Federal Register Vol. 83, No.222,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 222 (November 16, 2018)

Page Range57671-58174
FR Document

83_FR_222
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 57754 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57752 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57726 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
83 FR 57673 - Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 1245(d)(4)(B) and (C) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012PDF
83 FR 57671 - Delegation of Authorities Under Section 1294 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019PDF
83 FR 57746 - Meeting of the California Desert District Advisory CouncilPDF
83 FR 57746 - Notice of Federal Competitive Coal Lease Sale, Alton Coal Tract, Utah (Coal Lease Application UTU-81895)PDF
83 FR 57739 - Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Tick-Borne Disease Working GroupPDF
83 FR 57725 - Meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory CouncilPDF
83 FR 57704 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Amendment to Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds From Consumer ProductsPDF
83 FR 57734 - Request for Nominations for Individuals and Consumer Organizations for Advisory CommitteesPDF
83 FR 57725 - Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC; Notice of Technical MeetingPDF
83 FR 57724 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
83 FR 57723 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
83 FR 57745 - Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC)PDF
83 FR 57730 - Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval ApplicationsPDF
83 FR 57737 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Comment Request; Information Collection Request Title: MCH Jurisdictional Survey Instrument for the Title V MCH Block Grant Program, OMB No. 0906-XXXX, NewPDF
83 FR 57723 - Procurement List; DeletionsPDF
83 FR 57802 - Notice of OFAC Sanctions ActionsPDF
83 FR 57722 - Procurement List; Proposed Additions and DeletionsPDF
83 FR 57727 - Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Continued Approval of the Community Health Accreditation Partner's Hospice Accreditation ProgramPDF
83 FR 57739 - Findings of Research MisconductPDF
83 FR 57753 - Proposed Revisions to SRP 2.5.3, Surface DeformationPDF
83 FR 57732 - Electronic Submission of Adverse Event Reports to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System Using International Council for Harmonisation E2B(R3) Standards; Public Meetings; Request for CommentsPDF
83 FR 57717 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 41-Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Notification of Proposed Production Activity, Jeneil Biotech, Inc. (Natural Fragrance Intermediates), Saukville, WisconsinPDF
83 FR 57718 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 122-Corpus Christi, Texas; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Gulf Coast Growth Ventures LLC; (Ethylene, Polyethylene and Monoethylene Glycol and Related Co-Products); San Patricio County, TexasPDF
83 FR 57716 - Black Hills National Forest Advisory BoardPDF
83 FR 57715 - Umatilla National Forest, Oregon, Ellis Integrated Vegetation Management ProjectPDF
83 FR 57689 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Snohomish River, Everett, WAPDF
83 FR 57714 - Salmon-Challis National Forest; Idaho; Plan DevelopmentPDF
83 FR 57720 - Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public HearingsPDF
83 FR 57721 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57718 - South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57729 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 57751 - Proposed Revisions to SRPs 2.3.3, Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program; 2.4.6, Tsunami Hazards; and 2.4.9, Channel Migration or DiversionPDF
83 FR 57771 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 57761 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 57762 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 57770 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 57726 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
83 FR 57793 - Notice of Funding Opportunity for the Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair ProgramPDF
83 FR 57792 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
83 FR 57790 - Declaration of Economic Injury; Administrative Declaration of an Economic Injury Disaster for the Commonwealth of MassachusettsPDF
83 FR 57789 - Administrative Declaration of a Disaster for the Commonwealth of PennsylvaniaPDF
83 FR 57789 - Administrative Declaration of a Disaster for the State of New JerseyPDF
83 FR 57693 - Express Loan Programs; Affiliation StandardsPDF
83 FR 57792 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag and Supplemental OperationsPDF
83 FR 57747 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
83 FR 57749 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
83 FR 57767 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's RulesPDF
83 FR 57762 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's RulesPDF
83 FR 57758 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's RulesPDF
83 FR 57771 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's RulesPDF
83 FR 57765 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's RulesPDF
83 FR 57786 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's RulesPDF
83 FR 57786 - Investor Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
83 FR 57754 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
83 FR 57755 - Product Change-Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
83 FR 57755 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
83 FR 57755 - Product Change-First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
83 FR 57717 - Notice of Public Meetings of the Oklahoma Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil RightsPDF
83 FR 57791 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Recording of Aircraft Conveyances and Security DocumentsPDF
83 FR 57721 - Nevada Broadband WorkshopPDF
83 FR 57754 - Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee; Open Committee MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57691 - Olives Grown in California; Establish Procedures To Meet Via Electronic CommunicationsPDF
83 FR 57677 - Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual; CorrectionPDF
83 FR 57747 - Filing of Plats of Survey, Nebraska and WyomingPDF
83 FR 57740 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57743 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57728 - Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 57741 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57743 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 57744 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57742 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57742 - National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 57744 - National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 57675 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Previously Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH) HelicoptersPDF
83 FR 57778 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Granting Approval of Accelerated Delivery of Supplement to the Options Disclosure Document Reflecting the Inclusion of Disclosure Regarding Foreign Currency Index Options and Implied Volatility Index Options, Certain Contract Adjustment Disclosures, and T+2 SettlementPDF
83 FR 57790 - Request for Comments on Negotiating Objectives for a U.S.-United Kingdom Trade AgreementPDF
83 FR 57726 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
83 FR 57755 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Modify its Fee SchedulePDF
83 FR 57783 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Listed Company Manual To Clarify the Application of the Initial Listing Requirements to Common Equity Securities Issued in Exchange for a Listed Equity Investment Tracking StockPDF
83 FR 57780 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice of a Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Block Trade and Exchange of Contract for Related Position Reporting ProvisionsPDF
83 FR 57757 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Correction of Reporting ErrorsPDF
83 FR 57774 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Various Rules To Reflect Changes to The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (“NOM”) ProtocolsPDF
83 FR 57782 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Modify Its Fee SchedulePDF
83 FR 57689 - Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances; WithdrawalPDF
83 FR 57677 - Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations; Clarifying the Exemption for Manufacture of Recreational VehiclesPDF
83 FR 57693 - Military Credit MonitoringPDF
83 FR 57751 - Draft Federal Grants Management Data Standards for FeedbackPDF
83 FR 57705 - Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Regional Fishery Management Council Membership; Financial Disclosure and RecusalPDF
83 FR 57701 - Air Plan Approval; Oklahoma; Interstate Transport Requirements for the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality StandardsPDF
83 FR 57749 - Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), Alaska Region (AK), Beaufort Sea Program Area, Proposed 2019 Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Lease SalePDF
83 FR 58085 - Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory ActionsPDF
83 FR 58045 - Semiannual Agenda of RegulationsPDF
83 FR 58117 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58113 - Regulatory Flexibility AgendaPDF
83 FR 58093 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58091 - Semiannual Agenda of Regulations Under Development or ReviewPDF
83 FR 58089 - Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58031 - Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory ActionsPDF
83 FR 58019 - Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 57997 - Fall 2018 Semiannual Agenda of RegulationsPDF
83 FR 57991 - Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, Fall 2018PDF
83 FR 58077 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58075 - Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory ActionsPDF
83 FR 58071 - Semiannual Agenda and Fiscal Year 2017 Regulatory PlanPDF
83 FR 58051 - Department Regulatory and Deregulatory Agenda; Semiannual SummaryPDF
83 FR 58043 - Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 57803 - Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions-Fall 2018PDF
83 FR 58123 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58129 - Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions-Fall 2018PDF
83 FR 58157 - Semiannual Regulatory Flexibility AgendaPDF
83 FR 58099 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58161 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58163 - Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory ActionsPDF
83 FR 58173 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58167 - Regulatory Flexibility AgendaPDF
83 FR 58079 - Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory ActionsPDF
83 FR 58039 - Semiannual Regulatory AgendaPDF
83 FR 58015 - Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory ActionsPDF

Issue

83 222 Friday, November 16, 2018 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Olives Grown in California: Procedures to Meet Via Electronic Communications, 57691-57693 2018-25006 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Forest Service

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 57992-57996 2018-24141
Architectural Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58076 2018-24093 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58118-58121 2018-24167 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Continued Approval of the Community Health Accreditation Partner's Hospice Accreditation Program, 57727-57728 2018-25066 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 57728-57730 2018-24997 2018-25053 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Oklahoma Advisory Committee, 57717 2018-25011 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Snohomish River, Everett, WA, 57689 2018-25058 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 57998-58013 2018-24146
Committee for Purchase Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58078 2018-24094 NOTICES Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 57722-57723 2018-25067 2018-25069 Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58114-58115 2018-24166 Consumer Product Consumer Product Safety Commission PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58124-58128 2018-24065 Defense Department Defense Department PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58100-58112 2018-23933 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58016-58018 2018-23894
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances; Withdrawal, 57689-57690 2018-24973 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Maryland; Amendment to Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds from Consumer Products, 57704-57705 2018-25078 Oklahoma; Interstate Transport Requirements for the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 57701-57704 2018-24873 Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58080-58084 2018-23914 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Weekly Receipts, 57726 2018-25045 Meetings: National Drinking Water Advisory Council, 57725-57726 2018-25081 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Previously Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH) Helicopters, 57675-57677 2018-24989 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag and Supplemental Operations, 57792 2018-25036 Recording of Aircraft Conveyances and Security Documents, 57791-57792 2018-25009 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58130-58156 2018-24047 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 57726 2018-25184 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 57723-57725 2018-25073 2018-25074 Meetings: Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC, 57725 2018-25075 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 57726-57727 2018-24986 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Funding Opportunites: Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Program, 57793-57802 2018-25044 Petition for Waiver of Compliance, 57792-57793 2018-25043 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58158-58160 2018-23934 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission PROPOSED RULES Military Credit Monitoring, 57693-57701 2018-24940 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Medical Devices: Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval Applications, 57730-57732 2018-25071 Meetings: Electronic Submission of Adverse Event Reports to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System Using International Council for Harmonisation E2B(R3) Standards, 57732-57734 2018-25063 Requests for Nominations: Individuals and Consumer Organizations for Advisory Committees, 57734-57737 2018-25076 Foreign Assets Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties, 57802 2018-25068 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Production Activities: Gulf Coast Growth Ventures, LLC, Foreign-Trade Zone 122, Corpus Christi, TX, 57718 2018-25061 Jeneil Biotech, Inc., Foreign-Trade Zone 41, Milwaukee, WI, 57717-57718 2018-25062 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Charter Renewals: Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board, 57716-57717 2018-25060 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Umatilla National Forest, OR; Ellis Integrated Vegetation Management Project, 57715-57716 2018-25059 Plan Development: Salmon-Challis National Forest; Idaho, 57714 2018-25057 General Services General Services Administration PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58086-58087 2018-24197 Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58100-58112 2018-23933 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Health Resources and Services Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58020-58030 2018-24151 NOTICES Findings of Research Misconduct, 57739 2018-25065 Requests for Nominations: Tick-Borne Disease Working Group, 57739-57740 2018-25082
Health Resources Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: MCH Jurisdictional Survey Instrument for the Title V MCH Block Grant Program, 57737-57739 2018-25070 Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58032-58038 2018-24158
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department RULES Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations; Clarifying the Exemption for Manufacture of Recreational Vehicles, 57677-57689 2018-24950 Interior Interior Department See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Ocean Energy Management Bureau

