objectives and Strategies and Board-Established Criteria of any Regulated Fund the Adviser manages.

    (b) When an Adviser to a Regulated Fund is notified of a Potential Co-Investment Transaction under Condition 1(a), the Adviser will make an independent determination of the appropriateness of the investment for the Regulated Fund in light of the Regulated Fund's then-current circumstances.

    2. Board Approvals of Co-Investment Transactions.

    (a) If the Adviser deems a Regulated Fund's participation in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction to be appropriate for the Regulated Fund, it will then determine an appropriate level of investment for the Regulated Fund.

    (b) If the aggregate amount recommended by the Advisers to be invested in the Potential Co-Investment Transaction by the participating Regulated Funds and any participating Affiliated Funds, collectively, exceeds the amount of the investment opportunity, the investment opportunity will be allocated among them pro rata based on the size of the Internal Orders, as described in section III.A.1.b. of the application. Each Adviser to a participating Regulated Fund will promptly notify and provide the Eligible Directors with information concerning the Affiliated Funds' and Regulated Funds' order sizes to assist the Eligible Directors with their review of the applicable Regulated Fund's investments for compliance with these Conditions.

    (c) After making the determinations required in Condition 1(b) above, each Adviser to a participating Regulated Fund will distribute written information concerning the Potential Co-Investment Transaction (including the amount proposed to be invested by each participating Regulated Fund and each participating Affiliated Fund) to the Eligible Directors of its participating Regulated Fund(s) for their consideration. A Regulated Fund will enter into a Co-Investment Transaction with one or more other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds only if, prior to the Regulated Fund's participation in the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, a Required Majority concludes that:

    (i) The terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Regulated Fund and its equity holders and do not involve overreaching in respect of the Regulated Fund or its equity holders on the part of any person concerned;

    (ii) the transaction is consistent with:

    (A) The interests of the Regulated Fund's equity holders; and

    (B) the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies;

    (iii) the investment by any other Regulated Fund(s) or Affiliated Fund(s) would not disadvantage the Regulated Fund, and participation by the Regulated Fund would not be on a basis different from, or less advantageous than, that of any other Regulated Fund(s) or Affiliated Fund(s) participating in the transaction; provided that the Required Majority shall not be prohibited from reaching the conclusions required by this Condition 2(c)(iii) if:

    (A) The settlement date for another Regulated Fund or an Affiliated Fund in a Co-Investment Transaction is later than the settlement date for the Regulated Fund by no more than ten business days or earlier than the settlement date for the Regulated Fund by no more than ten business days, in either case, so long as: (x) The date on which the commitment of the Affiliated Funds and Regulated Funds is made is the same; and (y) the earliest settlement date and the latest settlement date of any Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund participating in the transaction will occur within ten business days of each other; or

    (B) any other Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund, but not the Regulated Fund itself, gains the right to nominate a director for election to a portfolio company's board of directors, the right to have a board observer or any similar right to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company so long as: (x) The Eligible Directors will have the right to ratify the selection of such director or board observer, if any; (y) the Adviser agrees to, and does, provide periodic reports to the Regulated Fund's Board with respect to the actions of such director or the information received by such board observer or obtained through the exercise of any similar right to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company; and (z) any fees or other compensation that any other Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund or any affiliated person of any other Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund receives in connection with the right of one or more Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds to nominate a director or appoint a board observer or otherwise to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company will be shared proportionately among any participating Affiliated Funds (who may, in turn, share their portion with their affiliated persons) and any participating Regulated Fund(s) in accordance with the amount of each such party's investment; and

    (iv) the proposed investment by the Regulated Fund will not involve compensation, remuneration or a direct or indirect 24 financial benefit to the Advisers, any other Regulated Fund, the Affiliated Funds or any affiliated person of any of them (other than the parties to the Co-Investment Transaction), except (A) to the extent permitted by Condition 14, (B) to the extent permitted by section 17(e) or 57(k), as applicable, (C) indirectly, as a result of an interest in the securities issued by one of the parties to the Co-Investment Transaction, or (D) in the case of fees or other compensation described in Condition 2(c)(iii)(B)(z).

    24 For example, procuring the Regulated Fund's investment in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction to permit an affiliate to complete or obtain better terms in a separate transaction would constitute an indirect financial benefit.

    3. Right to Decline. Each Regulated Fund has the right to decline to participate in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction or to invest less than the amount proposed.

    4. General Limitation. Except for Follow-On Investments made in accordance with Conditions 8 and 9 below,25 a Regulated Fund will not invest in reliance on the Order in any issuer in which a Related Party has an investment.26

    25 This exception applies only to Follow-On Investments by a Regulated Fund in issuers in which that Regulated Fund already holds investments.

    26 “Related Party” means (i) any Close Affiliate and (ii) in respect of matters as to which any Adviser has knowledge, any Remote Affiliate. “Close Affiliate” means the Advisers, the Regulated Funds, the Affiliated Funds and any other person described in section 57(b) (after giving effect to Rule 57b-1) in respect of any Regulated Fund (treating any registered investment company or series thereof as a BDC for this purpose) except for limited partners included solely by reason of the reference in section 57(b) to section 2(a)(3)(D). “Remote Affiliate” means any person described in section 57(e) in respect of any Regulated Fund (treating any registered investment company or series thereof as a BDC for this purpose) and any limited partner holding 5% or more of the relevant limited partner interests that would be a Close Affiliate but for the exclusion in that definition.

    5. Same Terms and Conditions. A Regulated Fund will not participate in any Potential Co-Investment Transaction unless (i) the terms, conditions, price, class of securities to be purchased, date on which the commitment is entered into and registration rights (if any) will be the same for each participating Regulated Fund and Affiliated Fund and (ii) the earliest settlement date and the latest settlement date of any participating Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund will occur as close in time as practicable and in no event more than ten business days apart. The grant to one or more Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds, but not the respective Regulated Fund, of the right to nominate a director for election to a portfolio company's board of directors, the right to have an observer on the board of directors or similar rights to participate in the governance or management of the portfolio company will not be interpreted so as to violate this Condition 5, if Condition 2(c)(iii)(B) is met.

    6. Standard Review Dispositions.

    (a) General. If any Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund elects to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of an interest in a security and one or more Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds have previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer, then:

    (i) The Adviser to such Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund 27 will notify each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer of the proposed Disposition at the earliest practical time; and

    27 Any Stellus Proprietary Account that is not advised by an Adviser is itself deemed to be an Adviser for purposes of conditions 6(a)(i), 7(a)(i), 8(a)(i) and 9(a)(i).

    (ii) the Adviser to each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer will formulate a recommendation as to participation by such Regulated Fund in the Disposition.

    (b) Same Terms and Conditions. Each Regulated Fund will have the right to participate in such Disposition on a proportionate basis, at the same price and on the same terms and conditions as those applicable to the Affiliated Funds and any other Regulated Fund.

    (c) No Board Approval Required. A Regulated Fund may participate in such a Disposition without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if:

    (i)(A) The participation of each Regulated Fund and Affiliated Fund in such Disposition is proportionate to its then-current holding of the security (or securities) of the issuer that is (or are) the subject of the Disposition; 28 (B) the Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in such Dispositions on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the application); and (C) the Board of the Regulated Fund is provided on a quarterly basis with a list of all Dispositions made in accordance with this Condition; or

    28 In the case of any Disposition, proportionality will be measured by each participating Regulated Fund's and Affiliated Fund's outstanding investment in the security in question immediately preceding the Disposition.

    (ii) each security is a Tradable Security and (A) the Disposition is not to the issuer or any affiliated person of the issuer; and (B) the security is sold for cash in a transaction in which the only term negotiated by or on behalf of the participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds is price.

    (d) Standard Board Approval. In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Directors and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Disposition solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.

    7. Enhanced Review Dispositions.

    (a) General. If any Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund elects to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of a Pre-Boarding Investment in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction and the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds have not previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer:

    (i) The Adviser to such Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund will notify each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer of the proposed Disposition at the earliest practical time;

    (ii) the Adviser to each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer will formulate a recommendation as to participation by such Regulated Fund in the Disposition; and

    (iii) the Advisers will provide to the Board of each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer all information relating to the existing investments in the issuer of the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds, including the terms of such investments and how they were made, that is necessary for the Required Majority to make the findings required by this Condition.