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58040-58042 2018-23899
Justice Department Justice Department PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58044 2018-24090 Labor Department Labor Department PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58046-58049 2018-24168 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Federal Competitive Coal Lease Sale: Alton Coal Tract, Utah, 57746-57747 2018-25083 Meetings: California Desert District Advisory Council, 57746 2018-25084 Plats of Survey: Nebraska and Wyoming, 57747 2018-25004 Management Management and Budget Office NOTICES Results-Oriented Accountability for Grants Cross-Agency Priority Goal, 57751 2018-24927 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58090 2018-24163 Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58100-58112 2018-23933 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 57740-57744 2018-24992 2018-24993 2018-24994 2018-24999 National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 57744 2018-24990 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 57741-57743 2018-24996 2018-24998 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 57742 2018-24991 National Labor National Labor Relations Board PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58162 2018-23932 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration PROPOSED RULES Regional Fishery Management Council Membership: Financial Disclosure and Recusal, 57705-57713 2018-24905 NOTICES Meetings: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 57721 2018-25055 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 57720-57721 2018-25056 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 57718-57720 2018-25054 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places: Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 57747-57749 2018-25034 2018-25035 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Meetings: Nevada Broadband Workshop, 57721-57722 2018-25008 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58164-58166 2018-23931 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 57752-57753 2018-25209 Proposed Revisions to SRPs 2.3.3, Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program; 2.4.6, Tsunami Hazards; and 2.4.9, Channel Migration or Diversion, 57751-57752 2018-25052 SRP 2.5.3, Surface Deformation, 57753-57754 2018-25064 Ocean Energy Management Ocean Energy Management Bureau NOTICES Oil and Gas Lease Sales: Outer Continental Shelf, Alaska Region, Beaufort Sea Program Area, Proposed 2019 Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Lease Sale, 57749-57751 2018-24739 Overseas Overseas Private Investment Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 57754 2018-25217 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Meetings: Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, 57754 2018-25007 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Changes: First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 57755 2018-25015 Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 57755 2018-25017 Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 57754 2018-25018 Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 57755 2018-25014 2018-25016 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Defense and National Security: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Presidential Determination No. 2019-04 of October 31, 2018), 57673 2018-25157 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019; Delegation of Authorities (Memorandum of October 26, 2018), 57671 2018-25156 Railroad Retirement Railroad Retirement Board PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58092 2018-24164 Regulatory Regulatory Information Service Center PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 57804-57989 2018-24084 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission RULES Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual, 57677 2018-25005 PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58168-58172 2018-23929 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 57761-57762, 57770-57771 2018-25051 2018-25047 2018-25048 2018-25049 Meetings: Investor Advisory Committee, 57786 2018-25019 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc., 57755-57756 2018-24985 Cboe Exchange, Inc., 57782-57783 2018-24980 Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC, 57757-57758, 57780-57782 2018-24982 2018-24983 Nasdaq BX, Inc., 57762-57765 2018-25032 Nasdaq GEMX, LLC, 57771-57774 2018-25030 Nasdaq ISE, LLC, 57786-57789 2018-25028 Nasdaq MRX, LLC, 57765-57767 2018-25029 Nasdaq PHLX LLC, 57767-57770 2018-25033 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 57783-57786 2018-24984 The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, 57758-57761, 57774-57778 2018-24981 2018-25031 The Options Clearing Corp., 57778-57780 2018-24988 Small Business Small Business Administration PROPOSED RULES Express Loan Programs; Affiliation Standards, 57693 2018-25037 Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58094-58097 2018-24165 NOTICES Disaster Declarations: Massachusetts, 57790 2018-25041 New Jersey, 57789 2018-25038 Pennsylvania, 57789 2018-25039 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda: Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, 58174 2018-23930 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES Negotiating Objectives for a U.S.-United Kingdom Trade Agreement, 57790-57791 2018-24987 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58052-58070 2018-24091
Treasury Treasury Department See

Foreign Assets Control Office

PROPOSED RULES Regulatory Agenda Semiannual Regulatory Agenda; Regulatory Plan, 58072-58073 2018-24092
Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Meetings: Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee, 57745-57746 2018-25072 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Regulatory Information Service Center, 57804-57989 2018-24084 Part III Agriculture Department, 57992-57996 2018-24141 Part IV Commerce Department, 57998-58013 2018-24146 Part V Energy Department, 58016-58018 2018-23894 Part VI Health and Human Services Department, 58020-58030 2018-24151 Part VII Homeland Security Department, 58032-58038 2018-24158 Part VIII Interior Department, 58040-58042 2018-23899 Part IX Justice Department, 58044 2018-24090 Part X Labor Department, 58046-58049 2018-24168 Part XI Transportation Department, 58052-58070 2018-24091 Part XII Treasury Department, 58072-58073 2018-24092 Part XIII Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 58076 2018-24093 Part XIV Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 58078 2018-24094 Part XV Environmental Protection Agency, 58080-58084 2018-23914 Part XVI General Services Administration, 58086-58087 2018-24197 Part XVII National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 58090 2018-24163 Part XVIII Railroad Retirement Board, 58092 2018-24164 Part XIX Small Business Administration, 58094-58097 2018-24165 Part XX Defense Department, 58100-58112 2018-23933 General Services Administration, 58100-58112 2018-23933 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 58100-58112 2018-23933 Part XXI Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 58114-58115 2018-24166 Part XXII Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 58118-58121 2018-24167 Part XXIII Consumer Product Safety Commission, 58124-58128 2018-24065 Part XXIV Federal Communications Commission, 58130-58156 2018-24047 Part XXV Federal Reserve System, 58158-58160 2018-23934 Part XXVI National Labor Relations Board, 58162 2018-23932 Part XXVII Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 58164-58166 2018-23931 Part XXVIII Securities and Exchange Commission, 58168-58172 2018-23929 Part XXIX Surface Transportation Board, 58174 2018-23930 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.

83 222 Friday, November 16, 2018 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2013-0446; Product Identifier 2010-SW-007-AD; Amendment 39-19498; AD 2013-21-05R1] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Previously Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH) Helicopters AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are revising Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-21-05 for Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (now Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH) (Airbus Helicopters) Model EC135 P1, P2, P2+, T1, T2, and T2+ helicopters. AD 2013-21-05 required an initial and repetitive inspections of certain bearings and modifying the floor and a rod. Since we issued AD 2013-21-05, we have determined that modifying the floor and rod removes the unsafe condition. This AD retains the requirements of AD 2013-21-05 but removes the repetitive inspections. The actions of this AD are intended to prevent an unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective December 21, 2018.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 5, 2013 (78 FR 65169, October 31, 2013).

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone (972) 641-0000 or (800) 232-0323; fax (972) 641-3775; or at http://www.airbushelicopters.com/website/technical-expert/. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-0446.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2013-0446; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, any incorporated-by-reference information, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5110; email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to remove AD 2013-21-05, Amendment 39-17629 (78 FR 65169, October 31, 2013) (AD 2013-21-05) and add a new AD. AD 2013-21-05 applied to Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (now Airbus Helicopters) Model EC135 P1, P2, P2+, T1, T2, and T2+ helicopters with bearing part number (P/N) LN9367GE6N2; rod P/N L671M5040205; lever P/N L671M5040101; and floor P/N L533M1014101, L533M1014102, L533M1014103, L533M1014104, L533M1014105 or L533M1014106 installed. AD 2013-21-05 required inspecting each bearing for freedom of movement within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 800 hours TIS. AD 2013-21-05 also required modifying the floor and modifying and re-identifying the rod with a new P/N. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 2, 2018 (83 FR 13883). The NPRM was prompted by AD No. 2006-0318R2, dated April 25, 2017, issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, issued to correct an unsafe condition for all Eurocopter Model EC 135 helicopters. EASA determined, based on a review of data and operator feedback, that repetitive inspections are not required for helicopters with the modified rod and floor. EASA accordingly revised its AD to remove the repetitive inspections.

Accordingly, the NPRM proposed to retain the requirements of AD 2013-21-05 but remove the repetitive inspections. The proposed actions were intended to detect and prevent the binding of a bearing, which could lead to loss of helicopter control.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD, but we received no comments on the NPRM.

FAA's Determination

These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of Germany and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with Germany, EASA, its technical representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in its AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs and that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

The EASA AD sets compliance times from its original effective date of October 20, 2006, and this AD does not. This AD requires modifying each rod within 100 hours TIS, rather than within 800 hours TIS as specified in the EASA AD. This AD does not require contacting Eurocopter customer support, unlike the EASA AD. Finally, this AD does not apply to Airbus Helicopters Model EC635 T1, EC635 P2+, and EC635 T2+ helicopters because they have no FAA type certificate.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin EC135-67A-012, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2006 (ASB Rev 1), which specifies repetitively inspecting the bearing of the linear transducer for freedom of movement and the lower side of the floor for chafing or damage. If there is binding, ASB Rev 1 specifies replacing the bearing. If there is chafing or damage on the floor, ASB Rev 1 specifies replacing the bearing and repairing the floor. ASB Rev 1 also specifies modifying and re-identifying a certain rod.

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

Other Related Service Information

We also reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin EC135-67A-012, Revision 2, dated April 3, 2017 (ASB Rev 2). ASB Rev 2 states that the repetitive inspection has been added to the helicopter maintenance manual. The repetitive inspection is therefore removed, and ASB Rev 2 requires no action. ASB Rev 1 is attached to ASB Rev 2 as an Appendix.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 304 helicopters of U.S. Registry and that labor costs average $85 a work hour. We estimate it takes about 10 work-hours to inspect the bearing, and no parts or materials are required, for a cost of $850 per helicopter and $258,400 for the U.S. fleet. If necessary, replacing the bearing requires 3 additional work-hours, and parts cost $50, for a cost of $305 per helicopter. Repairing the floor requires 3 additional work-hours and a minimal cost for materials, for a cost of $255 per helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-21-05, Amendment 39-17629 (78 FR 65169, October 31, 2013), and adding the following new AD: 2013-21-05R1 Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Previously Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH): Amendment 39-19498; Docket No. FAA-2013-0446; Product Identifier 2010-SW-007-AD. (a) Applicability

This AD applies to Model EC135 P1, P2, P2+, T1, T2, and T2+ helicopters, with bearing, part number (P/N) LN9367GE6N2; rod, P/N L671M5040205; lever, P/N L671M5040101; and floor, P/N L533M1014101, L533M1014102, L533M1014103, L533M1014104, L533M1014105 or L533M1014106, installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

This AD defines the unsafe condition as limited control of a tail rotor because of the binding of a bearing. This condition could result in subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

This AD replaces AD 2013-21-05, Amendment 39-17629 (78 FR 65169, October 31, 2013).

(d) Effective Date

This AD becomes effective December 21, 2018.

(e) Compliance

You are responsible for performing each action required by this AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

(1) Within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS), inspect each bearing for freedom of movement by turning and tilting the bearing as depicted in Figure 2 of Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. EC135-67A-012, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2006 (ASB). During any inspection:

(i) If there is binding or rough turning, before further flight, replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing.

(ii) If there is chafing on the lower side of the floor that does not extend through the panel outer layer, before further flight, replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing.

(iii) If there is damage on the lower side of the floor in the area of the assembly opening that extends through the panel outer layer (revealing an open honeycomb cell or layer), before further flight, replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing and repair the floor.

(2) After performing the actions in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (iii) of this AD, before further flight, install a Teflon strip and identify the floor by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.E.(1) through 3.E.(4), of the ASB.

(3) Within 100 hours TIS, modify and re-identify the rod as depicted in Figure 1 of the ASB and by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.H.(1) through 3.H.(3)(f), of the ASB.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5110; email [email protected]

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

(1) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. EC135-67A-012, Revision 2, dated April 3, 2017, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone (972) 641-0000 or (800) 232-0323; fax (972) 641-3775; or at http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/website/en/ref/Technical-Support_73.html. You may review the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

(2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2006-0318R2, dated April 25, 2017. You may view the EASA AD on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov in the AD Docket.

(i) Subject

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6720, Tail Rotor Control System.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

(3) The following service information was approved for IBR on December 5, 2013 (78 FR 65169, October 31, 2013).

(i) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. EC135-67A-012, Revision 1, dated October 18, 2006.

(ii) [Reserved]

(4) For Airbus Helicopters service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone (972) 641-0000 or (800) 232-0323; fax (972) 641-3775; or at http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/website/en/ref/Technical-Support_73.html.

(5) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.

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

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 7, 2018. James A. Grigg, Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-24989 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 232 [Release Nos. 33-10566A; 34-84325A; 39-2522A; IC-33261A] Adoption of Updated EDGAR Filer Manual; Correction AGENCY:

Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY:

The Securities and Exchange Commission published a document in the Federal Register of November 5, 2018 adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual and related rules. There was a mistake in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

DATES:

Effective November 16, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christian Windsor, EDGAR Business Office, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, (202) 551-3419.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In FR Doc. 2018-24128 appearing on page 55264 in the Federal Register of Monday, November 5, 2018, the following corrections are made:

Correction

On page 55264, in the 20th line of the third column, the phrase “(Version 32)” is corrected to read “(Version 31)”.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25005 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Part 3282 [Docket No. FR-5877-F-02] RIN 2502-AJ33 Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations; Clarifying the Exemption for Manufacture of Recreational Vehicles AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rulemaking revises the exemption for the manufacture of recreational vehicles to clarify which recreational vehicles qualify for an exemption from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations. HUD is adopting a recommendation of the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC) but expanding the definition of recreational vehicle and modifying it to require certification with the updated ANSI standard, A119.5-15.