    (b) Enhanced Board Approval. The Adviser will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Disposition solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines that:

    (i) The Disposition complies with Condition 2(c)(i), (ii), (iii)(A), and (iv); and

    (ii) the making and holding of the Pre-Boarding Investments were not prohibited by section 57 or rule 17d-1, as applicable, and records the basis for the finding in the Board minutes.

    (c) Additional Requirements. The Disposition may only be completed in reliance on the Order if:

    (i) Same Terms and Conditions. Each Regulated Fund has the right to participate in such Disposition on a proportionate basis, at the same price and on the same terms and conditions as those applicable to the Affiliated Funds and any other Regulated Fund;

    (ii) Original Investments. All of the Affiliated Funds' and Regulated Funds' investments in the issuer are Pre-Boarding Investments;

    (iii) Advice of counsel. Independent counsel to the Board advises that the making and holding of the investments in the Pre-Boarding Investments were not prohibited by section 57 (as modified by rule 57b-1) or rule 17d-1, as applicable;

    (iv) Multiple Classes of Securities. All Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds that hold Pre-Boarding Investments in the issuer immediately before the time of completion of the Co-Investment Transaction hold the same security or securities of the issuer. For the purpose of determining whether the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds hold the same security or securities, they may disregard any security held by some but not all of them if, prior to relying on the Order, the Required Majority is presented with all information necessary to make a finding, and finds, that: (x) Any Regulated Fund's or Affiliated Fund's holding of a different class of securities (including for this purpose a security with a different maturity date) is immaterial 29 in amount, including immaterial relative to the size of the issuer; and (y) the Board records the basis for any such finding in its minutes. In addition, securities that differ only in respect of issuance date, currency, or denominations may be treated as the same security; and

    29 In determining whether a holding is “immaterial” for purposes of the Order, the Required Majority will consider whether the nature and extent of the interest in the transaction or arrangement is sufficiently small that a reasonable person would not believe that the interest affected the determination of whether to enter into the transaction or arrangement or the terms of the transaction or arrangement.

    (v) No control. The Affiliated Funds, the other Regulated Funds and their affiliated persons (within the meaning of section 2(a)(3)(C) of the Act), individually or in the aggregate, do not control the issuer of the securities (within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act).

    8. Standard Review Follow-Ons.

    (a) General. If any Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund desires to make a Follow-On Investment in an issuer and the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds holding investments in the issuer previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer:

    (i) The Adviser to each such Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund will notify each Regulated Fund that holds securities of the portfolio company of the proposed transaction at the earliest practical time; and

    (ii) the Adviser to each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer will formulate a recommendation as to the proposed participation, including the amount of the proposed investment, by such Regulated Fund.

    (b) No Board Approval Required. A Regulated Fund may participate in the Follow-On Investment without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if:

    (i)(A) The proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund in such investment is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the issuer or the security at issue, as appropriate,30 immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and (B) the Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in Follow-On Investments on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the application); or

    30 To the extent that a Follow-On Investment opportunity is in a security or arises in respect of a security held by the participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds, proportionality will be measured by each participating Regulated Fund's and Affiliated Fund's outstanding investment in the security in question immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment using the most recent available valuation thereof. To the extent that a Follow-On Investment opportunity relates to an opportunity to invest in a security that is not in respect of any security held by any of the participating Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds, proportionality will be measured by each participating Regulated Fund's and Affiliated Fund's outstanding investment in the issuer immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment using the most recent available valuation thereof.

    (ii) it is a Non-Negotiated Follow-On Investment.

    (c) Standard Board Approval. In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Directors and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Follow-On Investment solely to the extent that a Required Majority makes the determinations set forth in Condition 2(c). If the only previous Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer was an Enhanced Review Disposition the Eligible Directors must complete this review of the proposed Follow-On Investment both on a stand-alone basis and together with the Pre-Boarding Investments in relation to the total economic exposure and other terms of the investment.

    (d) Allocation. If, with respect to any such Follow-On Investment:

    (i) The amount of the opportunity proposed to be made available to any Regulated Fund is not based on the Regulated Funds' and the Affiliated Funds' outstanding investments in the issuer or the security at issue, as appropriate, immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and

    (ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the Advisers to be invested in the Follow-On Investment by the participating Regulated Funds and any participating Affiliated Funds, collectively, exceeds the amount of the investment opportunity, then the Follow-On Investment opportunity will be allocated among them pro rata based on the size of the Internal Orders, as described in section III.A.1.b. of the application.

    (e) Other Conditions. The acquisition of Follow-On Investments as permitted by this Condition will be considered a Co-Investment Transaction for all purposes and subject to the other Conditions set forth in the application.

    9. Enhanced Review Follow-Ons.

    (a) General. If any Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund desires to make a Follow-On Investment in an issuer that is a Potential Co-Investment Transaction and the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds holding investments in the issuer have not previously participated in a Co-Investment Transaction with respect to the issuer:

    (i) The Adviser to each such Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund will notify each Regulated Fund that holds securities of the portfolio company of the proposed transaction at the earliest practical time;

    (ii) the Adviser to each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer will formulate a recommendation as to the proposed participation, including the amount of the proposed investment, by such Regulated Fund; and

    (iii) the Advisers will provide to the Board of each Regulated Fund that holds an investment in the issuer all information relating to the existing investments in the issuer of the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds, including the terms of such investments and how they were made, that is necessary for the Required Majority to make the findings required by this Condition.

    (b) Enhanced Board Approval. The Adviser will provide its written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Follow-On Investment solely to the extent that a Required Majority reviews the proposed Follow-On Investment both on a stand-alone basis and together with the Pre-Boarding Investments in relation to the total economic exposure and other terms and makes the determinations set forth in Condition 2(c). In addition, the Follow-On Investment may only be completed in reliance on the Order if the Required Majority of each participating Regulated Fund determines that the making and holding of the Pre-Boarding Investments were not prohibited by section 57 (as modified by rule 57b-1) or rule 17d-1, as applicable. The basis for the Board's findings will be recorded in its minutes.

    (c) Additional Requirements. The Follow-On Investment may only be completed in reliance on the Order if:

    (i) Original Investments. All of the Affiliated Funds' and Regulated Funds' investments in the issuer are Pre-Boarding Investments;

    (ii) Advice of counsel. Independent counsel to the Board advises that the making and holding of the investments in the Pre-Boarding Investments were not prohibited by section 57 (as modified by rule 57b-1) or rule 17d-1, as applicable;

    (iii) Multiple Classes of Securities. All Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds that hold Pre-Boarding Investments in the issuer immediately before the time of completion of the Co-Investment Transaction hold the same security or securities of the issuer. For the purpose of determining whether the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds hold the same security or securities, they may disregard any security held by some but not all of them if, prior to relying on the Order, the Required Majority is presented with all information necessary to make a finding, and finds, that: (x) Any Regulated Fund's or Affiliated Fund's holding of a different class of securities (including for this purpose a security with a different maturity date) is immaterial in amount, including immaterial relative to the size of the issuer; and (y) the Board records the basis for any such finding in its minutes. In addition, securities that differ only in respect of issuance date, currency, or denominations may be treated as the same security; and

    (iv) No control. The Affiliated Funds, the other Regulated Funds and their affiliated persons (within the meaning of section 2(a)(3)(C) of the Act), individually or in the aggregate, do not control the issuer of the securities (within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act).

    (d) Allocation. If, with respect to any such Follow-On Investment:

    (i) The amount of the opportunity proposed to be made available to any Regulated Fund is not based on the Regulated Funds' and the Affiliated Funds' outstanding investments in the issuer or the security at issue, as appropriate, immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and

    (ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the Advisers to be invested in the Follow-On Investment by the participating Regulated Funds and any participating Affiliated Funds, collectively, exceeds the amount of the investment opportunity,

    then the Follow-On Investment opportunity will be allocated among them pro rata based on the size of the Internal Orders, as described in section III.A.1.b. of the application.

    (e) Other Conditions. The acquisition of Follow-On Investments as permitted by this Condition will be considered a Co-Investment Transaction for all purposes and subject to the other Conditions set forth in the application.