DATES:

Effective Date: January 15, 2019.

Incorporation by Reference: The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January 15, 2019.

Compliance Date: The Manufacturer's Notice requirement under this rule applies to all covered units, beginning with the first unit to leave production on January 15, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Teresa Payne, Acting Administrator, Office of Manufactured Housing Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 9164, Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-402-5216. (This is not a toll-free number.) Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service, toll-free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background A. HUD's Regulatory Authority and the Recreational Vehicle Exemption

The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (the Act) 1 authorizes HUD, through its Office of Manufactured Housing Programs (OMHP), to establish and amend the Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (HUD Code) and the Procedural and Enforcement regulations, codified at 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282, respectively. This authority authorizes HUD to issue and enforce appropriate standards for the construction, design, performance, and installation of manufactured homes—formerly known as mobile homes—to ensure their quality, durability, affordability, and safety.

1See The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, approved August 22, 1974, codified at 42 U.S.C. 5401-5426.

Since the HUD Code's inception in 1976, Recreational Vehicles (RVs) have been largely exempted from the HUD Code. Self-propelled RVs are statutorily exempted, and other classes of RVs over which HUD maintains statutory jurisdiction have been exempted by regulations codified at 24 CFR 3282.8(g).2 Over time, the RV exemption has evolved. Since codifying its regulatory exemption in 1982, HUD has exempted RVs from both HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards at 24 CFR part 3280 and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations at 24 CFR part 3282 if they are: Built on a single chassis; 400 square feet or less when measured at their largest horizontal projections; self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.3 In 1988, HUD issued an interpretative bulletin to clarify the method for measuring a unit to determine whether an RV qualified under the exemption.4 In 1997, HUD also allowed for small lofts to be excluded from the exemption's square footage requirements.5

2See 41 FR 19846 (May 13, 1976).

3See 47 FR 28091, June 29, 1982, codified at 24 CFR 3282.8(g).

4 HUD stated that “measurements shall be taken on the exterior of the home. The square footage includes all siding, corner trim, including storage space, and area enclosed by windows, but not the roofing overhang.” Interpretative Bulletin A-1-88 (Oct. 5, 1988), available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=A188.pdf.

5See Letter from HUD, dated August 1, 1997, available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=loftletter.pdf.

B. The Need for a Broader Exemption

Prior to this rulemaking, the RV exemption was roundly criticized for not drawing a clear enough distinction between RVs, which are designed for temporary, recreational use, and manufactured housing, which is designed for permanent, year-round dwelling. This distinction has become increasingly relevant, because RV manufacturers have begun to produce larger products that include more features, such as porches built on the chassis, and that resemble manufactured homes. These additions have raised questions as to whether these features should be included when measuring according to Interpretive Bulletin A-1-88 for the purposes of exemption. This has increased the confusion over whether HUD should regulate certain RVs because they meet the statutory definition of a manufactured home or whether they should be exempted based on their intended design for temporary, recreational use.6 Subsequently, HUD determined that some manufacturers were producing Park Model Recreational Vehicles (PMRVs, also known as recreational park trailers or RPTs) in excess of the RV exemption's 400-square-foot threshold, which was based on a 1988 HUD Interpretative Bulletin guidance on how to measure a unit. These PMRVs contained screened-in porches built on the chassis and were advertised for all-season use.

6 For example, in November 2012, the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) issued a Standards News Bulletin to its members. Citing past HUD guidance, RVIA announced its position that in measuring the size and calculating the square footage of a Recreation Park Trailer, manufacturers should apply the “shadow rule” to determine what is included in the measurement, and they should not include in their measurement: Roof overhangs, porches, patios, decks, enclosed door entries, or loft areas with a ceiling height of less than 5 feet.

To address this issue, HUD issued memoranda in 2014 and 2015, reiterating the method through which RVs should be measured to qualify for the RV exemption.7 HUD also questioned whether it should exercise regulatory authority over fifth-wheel travel trailers, some of which, because they exceeded the 320 square foot threshold under the statutory definition of “manufactured home,” are subject to HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations. From December 2-4, 2014, the MHCC met and considered HUD's October 1, 2014, memorandum.8 After discussion and debate, the MHCC voted to approve a recommendation that HUD adopt language more clearly differentiating RVs from manufactured housing and simplify its RV exemption.9

7See HUD, RV Exemption Under Manufactured Housing Act, Parts I and II (Oct. 1, 2014 and Jan. 20, 2015), available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=rvmemo12015.pdf.

8See The FACTS: HUD's Manufactured Housing Newsletter (Feb. 2015), available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=mhnewsletter11515.pdf.

9 MHCC proposed the following language: “Recreational vehicles are not subject to this part, part 3280. A recreational vehicle is a factory built vehicular structure designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy, built and certified in accordance with NFPA 1192-2015 or ANSI A119.5-09 consensus standards for recreational vehicles and not certified as a manufactured home.” Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee, MHCC Proposed Changes (Received as of May 31, 2015), 5-6, available at https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=changes53115.pdf.

II. HUD's February 9, 2016, Proposed Rule; Expanding the RV Exemption

HUD issued a proposed rule on February 9, 2016, at 81 FR 6806, to revise the definitions of “Manufactured home” at 24 CFR 3280.2 and “Recreational vehicles” at 24 CFR 3282.8(g), to clarify—and effectively expand—the exemption of RVs from the HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations. The rule proposed to change the definition of RVs by revising the four-part test used to determine whether a structure qualifies for the RV exemption. Specifically, HUD's rule proposed a definition focused on whether or not the structure is certified as a manufactured home and whether it is constructed according to two consensus RV standards: The ANSI A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard and the NFPA 1192-15 Standard on Recreational Vehicles.10 By incorporating by reference the ANSI A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard, HUD's February 9, 2016, proposed rule would have allowed factory-constructed porches to be added to RPTs/PMRVs in excess of the RV exemption's 400 square foot threshold.

10 NFPA 1192-15 is available for review at http://www.nfpa.org/freeaccess. ANSI A119.5-15 is available for review at www.rvia.org/?ESID=A119.

III. HUD's January 26, 2018, Document; Regulatory Review of Manufactured Housing Rules

HUD issued a Federal Register document on January 26, 2018, at 83 FR 3635, entitled “Regulatory Review of Manufactured Housing Rules,” to solicit public comment on all of its current and pending manufactured housing regulatory actions. Consistent with Executive Order 13771, entitled “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” and Executive Order 13777, entitled, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” and as part of the efforts of HUD's Regulatory Reform Task Force, the document informed the public that HUD was reviewing its existing and planned manufactured housing regulatory actions to assess their actual and potential compliance costs and reduce regulatory burden. HUD invited public comment to assist in identifying regulations that may be outmoded, ineffective or excessively burdensome and should be modified, streamlined, replaced or repealed. Of the 156 unique comments that HUD received in response to the document, fewer than 20 referenced the proposed RV rule, and all expressed support for this rulemaking.

This final rule adopts the approach of the proposed rule to reinforce the distinction between manufactured housing, which HUD regulates under its Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations; and other structures, which HUD will exempt from such regulation. The rule takes into consideration the public comments submitted in response to the February 9, 2016, proposed rule and the January 26, 2018, Federal Register document. This final rule provides that the requirements of 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282 do not apply to the manufacture of a “recreational vehicle” as defined by this rule.

IV. Changes Made at the Final Rule Stage

After considering public comments received on the February 9, 2016, proposed rule, and after further review, HUD makes the following changes at the final rule stage.

1. In the final rule, HUD elects not to revise the definition of “manufactured home,” found at 24 CFR 3280.2, to ensure that the regulatory definition of “manufactured home” tracks with its statutory definition.

2. In § 3282.15(b)(1), HUD removes the term “factory built,” in response to public comment. HUD agrees with commenters who stated that some RV manufacturers do not produce their products in a factory, but nevertheless should qualify for the exemption if they meet all other exemption criteria.

3. In § 3282.15(b)(1), HUD adds the term “vehicle” to the definition of a recreational vehicle in response to public comment. HUD agrees with commenters who stated that “vehicle” is also a term of art used by state and local governments in regulating RVs.

4. In § 3282.15(b)(3), HUD makes a technical correction to remove the term “Recreational Park Trailer Standard” and replace it with the term “Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard,” in response to public comment and to reflect the standard's proper title.

5. In § 3282.15(c), HUD makes several changes; to remove the term “Notice” and replace it with the term “Manufacturer's Notice” for clarity; and to specify that in all cases where the exemption is based on the unit being certified to the ANSI A-119.5-15 standard, the Manufacturer's Notice must be provided to the consumer prior to the completion of the sales transaction, as defined in this final rule. Finally, HUD adds a definition of “completion of sales transaction” in this final rule, because the cross-reference to § 3282.252(b), in the proposed rule, was inapplicable.

V. Discussion of Public Comments Submitted on the Proposed Rule and HUD's Responses

The public comment period for the February 9, 2016, proposed rule closed on April 11, 2016. HUD received approximately 5,300 public comments in response to the proposed rule. A wide variety of interested entities submitted comments, including individuals, homeowners' associations, industry groups, state and local governments, and trade associations. At the outset, HUD notes that an overwhelming majority of these public comments were based on a misunderstanding of the proposed rule's intent and legal effect. This misunderstanding was propagated by social media, which opined that the rule was intended to increase regulation and restrict or prohibit consumer use of RVs and other types of housing, such as tiny homes. HUD emphasizes that this rule does not affect the use of RVs by consumers. Rather, this final rule clarifies the exemption for RVs from HUD manufactured housing regulation.

This section of the preamble addresses significant issues raised in the public comments, and organizes them into subject groups, with a description of each group of comments followed by HUD's responses.

A. General Misunderstanding of the Proposed Rule

Comments: Commenters stated that the rule would prohibit full-time RV living. Other commenters stated that the rule implied that HUD would regulate consumer use of RVs. Commenters may have based this conclusion on the proposed definition of “recreational vehicle” that includes a criterion that a RV be designed only for recreational use. The commenters stated that the criterion would deter full-time RV and tiny home living while yielding no safety improvements.

Many commenters stated that individuals have a right to housing choice, including where and how they live, so long as the housing they choose is safe and contains necessities. Some commenters shared current housing trends toward small homes to base their opposition to the rule. Commenters stated that consumers, not HUD, should determine what housing should be acceptable for full-time living. Commenters stated that there is no harm in full-time RV living.

Commenters also stated that many people rely on full-time RV living as an economic necessity, particularly in high-cost areas. Commenters also stated that many people live full-time in RVs, Fifth-Wheel Travel Trailers, or tiny homes, and have been doing so for years, particularly in warm climates.

Some commenters stated that RVs are designed for full-time living and that many RV parks encourage full-time RV living. Commenters also stated that HUD should recognize the many benefits of full-time RV or tiny home living, including but not necessarily limited to: Expanding access to housing or home ownership, especially for people with limited incomes, criminal records, or poor rental histories; homelessness prevention; flexible housing for people who are elderly; ease of evacuation from natural disasters or terrorism; and individual freedom—to live where a person wants, to have pets, to avoid environmental contaminants, to live mortgage-free, to have less to care for, to live frugally, to practice environmental responsibility, or to travel for enjoyment, work, or retirement. Commenters stated that HUD should specifically incorporate language into the rule, stating that full-time living in RVs remains legal. Commenters stated that HUD should not adopt any recommendations from the MHCC, as its agenda is to force people into manufactured homes.

Some commenters stated that because the rule would make it more difficult for full-time RV users to maintain their lifestyle, a host of detrimental secondary effects would result. For example, commenters stated that the rule would worsen homelessness and undermine HUD's mission by limiting the supply of affordable housing in the United States. Commenters stated that this would disproportionately affect, and effectively discriminate against, people who lack financial resources or face economic hardship; e.g., people adapting to worsening economic conditions, people with disabilities, students with significant debt, veterans, senior citizens, and people who must travel for their work (and their employers, including national parks). Commenters stated that this would also disproportionately affect people who live alone and people who want to live frugally or practice environmentally responsible living. Commenters stated that the rule would inhibit people from retiring, reduce people's financial independence, force them into assisted living facilities, and force them to choose between housing and other basic necessities, like food, medicine, and utilities. Commenters stated that the rule would increase burdens already faced by RV residents, including local restrictions on parking, minimum size requirements, and zoning laws. Commenters stated that in response to the rule, manufacturers will merely adjust the square footage of RVs or change their marketing materials.

Commenters stated that the rule dictates the minimum square footage of a home or requires modular homes to be as stable as foundation-built homes. A commenter stated that HUD should not base its RV exemption on Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) certification because doing so would have the effect of excluding most sport utility RV trailers, including toy hauler sport utility RV trailers, RV trailers with garage areas and the large number of RV trailers with generators.

HUD Response: HUD respectfully disagrees with the various fundamental premises and conclusions of these commenters about secondary effects. Initially, as stated in this preamble, HUD is not regulating use of manufactured homes or RVs. More specifically, how individuals decide to use their manufactured home or RV unit after purchase—and, in some cases, after receiving a Manufacturer's Notice about the unit's compliance with RV standards—is beyond the scope of this final rule. The regulation of use and occupancy of RVs is the purview of state and local authorities, not HUD.

Because this rule does not prohibit or regulate the use of manufactured homes or RVs, including tiny homes, the secondary consequences described by certain commenters are moot, and HUD does not believe that there exists a need to address them individually. HUD also states that this rule does not dictate the minimum square footage of a home, nor does it require modular homes to be “as stable” as foundation-built homes. It also does not require manufacturers to obtain RVIA certification to claim the RV exemption. HUD reiterates that when it first codified the RV exemption in 1976, it unequivocally stated that RVs were not designed to be used as permanent dwellings. This final rule does not alter that underlying rationale for the exemption. Moreover, as noted above, both the ANSI and NFPA standard descriptions underscore the need to distinguish RVs from permanent housing.

B. Public Comments in Support of and Against the Rule 1. Comments in Support of the Rule

Comment: Some commenters stated that they agreed with MHCC's recommendations that HUD should not apply HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations to RVs, PMRVs, or Fifth-Wheels, because such structures are vehicles, not manufactured homes, and they are designed and built for temporary recreational or seasonal camping accommodation in accordance with widely accepted national standards. Commenters also stated that HUD has no role regulating vehicles. Some commenters stated that the number of people living full-time in RVs constitute a small minority of RV consumers. Other commenters stated that the rule will positively discourage full-time residential use, protecting consumers and preserving the market for small, single-section manufactured homes.

Some commenters stated that HUD's manufactured home regulations were created to ensure minimum standards of safety, qualify, and affordability in housing designed for permanent residential use—while the market also demanded vehicles for recreational and seasonal use—but that both manufactured homes and RVs evolved and grew larger over time, making it more difficult to distinguish them. Several commenters stated that dwellings should be classified based on their design intent—i.e., whether they are for temporary or permanent use—and not on their size. Some commenters stated that those who live full-time in RVs constitute a small minority of all RV consumers.

Commenters also stated that the MHCC's RV definition is appropriate, insofar as it reflects a broad consensus among stakeholders, regulators, and Congress that regulating RVs is outside the scope of HUD's housing mission and is not contemplated by the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act, and it allows for RVs and manufactured homes to be more easily distinguished. Commenters stated that HUD should not exercise regulatory authority over RVs, because they are already extensively regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation and state motor vehicle and taxing authorities, and if HUD were to regulate them, it would create conflicts. One commenter stated that the rule will beneficially deter future requests for regulatory exemptions by creating an important regulatory firewall between manufactured housing and RVs. Other commenters stated that the rule serves to eliminate regulatory uncertainty and the likelihood of congressional inquiries, and litigation, by more broadly exempting RVs from HUD's regulations.

HUD Response: As stated in the proposed rule, HUD agrees with the MHCC that the RV exemption should be applied based on the manufacturer's design intent, and certification to a consensus-based RV building standard. HUD notes that because some RVs meet the statutory definition of manufactured home, and would otherwise fall within HUD's regulatory jurisdiction, those units require a regulatory exemption to avoid being covered under the Act and regulations.

Comment: Some commenters stated their support for the Manufacturer's Notice requirement, because it serves to protect consumers from an unregulated class of de facto homes by ensuring consumers do not unintentionally purchase homes that are unsafe for full-time living or that are actually less valuable than their retail price. Commenters also stated that the Manufacturer's Notice provides an objective basis for HUD to enforce its regulations in the event of false certifications or misuse of the RV exemption.

HUD Response: HUD welcomes these perspectives and agrees that the Manufacturer's Notice requirement is an important tool for ensuring that consumers are aware to what standard and purpose the units they are purchasing are built.

2. Comments Against the Rule

Comment: Many commenters stated their general opposition to the rule. One commenter stated that rather than revising its RV exemption, HUD should eliminate it entirely. Some commenters stated that the rule is an example of government overreach, overregulation, or waste of resources. Some expressed confusion regarding what problem the rule addressed. Others stated that the rule was based on opinion, lacked sufficient empirical justification, was disingenuous, was not sufficiently considered, or was unclear.

Many commenters stated that the rule was contrary to law or public policy. Some commenters stated that the rule is unconstitutional, e.g., due to federalism concerns or because it amounts to a regulatory taking. Commenters also stated that the rule exceeds HUD's regulatory authority, because only state or local governments should, and already do, regulate use of RVs. Some commenters also stated that the rule violates the Fair Housing Act. For these reasons, some commenters stated that the rule would lead to litigation or consumer claims against RV manufacturers.

Commenters also stated that the rule is vague, e.g., in terms of what constitutes “seasonal” or “permanent” occupancy, and, because of this, it is unenforceable, and it will require HUD to hire people to enforce it. Commenters stated that it was unclear whether the rule applied only to RVs that are permanently placed in a park or campground, or also to those being used to travel the country. Commenters stated that the rule will lead RV parks to evict residents out of fear of legal consequences. Commenters stated that some RV manufacturers have been marketing their products for full-time living. One commenter stated that if HUD will not issue a loan to purchase an RV, then it should not be able to regulate RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should exempt from its manufactured housing regulations altogether individuals who build their own tiny homes.

HUD Response: As explained above, this rule does not regulate the use of manufactured homes or RVs but serves to expand the exemption for RVs, and to provide for a clear way of determining whether RVs that meet the statutory definition of a “manufactured home” are exempt from complying with HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and Procedural and Enforcement regulations. The rule does not address “seasonal” or “permanent” occupancy or distinguish between RVs that are permanently placed in a park or campground and those being used to travel the county. This rule should not be used by RV parks to evict residents out of fear of legal consequences.

HUD's regulation applies to the design and manufacture of manufactured homes and by way of this rulemaking allows for exemption for manufacturers of RVs that meet the exemption criteria. HUD's rule also helps to ensure that consumers are aware of the building standards used to construct the unit and the design purpose of the unit that they purchase. Both reference standards (ANSI A119.5 and NFPA 1192) contain definitions that specify, for both an RV and PMRV, as applicable, that the units are primarily designed to provide temporary living quarters. Both the manufactured housing and RV industries have expressed overwhelming support for this rule.

HUD reiterates that it is issuing this rule well within the bounds of its regulatory authority, and the rule in no way encroaches upon or violates the constitutional rights of individuals, businesses, or states, and nothing in the rule violates any statute, including the Fair Housing Act. HUD additionally notes that the rule could potentially lessen the likelihood of litigation or consumer claims against RV manufacturers, because the Manufacturer's Notice will provide for greater transparency and consumer awareness before transactions are complete.

Moreover, HUD states that the rule provides clear and commonly-used standards by which RVs must be manufactured in order to qualify for the exemption. Any fears regarding secondary market consequences on consumers, RV parks, or insurance or housing financing are both unfounded and well outside the scope of this rulemaking. HUD again stresses that this rule clarifies the existing RV regulatory exemption and does not affect the aforementioned markets.

Comment: A large number of commenters questioned HUD's intent in proposing this rule. Some commenters stated that it was unclear what problem HUD hopes to address with this change. Some commenters stated that HUD should be required to demonstrate that full-time RV living is harmful. Some commenters stated that HUD wants to limit the number of RV dwellings or keep people from living in RVs full-time, e.g., in order to reform trailer parks. Commenters stated that HUD wants to incentivize people to live in public housing or other types of housing to allow the government or industry to profit off poor or elderly people and others. Commenters suggested that the rule might be the result of lobbying by one or more industries that HUD improperly favors, e.g., the mortgage or lending industry, home builders, the manufactured home industry, the RV industry, mobile home manufacturers, PMRV manufacturers, or realtors. Commenters stated that the rule is HUD's attempt to penalize people who pay lower or no property taxes.

HUD Response: As HUD explained in the proposed rule, this rule is appropriate, because exempting RVs from manufactured housing regulations remains sound policy, and clearer standards are needed to further that goal. The rule better differentiates RVs from manufactured homes to ensure that HUD does not unnecessarily regulate RVs. HUD received feedback from the manufactured housing and recreational vehicle industries and the public stating that the existing exemption had been difficult to apply, resulting in some RVs and PMRVs being manufactured in excess of the RV exemption's 400-square-foot threshold because of the addition of porches onto the chassis. As several commenters noted, this rule reflects broad consensus among stakeholders, regulators, and Congress that regulating RVs is outside the scope of HUD's housing mission and not contemplated by the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act; and the revised rule allows for RVs and manufactured homes to be more readily distinguished. The rule does not incentivize public housing, nor is it an attempt to penalize individuals that pay lower or no property taxes. Rather than being directed at individuals, the rule is directed at manufacturers of manufactured housing and RVs.

Comment: Several industry commenters disagreed with HUD's inclusion of a Manufacturer's Notice as part of the RV exception. Some commenters stated their opposition to the Manufacturer's Notice requirement, noting, for example, that the MHCC did not recommend the Manufacturer's Notice, and that the RVIA certifies 95 percent of PMRVs and 98 percent of other RVs, requiring them to contain permanent seals of ANSI and NFPA certification respectively, with the same or similar information. Commenters stated that if HUD lacks regulatory authority over these classes of vehicles, then it should not prescribe or enforce the Manufacturer's Notice requirement, because it would lead to improper regulation beyond the scope of HUD's statutory authority.

Commenters stated that HUD should follow the example of state regulations and incorporate broader references to the ANSI and NFPA standards, e.g., “the latest edition of . . .” rather than specific editions, to avoid having to issue a new rule each time a standard is updated, typically every three years. A commenter stated that HUD's reference to the ANSI standard in § 3282.15(b)(3) should be corrected to read: “. . . or ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard.”

HUD Response: The Manufacturer's Notice requirement was not part of the recreational vehicle definition recommended by MHCC for purposes of revising the RV exemption. However, HUD added the notice requirement as a means of ensuring that consumers are aware of the distinctions among the products available to them on the market. This is especially true because products that qualify for the RV exemption from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations nevertheless still fall under HUD's statutory jurisdiction. HUD retains the reference to specific editions of the ANSI and NFPA standards because it must do so under the Federal Register's rules for incorporation by reference of publications, found at 1 CFR part 51. HUD corrects the reference to ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard in every place where it is mentioned.

HUD acknowledges that the Manufacturer's Notice prescribed by this final rule is similar in content to the one issued by RVIA to its PMRV members; however, it also emphasizes two distinctions. First, HUD's requirement for a Manufacturer's Notice applies to all RVs built and certified to the ANSI A119.5-15 standard and seeking an exemption from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, not just RVs certified by RVIA. Additionally, HUD's Manufacturer's Notice, which is required to be placed more conspicuously than the RVIA seal or made available prior to the completion of the sales transaction, serves to inform consumers directly about the standard to which the prospective unit was built, and the purpose for which it was designed. While the RVIA seal contains similar language, the purposes of the RVIA seal and the Notice are substantially different. RVIA's seal signifies a voluntary certification by an RVIA PMRV member to the ANSI A119.5 standard. The Manufacturer's Notice is specifically designed to ensure that consumers are aware to what standard and purpose their prospective units are built.