    10. Board Reporting, Compliance and Annual Re-Approval.

    (a) Each Adviser to a Regulated Fund will present to the Board of each Regulated Fund, on a quarterly basis, and at such other times as the Board may request, (i) a record of all investments in Potential Co-Investment Transactions made by any of the other Regulated Funds or any of the Affiliated Funds during the preceding quarter that fell within the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies and Board-Established Criteria that were not made available to the Regulated Fund, and an explanation of why such investment opportunities were not made available to the Regulated Fund; (ii) a record of all Follow-On Investments in and Dispositions of investments in any issuer in which the Regulated Fund holds any investments by any Affiliated Fund or other Regulated Fund during the prior quarter; and (iii) all information concerning Potential Co-Investment Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions, including investments made by other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds that the Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, so that the Independent Directors, may determine whether all Potential Co-Investment Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions during the preceding quarter, including those investments that the Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, comply with the Conditions.

    (b) All information presented to the Regulated Fund's Board pursuant to this Condition will be kept for the life of the Regulated Fund and at least two years thereafter, and will be subject to examination by the Commission and its staff.

    (c) Each Regulated Fund's chief compliance officer, as defined in rule 38a-1(a)(4), will prepare an annual report for its Board each year that evaluates (and documents the basis of that evaluation) the Regulated Fund's compliance with the terms and Conditions of the application and the procedures established to achieve such compliance.

    (d) The Independent Directors will consider at least annually whether continued participation in new and existing Co-Investment Transactions is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.

    11. Record Keeping. Each Regulated Fund will maintain the records required by section 57(f)(3) of the Act as if each of the Regulated Funds were a BDC and each of the investments permitted under these Conditions were approved by the Required Majority under section 57(f).

    12. Director Independence. No Independent Director of a Regulated Fund will also be a director, general partner, managing member or principal, or otherwise be an “affiliated person” (as defined in the Act) of any Affiliated Fund.

    13. Expenses. The expenses, if any, associated with acquiring, holding or disposing of any securities acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction (including, without limitation, the expenses of the distribution of any such securities registered for sale under the Securities Act) will, to the extent not payable by the Advisers under their respective advisory agreements with the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds, be shared by the Regulated Funds and the participating Affiliated Funds in proportion to the relative amounts of the securities held or being acquired or disposed of, as the case may be.

    14. Transaction Fees. 31 Any transaction fee (including break-up, structuring, monitoring or commitment fees but excluding brokerage or underwriting compensation permitted by section 17(e) or 57(k)) received in connection with any Co-Investment Transaction will be distributed to the participants on a pro rata basis based on the amounts they invested or committed, as the case may be, in such Co-Investment Transaction. If any transaction fee is to be held by an Adviser pending consummation of the transaction, the fee will be deposited into an account maintained by an Adviser at a bank or banks having the qualifications prescribed in section 26(a)(1), and the account will earn a competitive rate of interest that will also be divided pro rata among the participants. None of the Adviser, the Affiliated Funds, the other Regulated Funds or any affiliated person of the Affiliated Funds or the Regulated Funds will receive any additional compensation or remuneration of any kind as a result of or in connection with a Co-Investment Transaction other than (i) in the case of the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds, the pro rata transaction fees described above and fees or other compensation described in Condition 2(c)(iii)(B)(z), (ii) brokerage or underwriting compensation permitted by section 17(e) or 57(k) or (iii) in the case of the Adviser, investment advisory compensation paid in accordance with investment advisory agreements between the applicable Regulated Fund(s) or Affiliated Fund(s) and its Adviser.

    31 Applicants are not requesting and the Commission is not providing any relief for transaction fees received in connection with any Co-Investment Transaction.

    15. Independence. If the Holders own in the aggregate more than 25 percent of the Shares of a Regulated Fund, then the Holders will vote such Shares as directed by an independent third party when voting on (1) the election of directors; (2) the removal of one or more directors; or (3) any other matter under either the Act or applicable State law affecting the Board's composition, size or manner of election.

    16. Proprietary Accounts. The Stellus Proprietary Accounts will not be permitted to invest in a Potential Co-Investment Transaction except to the extent the aggregate demand from the Regulated Funds and the other Affiliated Funds is less than the total investment opportunity.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24635 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Sunshine Act Meeting Notice; Meeting No. 18-04

    The TVA Board of Directors will hold a public meeting on November 14, 2018, in the Bancorp South Conference Center, 387 East Main Street, Tupelo, Mississippi. The meeting will be called to order at 9:30 a.m. CT to consider the agenda items listed below. TVA management will answer questions from the news media following the Board meeting.

    On November 13, the public may comment on any agenda item or subject at a board-hosted public listening session which begins at 2:30 p.m. CT and will last until 4:30 p.m. Preregistration is required to address the Board.