Comment: Many commenters stated that the rule will have a detrimental impact on various segments of the market, the economy, industry or consumers. Commenters stated that the rule would make it difficult for people to obtain loans or insurance for RVs. Commenters stated that the rule would drive up RV costs, because manufacturers would need to build them to higher standards for full-time living or obtain additional certifications. Commenters stated that the rule would permit manufacturers to create inferior products and disclaim them with the Manufacturer's Notice prescribed by the rule.

Commenters stated that by deterring full-time RV living, the rule would also have a negative impact on local economies and the United States and state and local tourist industries, particularly in warmer climates. Commenters similarly stated that the rule will have a detrimental impact on various segments of the market, the economy, industry or consumers, including manufacturers, the RV industry, RV parks, campgrounds. Commenters stated that the rule would force people to choose renting over home ownership, which would have the secondary effect of causing rent prices to increase.

HUD Response: As already stated, this rule allows manufacturers to choose the standard(s) to which they produce their products, so that their design intent is properly reflected in the information they provide to consumers, whether the product is manufactured housing designed as a primary residence or permanent dwelling and regulated under HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, or is an RV designed for recreational use, and not as a primary residence or permanent dwelling and exempt from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations by way of its conformance to NFPA or ANSI standards. Because the rule has no impact on consumer use, the question of its impact on the economy, tourism, or the rental market is outside the scope of this rulemaking. The issues HUD seeks to clarify in publishing this rule are to: (1) Identify which manufacturing standards apply to what structures; and (2) enhance consumer knowledge and confidence in their purchases.

Comment: Some commenters stated that the rule would lead state or local governments to adopt changes reflecting HUD's interpretation that RVs are not designed for full-time living, which would ultimately lead them to prohibit full-time RV living. Commenters stated that such entities often incorporate the language of HUD's rule, verbatim, into their laws and ordinances. Commenters stated that the rule will lead HUD and state or local jurisdictions to question the legality of other types of alternative structures, such as tree homes and container homes.

HUD Response: HUD has made it very clear, in this rulemaking and elsewhere, including the HUD website and program materials, that the intent of HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, including the revised RV exemption under this rule, is to regulate the manufacture and installation of manufactured housing and to exempt RVs from such HUD regulation.

C. Comments in Response to HUD's Questions 1. Public Comments in Response to HUD's First Set of Questions

Comment: In response to HUD's first set of questions,11 commenters provided no specific evidence that the rule would result in additional costs to PMRV manufacturers. Commenters further stated that RVIA members produce nearly 95 percent of all PMRVs sold in the United States. Commenters stated that as a condition of membership, RVIA member manufacturers must agree to: (1) Build units in compliance with ANSI A119.5; (2) self-certify compliance with ANSI A119.5; display RVIA's ANSI compliance seal for PMRVs, which states “This park model RV is designed for temporary recreational, camping, or seasonal use. Manufacturer certifies compliance with park model RV standard—ANSI A119.5.” Commenters stated that RVIA conducts 6 or 7 unannounced annual compliance inspections at each member's plant(s). Commenters stated that in 2015, 3,600 PMRV units were manufactured, and while approximately 180 of those may not meet the ANSI A119.5 standard, they nevertheless may still be in compliance, due to state and local building codes and campground regulations. Commenters stated that third-party agencies offer ANSI A119.5 inspections and seals to non-RVIA members and product liability laws strongly favor ANSI A119.5 compliance.

11 What if any costs beyond the Notice requirements for recreational vehicle manufacturers seeking an ANSI A119.5 exception would be imposed on recreational vehicle manufacturers as a result of the implementation of this proposed rule? Are PMRVs that meet HUD's statutory and regulatory definitions of “manufactured homes” currently being constructed outside the scope of ANSI A119.5? If so, how many units are being built? What would be the costs of requiring these manufacturers to build to ANSI A119.5 in order to take advantage of the exemption? Would it be more efficient and advantageous for HUD to exercise direct regulatory oversight over this portion of the industry? What would be the costs and benefits of doing so?

Commenters stated that HUD's Office of Manufactured Housing is charged with regulating the manufactured housing industry, which provides permanent housing, and not the RV industry, which provides temporary accommodations for recreational and seasonal use. Commenters stated that if HUD were to regulate any RVs, it would waste scarce resources appropriated by Congress for the regulation of manufactured housing.

HUD Response: HUD appreciates these comments and believes that they support the final rule in its current form. Consistent with these comments, HUD has decided to clarify the definition of the RV exemption so that PMRVs may take advantage of a clearer and simpler RV exemption if they would otherwise technically fall within the statutory definition of manufactured home.

2. Public Comments in Response to HUD's Second Set of Questions

Comment: In response to HUD's second set of questions,12 commenters stated that HUD should not require certification of RVs built to the NFPA 1192 standard in order to exempt them from HUD's manufactured housing standards. Commenters stated that RV trailer types built to the NFPA 1192 standard, including travel trailers, Fifth-wheels, and folding camping trailers, are vehicles and not manufactured homes. Commenters stated that vehicles should not need certification to escape classification by HUD as housing, especially since well-established law in all 50 states, and the U.S. Department of Transportation, already classify RVs as vehicles and not manufactured homes. Commenters stated that the Manufacturer's Notice requirement would be redundant, because RVIA members comprise 98 percent of the industry, and as a condition of membership, RVIA member manufacturers must agree to: (1) Build units in compliance with NPFA 1192; (2) self-certify compliance with NPFA 1192. Commenters stated that most local and campground regulations require NFPA 1192 compliance.

12 In what manner, if any, should HUD ensure that recreational vehicles conforming to NFPA 1192-2015 be certified to be exempt from the provisions of HUD's Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement Regulations? For example, should HUD require that a Notice of certification be provided in each such recreational vehicle built to NFPA 1192-15 similar to the Notice being proposed for PMRVs or should other methods be considered such as a label to be exempt from HUD's regulations?

HUD Response: HUD appreciates these responses and believes that they support the final rule in its current form. Consistent with these comments, HUD elects not to require a Manufacturer's Notice for RVs to be exempted from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations on the grounds that they are built to the NFPA 1192-15 standard.

3. Public Comments in Response to HUD's Third Set of Questions

Comment: In response to HUD's third set of questions,13 commenters stated that HUD should not regulate Fifth-wheels or any other type of RV. Commenters stated that even deeming a Fifth-wheel camper “not for full-time occupancy” would be inappropriate, because Fifth-wheels are already regulated as vehicles and not as housing. Commenters stated that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the U.S. Department of Transportation, and all 50 states define and regulate Fifth-wheel RVs as motor vehicles, regardless of how long people spend in them, and on the clear understanding that they are not permanent housing. Commenters stated that NHTSA, which administers the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), requires Fifth-wheel manufacturers to register as vehicle manufacturers, and subjects them to the same vehicle recall requirements as cars, trucks, and buses. Commenters stated that states require Fifth-wheel vehicles to comply with maximum vehicle dimensions, titling and registration requirements, taxation, tag statutes, and licensed vehicle manufacturers and dealer requirements. Commenters stated that since HUD last updated the RV definition for purposes of the exemption, most states have increased maximum vehicle widths to 8.5 feet and maximum lengths to more than 45 feet, yielding combination vehicle lengths of more than 65 feet. Commenters stated that Fifth-wheels do not become manufactured homes simply because industry created larger versions of them, nor because states increased the maximum allowable size of vehicles. Commenters stated that regulation of Fifth-wheel trailers or other classes of vehicles is clearly not a logical outgrowth of the proposed rule, because the proposed rule nowhere defines Fifth-wheel trailers; nor does it offer any justification or cost-benefit analysis relating to regulation of Fifth-wheel trailers as housing; nor does it describe or detail specific regulations that would apply to Fifth-wheel trailers; nor does it offer any rationale for treating Fifth-wheel trailers differently from other RVs. Commenters stated that if HUD were to regulate Fifth-wheel trailers, it would be an example of mission creep or “bait-and-switch.” One commenter, on the contrary, stated that Fifth-wheel trailers should be distinguished, because they are recreational camp trailers and not RVs.

13 As described in the preamble to this proposed rule, HUD has not exercised regulatory oversight over Fifth Wheel Recreational Vehicles that might meet the statutory and regulatory definitions of “manufactured home.” This proposed rule proposes to except Fifth Wheel Recreational Vehicles from regulatory oversight. Should HUD take a different approach and begin exercising regulatory oversight of these units that meet the statutory and regulatory definitions of “manufactured home?” What are the costs and benefits of bringing these units within HUD oversight? Should HUD exercise any regulatory authority over Fifth Wheelers or other forms of recreational vehicles?

HUD Response: HUD appreciates these responses and believes that they support the final rule in its current form. Consistent with these comments, HUD elects not to exercise direct regulatory oversight over Fifth-wheel trailers and instead to allow them to take advantage of a bright-line RV exemption if they would otherwise technically fall within the statutory definition of manufactured home.

D. Public Comments Offering Recommendations

Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should affirmatively state in the rule that it does not regulate RVs and revise the regulatory text and preamble to state that HUD's definition of RV is for the express purpose of exempting RVs from manufactured home requirements and, in effect, any regulation by HUD. Commenters stated that HUD should make explicit that its Office of Manufactured Housing Programs has no authority to regulate consumer use of RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should affirmatively specify that RVs may be used as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy. Commenters stated that HUD should specifically define RVs as permanent dwellings. Commenters stated that HUD should make explicit that the rule is not intended and should not be interpreted to involve HUD in the regulation of consumer use, particularly if HUD's intent is only to develop and enforce manufactured housing standards. Commenters stated that HUD should state that the rule cannot be used by any entity to impede people from living in small dwellings, whether RVs or not. A commenter stated that HUD should not regulate any structure that can hitch up to a pickup truck or be driven independently. Commenters stated that HUD should focus on the issue of RVs exceeding 400 square feet, e.g., by ensuring that patio roofs, screened-in porches, and other outdoor areas or slide-outs are not counted as living space or by increasing the RV exemption size to 460 square feet. Commenters stated that if HUD requires a sharper distinction between RVs and manufactured homes, it should clarify differences between foundations and leveling techniques, e.g., if a home has wheels, it should be classified as a vehicle, and if has a foundation, it should be classified as a manufactured home. Some commenters stated that dwelling classification should only be done by local authorities, and it should take into account differences in local climates. Some commenters stated that dwellings should be classified based on square footage per inhabitant. Some commenters stated that if the problem with RVs is poor construction, then HUD should set guidelines and conduct inspections, e.g., regulate the RV industry more, and not less.

Commenters stated that HUD should not include in the definition of “recreational vehicle” that it is a non-permanent dwelling or otherwise reference the duration a user dwells within an RV. Commenters stated that HUD should specifically strike from its RV definition at 24 CFR 3282.15(b)(2): Subparagraph (2) in its entirety, or “. . . only for recreational use . . .” or “. . . Designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy . . .” 14 Commenters stated that HUD should clarify the rule's effects on all structures, including RVs, mobile homes, mobile trailers, mobile tiny homes, and fixed tiny homes less than 400 square feet in size. Commenters stated that HUD should better distinguish PMRVs from other classes of RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should require PMRVs to meet standards rather than be exempted from them. Commenters stated that HUD should use frequency of moves, or movability, to distinguish RVs from manufactured housing. A commenter stated that HUD should specifically exempt RVs that remain stationary for seven or fewer consecutive months, regardless of whether an individual resides in them full-time.

14 24 CFR 3282.15(b) reads in part: “Definition. A Recreational Vehicle is: . . . (2) Designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy . . .” 