    Status: Open.

    Agenda 1. Approval of minutes of the August 22, 2018, Board Meeting 2. Report from President and CEO 3. Report of the Finance, Rates, and Portfolio Committee 4. Report of the People and Performance Committee A. Fiscal Year 2018 Performance and Compensation B. CEO Compensation for Fiscal Year 2019 5. Report of the Audit, Risk, and Regulation Committee A. Regulatory Assets 6. Report of the External Relations Committee 7. Report of the Nuclear Oversight Committee

    For more information: Please call TVA Media Relations at (865) 632-6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call (865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.

    Dated: November 7, 2018. Sherry A. Quirk, General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24842 Filed 11-8-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 8120-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Comment Request; Leveraged Lending AGENCY:

    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The OCC, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a continuing information collection as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

    In accordance with the requirements of the PRA, the OCC may not conduct or sponsor, and respondents are not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    The OCC is soliciting comment concerning the renewal of its information collection titled “Leveraged Lending.”

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Commenters are encouraged to submit comments by email, if possible. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected]

    Mail: Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Attention: 1557-0315, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.

    Instructions: You must include “OCC” as the agency name and “1557-0315” in your comment. In general, the OCC will publish comments on www.reginfo.gov without change, including any business or personal information that you provide, such as name and address information, email addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

    You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this information collection beginning on the date of publication of the second notice for this collection 1 by any of the following methods:

    1 Following the close of the 60-Day comment period for this notice, the OCC will publish a notice for 30 days of comment for this collection.

    Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to www.reginfo.gov. Click on the “Information Collection Review” tab. Underneath the “Currently under Review” section heading, from the drop-down menu, select “Department of Treasury” and then click “submit.” This information collection can be located by searching by OMB control number “1557-0315” or “Leveraged Lending.” Upon finding the appropriate information collection, click on the related “ICR Reference Number.” On the next screen, select “View Supporting Statement and Other Documents” and then click on the link to any comment listed at the bottom of the screen.

    • For assistance in navigating www.reginfo.gov, please contact the Regulatory Information Service Center at (202) 482-7340.

    Viewing Comments Personally: You may personally inspect comments at the OCC, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC. For security reasons, the OCC requires that visitors make an appointment to inspect comments. You may do so by calling (202) 649-6700 or, for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo identification and submit to security screening in order to inspect comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shaquita Merritt, Clearance Officer, (202) 649-5490 or, for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597, Chief Counsel's Office, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from 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) to include Agency recommendations, 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 title 44 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, the OCC is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    Title: Leveraged Lending.

    OMB Control No.: 1557-0315.

    Description: On March 22, 2013, the agencies 2 issued guidance to the financial institutions they supervise 3 on how to evaluate and monitor credit risks in leveraged loans, understand the effect of changes in borrowers' enterprise values on credit portfolio quality, and assess the sensitivity of future credit losses to these changes in enterprise values.4 In regard to the underwriting of such credits, the guidance provides information for financial institutions to consider in assessing whether borrowers have the ability to repay credits when due and whether borrowers have sustainable capital structures, including bank borrowings and other debt, to support their continued operations through economic cycles. The guidance also provides information to financial institutions on the risks and potential impact of stressful events and circumstances on a borrower's financial condition.

    2 OCC, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    3 For the OCC, the term “financial institution” or “institution” includes national banks, federal savings associations, and federal branches and agencies supervised by the OCC.

    4 78 FR 17766 (March 22, 2013).

    The final guidance recommends that financial institutions consider developing: (i) Underwriting policies for leveraged lending, including stress-testing procedures for leveraged credits; (ii) risk management policies, including stress-testing procedures for pipeline exposures; and, (iii) policies and procedures for incorporating the results of leveraged credit and pipeline stress tests into the firm's overall stress-testing framework. While not requirements, these recommended policies qualify as “collections of information” as defined in the PRA.

    Respondents are financial institutions with leveraged lending activities as defined in the guidance that may develop policies recommended in the guidance.

    Title: Guidance on Leveraged Lending.

    OMB Control No.: 1557-0315.

    Frequency of Response: Annual.

    Affected Public: Financial institutions with leveraged lending.

    Burden Estimates:

    Estimated number of respondents: 29.