HUD Response: As stated above, HUD takes the opportunity in this final rule to emphasize that while it possesses statutory authority to regulate the manufacture of certain RVs that meet the statutory definition of manufactured home, it nevertheless believes that exercising such authority is currently unnecessary. HUD believes that the non-permanent design intent of RVs favors that they be exempt from such regulation, even in cases where they fall within the statutory definition of “manufactured home.” Accordingly, HUD takes this opportunity to state that while it possesses statutory authority to regulate the manufacture of certain types of RV, it declines to do so by clarifying—and effectively broadening—the RV exemption and by requiring PMRV manufacturers claiming the exemption to notify consumers as to the standards their unit is built to, as well as the unit's design and appropriate use. HUD also believes it would be inappropriate to use other criteria recommended by commenters, such as movability, to distinguish exempted RVs from regulated manufactured homes. Because ANSI A119.5-15 sets forth a maximum size of 400 square feet, excluding porches, size will continue to be a factor in defining the exemption for a Park Model RV. HUD reiterates that its goal is to establish a broad, easily applied exemption for purposes of its own regulatory activities. HUD maintains statutory jurisdiction over the manufacture and installation of all structures falling within the statutory definition of “manufactured home,” but it elects not to regulate all structures that qualify for the RV exemption. However, HUD's OMHP will continue to regulate those structures that do not qualify for the RV exemption from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations. As stated above, HUD has no authority to dictate how its rule is used by other entities, including state and local governments, to formulate or interpret their own rules.

Comment: Some commenters recommended that HUD amend the definition of “recreational vehicle” in order to exempt recreational vehicles beyond those that are factory-built.

HUD Response: HUD appreciates these comments and upon further consideration agrees that some non-factory-built RVs should qualify for the exemption, if they were manufactured in non-factory facilities and still meet all of the remaining exemption requirements. Accordingly, HUD removes the term “factory built” from the definition of “recreational vehicle.”

Comment: Commenters stated that for accuracy and clarity, HUD should amend the definition of “recreational vehicle” by substituting the word “vehicle” for “vehicular structure,” on the grounds that states and municipalities classify RVs as vehicles—and RV manufacturers and dealers as “vehicle” manufacturers and dealers—for purposes of regulation and taxation.

HUD Response: HUD appreciates these comments and agrees that “vehicle” is an equally appropriate and widely-recognized term. Accordingly, HUD is including both the terms “vehicle” and “vehicular structure” in the definition of a “recreational vehicle.”

Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should make null and void existing manufactured housing regulations for snow load and roof slope.

HUD Response: This comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking.

Comment: Commenters stated that it was unclear whether the rule applied only prospectively, or also retrospectively. Commenters stated that HUD should “grandfather” older products or have a delayed compliance date of two years after this rule's publication.

HUD Response: Because this rulemaking only affects the manufacture of RVs, providing a clause “grandfathering” older products would have no effect. Similarly, because the only new requirement imposed by the rule is the inclusion of a printed Manufacturer's Notice in certain units, HUD finds that there is no need for a delayed compliance date. As HUD states in the preamble, the Manufacturer's Notice requirement under this rule applies to all covered units, beginning with the first unit to leave production on the 60-day effective date. This provides manufacturers with sufficient notice to identify which units require the Manufacturer's Notice and include the Notice in those units prior to their leaving production.

Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should disclose all who participated in the formulation of the proposed rule.

HUD Response: As discussed above, HUD formulated its proposed rule based on a recommendation by the Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee (MHCC). MHCC members are appointed by the HUD Secretary based on selection procedures published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or successor organization as modified by the Act. The MHCC has 21 members at any given time, with seven members in each of the following categories: (1) Producers or retailers of manufactured housing; (2) users, representing consumer interests, such as consumer organizations, recognized consumer leaders, and owners who are residents of manufactured homes; and (3) general interest and public official members, three of whom must be public officials. All MHCC meetings are announced in the Federal Register and are open to the public. In this final rulemaking, HUD further takes into account public comment received on the proposed rule.

E. Public Comments Regarding Other Issues

“Tiny home,” while not formally defined, generally refers to a type of home that is compact (usually below 400 square feet), on wheels, and intended for permanent residence. These tiny homes are gaining popularity even though most are built by do-it-yourself builders and do not conform to any established building code or construction standard for safety. The majority of these homes are built and occupied in ways that do not meet construction standards for recreational vehicles (RVs), which are designed for use as temporary living quarters for non-commercial, recreational and/or camping use. They also do not meet construction standards for a manufactured home, which is a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which in the traveling mode is 8 body feet or more in width or 40 body feet or more in length or which when erected on-site is 320 or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained in the structure “except that such terms shall include any structure which meets all the requirements of this paragraph except the size requirements and with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the Secretary and complies with the standards established under this title.” 42 U.S.C. Section 5402(6). Sizes of tiny homes can range from around 80-500 square feet in floor area.

Comment: Commenters stated that HUD should investigate and support the burgeoning “tiny home” movement, especially as a potential solution to the problem of homelessness. Commenters stated that tiny homes should not be classified as RVs, and HUD should better distinguish tiny homes from RVs. Commenters stated that HUD should set standards for or regulate tiny homes, even if they fall outside the current scope of regulation for manufactured housing or do not fall within the RV exemption. Commenters stated that HUD should define tiny homes as permanent dwellings. Commenters stated that HUD should regulate tiny homes as manufactured housing. Commenters stated that MHCC should define tiny homes as manufactured homes.

One commenter stated that HUD should broaden the definition of manufactured housing to include tiny homes, including those that are under 400 square feet, those that are built by manufacturers, and those that are built by so-called “do-it-your-selfers,” assuming that they meet or exceed ANSI standards, other than square footage, and are built on a trailer frame, a foundation, a boat, or piers. Commenters stated that such tiny homes are fit for year-round use, and should be recognized as such, particularly if they are insulated and include heating and cooling systems. Commenters stated that HUD regulation of tiny homes would make it easier for states and municipalities to recognize tiny homes as legitimate year-round, permanent dwellings, and it would make it easier for tiny house owners to obtain insurance policies.

Commenters stated that there are currently no safety, construction, or energy efficiency standards specifically and uniformly being applied to tiny homes. Commenters stated that the National Organization of Alternative Housing (NOAH) already encourages the tiny home industry to self-regulate using various standards, e.g., National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NTSHA), NFPA 1192-2015, NFPA 70/National Electrical Code (NEC), and American Tiny House Association (ATHA). Commenters stated that tiny homes are designed more for full-time or permanent living than RVs, that they are often built to code with durable materials, that they typically exceed RV standards like ANSI and NFPA, that they are typically smaller than manufactured homes, e.g., less than 250 square feet, and that they have their own standards. One commenter cited to NOAH as one viable standard. Commenters stated that cities like Austin, Texas, Nashville, Tennessee, Olympia, Washington, Ithaca, New York, and Portland, Oregon, use tiny homes as an important tool to combat homelessness, e.g., by establishing tiny home shelters.

A commenter stated that HUD should create a new and separate exemption for tiny homes, to define them in a fashion similar to the definition of RV under the prior exemption at 24 CFR 3282.8; e.g., with a maximum dimension of between 240 and 320 square feet, built on a single chassis, and permanently towable by a light-duty truck. The commenter stated that most tiny homes are no larger than 28 by 8 feet and built on a single chassis. The commenter stated that this exemption would not apply to larger PMRVs, but it would provide a safe harbor for innovation. The commenter stated that the proposed rule's reliance on permanent versus recreational design intent is unnecessarily vague and discourages the use of energy-efficient insulation.

HUD Response: As stated above, HUD currently regulates as manufactured housing only those structures that are built on a permanent chassis and that “in traveling mode, [are] eight body feet or more in width or forty body feet or more in length or, when erected on site, [are] three hundred twenty or more square feet.” Accordingly, HUD lacks jurisdiction to regulate any tiny home that is less than eight body feet in width, 40 body feet in length, or 320 square feet, or any tiny home that is built on a foundation without a permanent chassis. While this statutorily precludes HUD from regulating many tiny homes, manufacturers can voluntarily opt-in to regulation by HUD (See 42 U.S.C. 5402(6)).

That said, HUD is considering whether it should develop Federal Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards to allow manufactured homes with reduced dimensions and design requirements to be built to a national preemptive HUD standard. Additionally, the International Code Council (ICC) has recently considered a “tiny house appendix,” which is incorporated into the 2018 International Residential Code. HUD will consider other appropriate measures, including potential rulemaking related to tiny homes, as it receives new information.

Comment: Many commenters stated their concern that the rule could have negative consequences for the tiny home community. Commenters stated that the rule would have the effect of banning tiny homes. Commenters stated that HUD should not regulate tiny homes at all. Commenters stated that by requiring compliance with either ANSI/NFPA standards or HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, HUD would extinguish the community of small-scale hobbyist and small-business builders of tiny homes, which would in turn kill innovation in construction and manufacturing—particularly given that the exemption as stated in the proposed rule only applies to factory-built structures. Commenters stated that by restricting the tiny home movement, the rule would allow other countries to gain tiny home advantages over the United States.

HUD Response: As already discussed, it is neither HUD's intention nor goal with this rule to regulate temporary, recreational structures in the form of RVs. At the same time, HUD is cognizant of the increased popularity of so-called “tiny homes,” many of which are purported to be built to the ANSI A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle standard. HUD believes that consumers should be fully aware of the construction standard used to build a particular product at the time of purchase. If a tiny home is a “manufactured home” as defined by statute, then it can be regulated as manufactured housing, unless it also falls within HUD's regulatory exemption for recreational vehicles as provided by this final rule. If a tiny home is not a “manufactured home” as defined by statute, then HUD does not have authority to regulate its construction under its Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations. It is also important that the general public be aware that HUD regulates manufacturers of manufactured homes, as defined by statute.

VI. Incorporation by Reference

This rulemaking incorporates by reference ANSI A119.5-15 and NFPA 1192-15 consensus standards for Recreational Vehicles. The Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) sponsors and is accredited to manage the ANSI A119.5 Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard, which is designed specifically for PMRVs. According to the RVIA, “[m]embers of the engineering profession and others associated with the design, manufacture, and inspection of Park Model Recreational Vehicles have been aware of the need for a standard providing for healthful and safe, portable, seasonal housing, arranged and equipped to assure suitable living conditions. They have also recognized that because of conditions of transport, size, and use, existing standards for permanent buildings and recreational vehicles are not completely applicable to Park Model RVs. It is with these factors in mind that this standard has been developed.” 15 Specifically, the ANSI A119.5-15 standard covers fire and life safety criteria and plumbing for PMRVs considered necessary to provide a reasonable level of protection from loss of life from fire and explosion.

15See RVIA, Standard for Park Model Recreational Vehicles, http://www.rvia.org/UniPop.cfm?v=2&OID=6772&CC=7040.

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) develops and maintains the NFPA 1192 Standard on Recreational Vehicles. According to NFPA, “Those members of the engineering profession and others associated with the design, manufacturing, and inspection of recreational vehicles have been aware of the need for uniform technical standards leading to the proper use of this special type of equipment. They also have recognized that, because of conditions of transport, size, and use, existing standards for motor vehicles or permanent buildings are not completely applicable to recreational vehicles.” 16 The NFPA 1192-15 standard provides the minimum construction standards considered necessary to protect against loss of life from fire and explosion for non-Park Model Recreational Vehicles.

16See http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards?mode=code&code=1192.

Incorporated standards have the same force and effect as 24 CFR part 3282, except that whenever reference standards and 24 CFR part 3282 are inconsistent, the requirements of 24 CFR part 3282 prevail to the extent of the inconsistency. The Department will enforce the listed editions of incorporated material. Where two or more incorporated standards are equivalent in application, the manufacturer may use either standard.

HUD has worked with both organizations to ensure that both ANSI A119.5-15 and NFPA 1192-15 are available via read-only, electronic access. NFPA 1192-15 is available at http://www.nfpa.org/freeaccess. ANSI A119.5-15 is available for review at www.rvia.org/?ESID=A119. Additionally, interested parties have access to the standards through their normal course of business.

VII. Findings and Certifications Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), a determination must be made whether a regulatory action is significant and, therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the order. Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review) directs executive agencies to analyze regulations that are outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal them in accordance with what has been learned. Executive Order 13563 also directs that, where relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives, and to the extent permitted by law, agencies are to identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public.

This rule is a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and was formally reviewed by the OMB. This rule revises the definition of recreational vehicle to clarify the types of recreational vehicles exempted from 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282. In the past, both consumers and manufacturers of recreational vehicles have questioned whether certain recreational vehicles are subject to HUD's Construction and Safety Standards, codified in 24 CFR part 3280 (the HUD Code), and HUD's Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations, codified in 24 CFR part 3282. This rule will provide that a recreational vehicle is exempted from HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards and its Manufactured Home Procedural and Enforcement regulations if the unit is built in conformance with either NFPA 1192-15, Standard on Recreational Vehicles, or ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard.

Executive Order 13771 and Executive Order 13777

Under the leadership of Secretary Carson, HUD has undertaken an effort, consistent with Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339), entitled “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” to identify and eliminate or streamline regulations that are wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary. In furtherance of this objective, the Secretary has also led HUD's implementation of Executive Order 13777 (82 FR 12285), entitled “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda.” Executive Order 13777 reaffirms the rulemaking principles of Executive Order 13771 by directing each agency to establish a Regulatory Reform Task Force to evaluate existing regulations to identify those that merit repeal, replacement, modification, are outdated, unnecessary, or are ineffective, eliminate or inhibit job creation, impose costs that exceed benefits, or derive from or implement Executive Orders that have been rescinded or significantly modified. This final rule is considered an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in the rule's economic analysis.

Summary of Benefits and Costs of Final Rule Exemption Criteria

Under this rule, self-propelled RVs qualify for the RV exemption, insofar as they meet all three RV exemption criteria by definition. For towable RVs, however, the standard for the RV exemption is clarified to provide that the RV must be designed, built, and certified in accordance with one of two national standards: NFPA 1192-15, Standard for Recreational Vehicles; or ANSI A119.5-15, Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard. These standards are already being used by the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) in its standards, inspection, and self-certification process. HUD concludes that the exemption criteria for towable RVs impose negligible costs on the market of RV manufacturers and consumers.

As far as benefits of the new exemption criteria on the market are concerned, the rule provides regulatory clarity to both RV manufacturers and consumers. HUD's Office of Manufactured Housing receives approximately 4-6 complaints per year on the topic of RVs. In reviewing these complaints, HUD has determined that some come from manufacturers questioning whether a competitor's RV product is exempt from HUD's manufactured housing regulations. These manufacturers may be unsure of the scope of the exemption and feel that the RV in question meets the statutory definition of manufactured housing and does not satisfy the existing RV exemption. Complaints also have been submitted by consumers, who experience difficulty in determining whether their RVs meet the statutory definition of manufactured housing and are suitable for full-time living. This final rule provides both manufacturers and consumers additional clarity to make informed decisions without additional help from HUD.

Manufacturer's Notice

The Manufacturer's Notice, required for an ANSI-certified PMRVs to be exempt from HUD manufactured housing regulation, imposes a negligible or nonexistent burden on industry and provides informational benefit to consumers. RVIA already requires a seal to be affixed to PMRVs meeting the ANSI standard. RVIA's own statement in support of this rule indicates that there will be no additional cost as a result of this notice. RVIA's current seal does not satisfy HUD's standard for the Manufacturer's Notice, however, which provides specific requirements regarding the content and prominence of the notice and which requires the notice to be prominently displayed in the unit and delivered to the consumer before the sale transaction is complete, regardless of whether the transaction occurs online or in person.

Nevertheless, HUD's Manufacturer's Notice requirement is not burdensome. A PMRV manufacturer could satisfy this requirement with at most two printed sheets of paper per PMRV: One in the kitchen, and one delivered to the consumer before the transaction. These sheets could be identical for every PMRV and would not need to be modified between sales. In the case of an online transaction, the seller could deliver the notice to the purchaser by email or include the notice as a document in the transaction process and leave the notice in the kitchen.

RVIA data show that about 4,000 PMRVs are sold each year by 22 manufacturers. The costs of ensuring that a notice is printed, included within a sales packet, and left in the PMRV kitchen are negligible. A simple calculation is that 22 quality managers, one at each PMRV manufacturer, will prepare a manufacturer's notice and include it in their manufacturer information and sales packet, spending up to one hour in the process. A Bureau of Labor Statistics estimate for a quality manager (Managers—All other) mean wage is $54.41 as of May 2017. A loaded wage may be double that. In this scenario, 22 quality managers might incur a cost of $2,394, if this task took them a full hour each year. Printing 8,000 sheets of paper at $0.10 each, a conservative estimate, would yield an additional cost of $800.

Conclusion

This rule can be considered deregulatory, as it imposes only de minimis new costs and creates potential cost savings for consumers and manufacturers by providing additional clarity to inform production and purchasing of RVs. In practice, HUD has not exercised regulatory oversight over RV manufacturers and only seeks to update its regulations to conform to its existing practices. The new exemption criteria are less exacting than the existing criteria, and possibly than industry self-regulation as well. The requirement for a Manufacturer's Notice in the case of PMRVs comes at negligible cost, estimated conservatively at less than $4,000 per year for the entire RV industry. This cost will be easily outweighed by the regulatory clarity that the exemption provides to the RV industry and consumers.

Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. It is HUD's position that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

This rule is intended to clarify and effectively expand the RV exemption and ensure that RV manufacturers have a clear understanding of which units qualify to be exempt. In addition to benefiting the consumer by providing clarity regarding the manufactured housing standards used to construct the unit, this rule would reduce the paperwork burden and costs of construction delays on RV manufacturers.

As noted above, there are 22 manufacturers. The small business size standard is 1,000 employees for NAICS Code 336211. Pursuant to the small business size standard, 14 of the 22 manufacturers are small. The final rule would apply to all of them. However, the economic impact will not be significant. This rule's notice requirement, the Manufacturer's Notice in question, may be produced and displayed within a unit at $1.00 expense for each unit to the manufacturer. The average small business will need to prepare an estimated 300 notices per year. As such, a small business may incur $150 in additional costs. Easing the process for RV certification assists manufacturers, while the Manufacturer's Notice requirement supports achievement of the goal of ensuring a clear distinction between RV structures and residential manufactured housing. Accordingly, the undersigned certifies that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. This rule does not impose any federal mandates on any state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector within the meaning of the UMRA.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements contained in this regulation have been approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned OMB Control Number 2502-NEW. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number.

In its proposed rule, HUD estimated the burden of information collection in the rule and solicited public comments on that estimate. HUD received several public comments regarding the information collection estimate. One comment stated that HUD's proposed information collection was accurate and necessary to carry out the purposes of the proposed rule. Several others, as part of a letter writing campaign, stated that HUD's proposed collection would not enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected. HUD considered the comments and concludes that the Manufacturer's Notice provides important information to prospective purchases of Park Model RVs that may otherwise be uninformed about the design of Park Model RVs for recreational use and temporary occupancy. HUD did not receive any comments from OMB. In this final rule, HUD is updating its information collection analysis based on current RV industry data. Specifically, HUD has confirmed that the number of RV manufacturers that build and ship Park Model RV's, in accordance with ANSI-A119.5-15, total approximately 22 manufacturers. HUD has also updated the burden estimate necessary for each affected manufacturer to provide 2 copies of the manufacturer's notice (see § 3282.15(c)).

Environmental Impact

A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the environment was made at the proposed rule stage in accordance with HUD regulations in 24 CFR part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). That FONSI remains applicable to this final rule and is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the Regulations Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, please schedule an appointment to review the FONSI by calling the Regulations Division at 202-402-3055 (this is not a toll-free number).

Federalism Impact

Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either (1) imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments and is not required by statute, or (2) the rule preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order. This rule does not have federalism implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments or preempt state law within the meaning of the Executive Order.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for the Manufactured Housing Program is 14.171.

List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 3282

Administrative practice and procedure, Consumer protection, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Investigations, Manufactured homes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, HUD amends part 3282 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 3282—MANUFACTURED HOME PROCEDURAL AND ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 3282 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

28 U.S.C. 2461; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 5403, and 5424.

§ 3282.8 [Amended]
2. In § 3282.8, remove and reserve paragraph (g). 3. Add § 3282.15 to subpart A to read as follows:
§ 3282.15 Exemption for recreational vehicles

(a) Exemption. A recreational vehicle that meets the requirements of this section is exempt from 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282.

(b) Definition. A recreational vehicle is:

(1) A vehicle or vehicular structure not certified as a manufactured home;

(2) Designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy; and is either:

(i) Built and certified in accordance with either NFPA 1192 (incorporated by reference, see § 3282.16) or ANSI A119.5 (incorporated by reference, see § 3282.16) as provided by paragraph (c) of this section; or

(ii) Any vehicle which is self-propelled.

(c) Notice and certification requirements. In order for the exemption to apply to an ANSI A119.5-15 certified recreational vehicle, a Manufacturer's Notice must be delivered to the consumer prior to the completion of the sales transaction. The Manufacturer's Notice must also be prominently displayed in a temporary manner in the kitchen (i.e., countertop or exposed cabinet face). The Manufacturer's Notice must meet the following requirements:

(1) Title of Manufacturer's Notice. The title of the Manufacturer's Notice shall be “*****MANUFACTURER'S NOTICE*****” which shall be legible and typed using bold letters at least 1 inch in size.

(2) Content of Notice. The content of the Manufacturer's Notice text shall be as follows:

The Manufacturer of this unit certifies that it is a Park Model Recreational Vehicle designed only for recreational use, and not for use as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy. The manufacturer of this unit further certifies that this unit has been built in accordance with the ANSI A119.5-15 consensus standard for Park Model Recreational Vehicles.

(3) Text of Notice. The text of the Manufacturer's Notice, aside from the Manufacturer's Notice's title shall be legible and typed using letters at least 1/2 inch in size.

(4) Removal of Manufacturer's Notice. The Manufacturer's Notice shall not be removed by any party until the entire sales transaction has been completed.

(5) Completion of sales transaction. A sales transaction with a Park Model Recreational Vehicle purchaser is considered completed when all the goods and services that the dealer agreed to provide at the time the contract was formed have been provided. Completion of a retail sale will be at the time the dealer completes installation of the Park Model Recreational Vehicle, if the dealer has agreed to provide the installation, or at the time the dealer delivers the recreational vehicle to a transporter, if the dealer has not agreed to transport or install the Park Model Recreational Vehicle. The sale is also complete upon delivery to the site if the dealer has not agreed to provide installation as completion of sale.

4. Add § 3282.16 to subpart A to read as follows:
§ 3282.16 Incorporation by reference

(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, the Department must publish a document in the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the Office of Manufactured Housing Programs, Manufactured Housing and Construction Standards Division, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room B-133, Washington, DC 20410, 202-402-5216, and is available from the sources listed below. Copies of incorporated standards that are not available from their producer organizations may be obtained from the Office of Manufactured Housing Programs. These standards are also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For more information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

(b) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169, telephone number 800-344-3555, website http://www.nfpa.org.

(1) NFPA 1192, Standard on Recreational Vehicles, 2015 Edition, issued August 14, 2014, IBR approved for § 3282.15(b).

(2) [Reserved]

(c) Recreational Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA), 1896 Preston White Drive, Reston, VA 20191, telephone number 703-620-6003, website http://www.rvia.org.

(1) ANSI A119.5: Park Model Recreational Vehicle Standard, 2015 Edition, ANSI-approved April 7, 2015, IBR approved for § 3282.15(b).

(2) [Reserved]

Dated: November 8, 2018. Brian D. Montgomery, Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2018-24950 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2018-1028] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Snohomish River, Everett, WA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) Railroad Bridge (BNSF Bridge 37.0) across the Snohomish River, mile 3.5 near Everett, WA. The deviation is necessary to accommodate scheduled replacement of bridge ties across the swing span replacement. The deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 11 a.m. on November 26, 2018 to 3 p.m. on December 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-1028 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email the Bridge Administrator, Coast Guard Thirteenth District; telephone 206-220-7282 email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

BNSF has requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule for the BNSF Bridge 37.0, mile 3.5, across the Snohomish River, near Everett, WA. BNSF requested for BNSF Bridge 37.0 be allowed to remain in the closed-to-navigation position for swing span maintenance. This maintenance will improve the reliability of the bridge for marine openings. The normal operating schedule for the subject bridge is in 33 CFR 117.5. BNSF Bridge 37.0 is a swing bridge and provides 9 feet of vertical clearance above mean high water elevation while in the closed-to-navigation position.