    Estimated total annual burden: 39,162 hours to build; 49,462 hours for ongoing use.

    Total estimated annual burden: 88,624 hours.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized, included in the request for OMB approval, and become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:

    (a) Whether the information collections are necessary for the proper performance of the OCC's functions, including whether the information has practical utility;

    (b) The accuracy of the OCC's estimates of the burden of the information collections, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    (d) Ways to minimize the burden of information collections on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

    (e) Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Theodore J. Dowd, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24616 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Comment Request; Fiduciary Activities AGENCY:

    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The OCC, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a continuing information collection as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The OCC is soliciting comment concerning the renewal of its information collection titled, “Fiduciary Activities.”

    DATES:

    You should submit written comments by January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Commenters are encouraged to submit comments by email, if possible. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected]

    Mail: Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Attention: 1557-0140, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.

    Fax: (571) 465-4326.

    Instructions: You must include “OCC” as the agency name and “1557-0140” in your comment. In general, the OCC will publish your comment on www.reginfo.gov without change, including any business or personal information that you provide, such as name and address information, email addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

    You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this information collection beginning on the date of publication of the second notice for this collection 1 by any of the following methods:

    1 Following the close of the 60-Day comment period for this notice, the OCC will publish a notice for 30 days of comment for this collection.

    Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to www.reginfo.gov. Click on the “Information Collection Review” tab. Underneath the “Currently under Review” section heading, from the drop-down menu, select “Department of Treasury” and then click “submit.” This information collection can be located by searching by OMB control number “1557-0140” or “Fiduciary Activities.” Upon finding the appropriate information collection, click on the related “ICR Reference Number.” On the next screen, select “View Supporting Statement and Other Documents” and then click on the link to any comment listed at the bottom of the screen.

    • For assistance in navigating www.reginfo.gov, please contact the Regulatory Information Service Center at (202) 482-7340.

    Viewing Comments Personally: You may personally inspect comments at the OCC, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC. For security reasons, the OCC requires that visitors make an appointment to inspect comments. You may do so by calling (202) 649-6700 or, for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo identification and submit to security screening in order to inspect comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shaquita Merritt, Clearance Officer, (202) 649-5490 or, for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY, (202) 649-5597, Chief Counsel's Office, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from 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) to include agency requests and requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of part 44 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, the OCC is publishing notice of the proposed extension of this collection of information.

    Title: Fiduciary Activities.

    OMB Control No.: 1557-0140.

    Description: The OCC regulates the fiduciary activities of national banks and federal savings associations (FSAs), including the administration of collective investment funds (CIFs), pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 92a and 12 U.S.C. 1464(n), respectively. Twelve CFR part 9 contains the regulations that national banks must follow when conducting fiduciary activities, and 12 CFR part 150 contains the regulations that FSAs must follow when conducting fiduciary activities. Regulations adopted by the former Office of Thrift Supervision, now recodified as OCC rules pursuant to Title III of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,2 have long required FSAs to comply with the requirements of the OCC's CIF regulation.3 Thus, 12 CFR 9.18 governs CIFs managed by both national banks and FSAs.

    2 76 FR 48950 (August 9, 2011).

    3See 12 CFR 150.260(b)(3).

    Twelve CFR 9.8 and 150.410-150.430 require that national banks and FSAs document the establishment and termination of each fiduciary account and maintain adequate records. Records must be retained for a period of three years from the later of the termination of the account or the termination of any litigation. The records must be separate and distinct from other records of the institution.

    Twelve CFR 9.9 and 12 CFR 150.480 require national banks and FSAs to note the results of any audit conducted (including significant actions taken as a result of the audit) in the minutes of the board of directors. National banks and FSAs that adopt a continuous audit system must note the results of all discrete audits performed since the last audit report (including significant actions taken as a result of the audits) in the minutes of the board of directors at least once during each calendar year.

    Twelve CFR 9.17(a) and 150.530 require that a national bank or FSA seeking to surrender its fiduciary powers file with the OCC a certified copy of the resolution of its board of directors evidencing that intent.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(1) (and 12 CFR 150.260 by cross-reference) require national banks and FSAs to establish and maintain each CIF in accordance with a written plan approved by the board of directors or a committee authorized by the board. The plan must include provisions relating to:

    • Investment powers and policies with respect to the fund;

    • Allocation of income, profits, and losses;

    • Fees and expenses that will be charged to the fund and to participating accounts;

    • Terms and conditions regarding admission and withdrawal of participating accounts;

    • Audits of participating accounts;

    • Basis and method of valuing assets in the fund;

    • Expected frequency for income distribution to participating accounts;

    • Minimum frequency for valuation of fund assets;

    • Amount of time following a valuation date during which the valuation must be made;

    • Bases upon which the institution may terminate the fund; and

    • Any other matters necessary to define clearly the rights of participating accounts.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(1) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that a national bank or FSA make a copy of any CIF plan available for public inspection at its main office and provide a copy of the plan to any person who requests it.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(E) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt portfolio and issuer qualitative standards and concentration restrictions for short-term investment funds (STIFs), a type of CIF.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(F) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt liquidity standards and include provisions that address contingency funding needs for STIFs.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(G) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt shadow pricing procedures for STIFs that calculate the extent of difference, if any, of the mark-to-market net asset value per participating interest from the STIF's amortized cost per participating interest, and to take certain actions if that difference exceeds $0.005 per participating interest.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(H) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt, for STIFs, procedures for stress testing the STIF's ability to maintain a stable net asset value per participating interest and provide for reporting the results.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(I) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt, for STIFs, procedures that require a national bank or FSA to disclose to the OCC and to STIF participants within five business days after each calendar month-end the following information about the fund: Total assets under management; mark-to-market and amortized cost net asset values; dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity; dollar-weighted average portfolio life maturity as of the last business day of the prior calendar month; and certain other security-level information for each security held.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(J) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt, for STIFs, procedures that require a national bank or FSA that manages a STIF to notify the OCC prior to or within one business day thereafter of certain events.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(K) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt, for STIFs, certain procedures in the event that the STIF has repriced its net asset value below $0.995 per participating interest.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(4)(iii)(L) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that national banks and FSAs adopt, for STIFs, procedures for initiating liquidation of a STIF upon the suspension or limitation of withdrawals as a result of redemptions.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(6)(ii) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require, for CIFs, that national banks and FSAs, at least once during each 12-month period, prepare a financial report of the fund based on the audit required by 12 CFR 9.18(b)(6)(i). The report must disclose the fund's fees and expenses in a manner consistent with applicable state law in the state in which the national bank or FSA maintains the fund and must contain:

    • A list of investments in the fund showing the cost and current market value of each investment;

    • A statement covering the period after the previous report showing the following (organized by type of investment):

    ○ A summary of purchases (with costs);

    ○ A summary of sales (with profit or loss and any investment change);

    ○ Income and disbursements; and

    ○ An appropriate notation of any investments in default.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(b)(6)(iv) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that a national bank or FSA managing a CIF provide a copy of the financial report, or provide notice that a copy of the report is available upon request without charge, to each person who ordinarily would receive a regular periodic accounting with respect to each participating account. The national bank or FSA may provide a copy to prospective customers. In addition, the national bank or FSA must provide a copy of the report upon request to any person for a reasonable charge.

    Twelve CFR 9.18(c)(5) (and 150.260 by cross-reference) require that, for special exemption CIFs, national banks and FSAs must submit to the OCC a written plan that sets forth:

    • The reason the proposed fund requires a special exemption;

    • The provisions of the fund that are inconsistent with 12 CFR 9.18(a) and (b);

    • The provisions of 12 CFR 9.18(b) for which the national bank or FSA seeks an exemption; and

    • The manner in which the proposed fund addresses the rights and interests of participating accounts.

    Type of Review: Regular.

    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 320.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 115,125 hours.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized, included in the request for OMB approval, and become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on:

    (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the OCC, including whether the information has practical utility;

    (b) The accuracy of the OCC's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;

    (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

    (e) Estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

    Dated: November 6, 2018. Theodore J. Dowd, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24612 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Request for Comment; Identity Theft Red Flags and Address Discrepancies Under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 AGENCY:

    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The OCC, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a continuing information collection as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The OCC is soliciting comment concerning the renewal of its information collection titled, “Identity Theft Red Flags and Address Discrepancies under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003.”

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 14, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Commenters are encouraged to submit comments by email, if possible. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected]

    Mail: Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the C