This deviation allows the BNSF Bridge 37.0 to remain in the closed-to-navigation position, and need not open for maritime traffic from 11 a.m. on November 26, 2018 to 3 p.m. on December 14, 2018 per the table below:

From time/date To time/date Span position 11 a.m./Nov 26, 2018 3 p.m./Nov 30, 2018 Closed. 11 a.m./Dec 3, 2018 3 p.m./Dec 7, 2018 Closed. 11 a.m./Dec 10, 2018 3 p.m./Dec 14, 2018 Closed.

The bridge shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.5 at all other times. Vessels able to pass through the subject bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridge will be required to open, if needed, for vessels engaged in emergency response operations during this closure period.

Waterway usage on this part of the Snohomish River includes tug and barge to small pleasure craft. The BNSF Bridge 37.0 receives an average number of three opening request during this time of year. BNSF has coordinated with Snohomish River users that frequently request bridge openings during this time of year. An alternate route for vessels to pass is available through Steamboat Slough to the north. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridges must return to their regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2018-25058 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 9 and 721 [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0567; FRL-9986-15] RIN 2070-AB27 Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances; Withdrawal AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Withdrawal of direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

EPA is withdrawing significant new use rules (SNURs) promulgated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 28 chemical substances, which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). EPA published these SNURs using direct final rulemaking procedures, which requires EPA to take certain actions if an adverse comment is received. EPA received adverse comments and a request to extend the comment period regarding the SNURs identified in the direct final rule. Therefore, the Agency is withdrawing the direct final rule SNURs identified in this document, as required under the direct final rulemaking procedures.

DATES:

The direct final rule published at 83 FR 47004 on September 17, 2018 is withdrawn effective November 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0567, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For technical information contact: Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-9232; email address: [email protected]

For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave. Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

A list of potentially affected entities is provided in the Federal Register of September 17, 2018 (83 FR 47004) (FRL-9983-14). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

II. What direct final SNURs are being withdrawn?

In the Federal Register of September 17, 2018 (83 FR 47004) (FRL-9983-14), EPA issued direct final SNURs for 28 chemical substances that are identified in the document. Because the Agency received adverse comments and a request to extend the comment period regarding the SNURs identified in the document, EPA is withdrawing the direct final SNURs issued for these 28 chemical substances, which were the subject of PMNs. In addition to the direct final SNURs, elsewhere in the same issue of the Federal Register of September 17, 2018 (83 FR 47026) (FRL-9983-59), EPA issued proposed SNURs covering these 28 chemical substances. EPA will address all adverse public comments in a subsequent final rule, based on the proposed rule.

III. Good Cause Finding

EPA determined that this document is not subject to the 30-day delay of effective date generally required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(d)) because of the time limitations for publication in the Federal Register. This document must publish on or before the effective date of the direct final rule containing the direct final SNURs being withdrawn.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This action withdraws regulatory requirements that have not gone into effect and which contain no new or amended requirements and reopens a comment period. As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have any adverse impacts, economic or otherwise. The statutory and Executive Order review requirements applicable to the direct final rules were discussed in the September 17, 2018 Federal Register (83 FR 47004). Those review requirements do not apply to this action because it is a withdrawal and does not contain any new or amended requirements.

V. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

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). Section 808 of the CRA allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. As required by 5 U.S.C. 808(2), this determination is supported by a brief statement in Unit III.

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 9

Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 721

Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: November 5, 2018. Lance Wormell, Acting Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Accordingly, the amendments to 40 CFR parts 9 and 721 published on September 17, 2018 (83 FR 47004), are withdrawn effective November 16, 2018.
[FR Doc. 2018-24973 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
83 222 Friday, November 16, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 932 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-18-0061; SC18-932-1 PR] Olives Grown in California; Establish Procedures To Meet Via Electronic Communications AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:

This proposed rule invites comments on a recommendation made by the California Olive Committee (Committee) to establish procedures to conduct meetings and voting using electronic means of communication.

DATES:

Comments must be received by December 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposed rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or internet: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be made available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposed rule will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Sommers, Marketing Specialist, or Terry Vawter, Senior Marketing Specialist, California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, proposes to amend regulations issued to carry out a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This proposed rule is issued under Marketing Agreement and Order No. 932, as amended (7 CFR part 932), regulating the handling of olives grown in California. Part 932 (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 California Olive Committee (Committee) locally administers the Order and is comprised of producers and handlers of olives operating within the area of production.

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

This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.

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.

On May 17, 2018 (83 FR 22831), the Agricultural Marketing Service published a final rule amending 7 CFR part 900, the general regulations for federal fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders, to authorize the use of electronic means of communication for meetings and voting.

During a meeting on June 13, 2018, the Committee unanimously recommended adoption of modern communication methods to conduct Committee meetings, as outlined in the Federal Register volume referenced above. On August 17, 2018, the Committee unanimously approved the recommended procedures for the use of communication technology. This proposed rule would establish those procedures in a new section § 932.136, Use of communication technology in Subpart B—Administrative Requirements.

The Order currently states that the Committee may only meet in assembled, in-person, meetings and that voting may only be conducted at meetings or via mail or telegraph. Such limitations present logistical problems for many Committee members since membership is widely distributed across California. Some members travel over 400 miles to attend a Committee meeting, thus resulting in lost work hours for the members and increased costs for the Committee.

Allowing the Committee to conduct meetings via electronic means of communication would likely result in increased member participation and productivity at a reduced cost, as well as greater potential for meeting quorum and voting requirements.

The Committee recommended that audio or audiovisual technology (AVT) that facilitates open communication and effectively assembles Committee members be used to conduct meetings by AVT or partial in-person meetings (meaning some members not present participate in an in-person meeting via technology). These meetings would be subject to the same quorum and voting requirements currently in effect for in-person meetings under § 932.36. These requirements define a quorum as a majority of the 16-member Committee, of which at least half are producer members and half are handler members. Voting requirements state that a passing recommendation must receive a majority vote, with at least half of the voting members representing producers and half representing handlers. For recommendations regarding grade and size, a minimum of ten votes representing five producer and five handler members are necessary for approval. The requirements further state that issues to be voted on shall be explained accurately and fully, and that all votes cast will be confirmed through a roll call.

Regarding casting votes electronically or by email, the Committee proposed that such votes be subject to the same requirements currently in effect for mail voting in § 932.36. These requirements state that advanced notice, as well as an accurate, full and identical description of the issues to be voted on, be given to all members. For a recommendation to pass, at least 14 affirmative votes representing seven producer and seven handler members are required.

The Committee recommended these changes to provide an opportunity to conduct meetings more efficiently and cost-effectively; use of audio and or audiovisual communication technology would result in time and cost savings to the Committee and its members by allowing for meetings to be conducted with all or a portion of its membership attending by audio and or AVT.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

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

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and 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 1,100 producers of olives in the production area and two 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).

Based on National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) information, the average price to producers for the 2017 crop year was $974.00 per ton, and total assessable volume for the 2017 crop year was 83,799 tons. Based on production, price paid to producers, and the total number of California olive producers, the average annual producer revenue is less than $750,000 ($974.00 times 83,799 tons equals $81,620,226, divided by 1,100 producers equals an average annual producer revenue of $74,200). Based on Committee data, both handlers may be classified as large entities under the SBA's definitions because their annual receipts are greater than $7,500,000.

This proposed rule would not impose additional costs on handlers or producers of any size. Committee members are expected to see a reduction in their travel expenses and time lost from work in order to attend Committee meetings in person. Thus, this proposed rule would reduce the cost burden on both handlers and producers.

The Committee considered the alternative of making no changes to the regulations. However, it was determined that by taking no action, the Committee would be unnecessarily limiting the participation of some members due to time constraints and travel considerations. Therefore, the Committee determined that recommending this change was in the best interest of the Committee, its members, and the industry.

Like all Committee meetings, the June 13, 2018, meeting was public and was widely publicized throughout the production area. All entities, both large and small, were able to express their views on this issue and participate in Committee deliberations. Following the meeting, ballots along with the proposed procedures were sent to all Committee members on July 31, 2018, and the mail vote concluded on August 17, 2018. The proposal received unanimous support.

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and information collection impacts of this action on small businesses.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178 Vegetable Crops. No changes in those requirements would be necessary as a result of this action. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California olive handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

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

USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action.

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

A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposed rule. All written comments timely received will be considered before a final determination is made on this matter.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932

Marketing agreements, Olives, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 932 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 601-674.

2. Add § 932.136 to subpart B to read as follows:
§ 932.136 Use of communication technology.

The Committee may conduct meetings by any means of audio and/or audiovisual communication technology available that effectively assembles members and alternates, and facilitates open communication; Provided, That, quorum and voting requirements specified in § 932.36 for physically assembled meetings shall apply. The Committee may also vote electonically; Provided, That, such voting shall be subject to the same requirements specified for mail voting in § 932.36.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Bruce Summers, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-25006 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 13 CFR Parts 103, 120, and 121 RIN 3245-AG74 Express Loan Programs; Affiliation Standards AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION:

Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

SUMMARY:

On September 28, 2018, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register to solicit public comments on, among other things, Express loan programs and affiliation standards. This document announces the extension of the current comment period for an additional 15 business days until December 18, 2018.

DATES:

The comment period for the notice of proposed rulemaking published on September 28, 2018 (83 FR 49001) is extended until December 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3245-AG74, by any of the following methods: (1) Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments; or (2) Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. Small Business Administration, Attn: Kimberly Chuday or Thomas Heou, Office of Financial Assistance, 409 Third Street SW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20416. SBA will post all comments to this notice of proposed rulemaking on http://www.regulations.gov. If you wish to submit confidential business information (CBI) as defined in the User Notice at http://www.regulations.gov, you must submit such information to the U.S. Small Business Administration, Attn: Kimberly Chuday or Thomas Heou, Office of Financial Assistance, 409 Third Street SW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20416. Highlight the information that you consider to be CBI and explain why you believe SBA should hold this information as confidential. SBA will review your information and determine whether it will make the information public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Carpenter, Acting Chief, 7(a) Policy & Program Branch, U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Financial Assistance, 409 3rd Street SW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20416; telephone: (202) 619-1654; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On September 28, 2018, SBA published a notice of proposed rulemaking at 83 FR 49001 to solicit comments on the Express loan program, affiliation standards, and other miscellaneous amendments to SBA business loan programs. This proposed rulemaking, which is identified by RIN 3245-AG74, is also available at https://www.regulations.gov/searchResults?rpp=25&po=0&s=SBA-2018-0009&fp=true&ns=true.

SBA received a formal request from several trade associations that represent participants in SBA's business loan programs to extend the comment period on this proposed rulemaking for an additional 60 days. After considering the request, SBA decided to extend the comment period an additional 15 business days until December 18, 2018. This extension will give commenters additional time to consider the proposed rulemaking and submit comments.

Dianna L. Seaborn, Director, Office of Financial Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2018-25037 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 16 CFR Part 609 RIN 3084-AB54] Military Credit Monitoring AGENCY:

Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking; request for public comment.

SUMMARY:

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) is publishing for comment a proposed rule to implement the credit monitoring provisions applicable to active duty military consumers in section 302 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, which amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). That section requires nationwide consumer reporting agencies to provide a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers, subject to certain conditions. The proposed rule defines “electronic credit monitoring service,” “contact information,” “material additions or modifications to the file of a consumer,” and “appropriate proof of identity,” among other terms. It also contains requirements on how nationwide consumer reporting agencies must verify that an individual is an active duty military consumer.

DATES:

Written comments must be received on or before January 7, 2019.

ADDRESSES:

Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper by following the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write “Military Credit Monitoring Rulemaking, Matter No. R811007” on your comment and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/militarycreditmonitoringnprm 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 B), 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 B), Washington, DC 20024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Amanda Koulousias (202-326-3334), Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (“the Act”) was signed into law on May 24, 2018. Public Law 115-174. The Act, among other things, amends section 605A of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681c-1 to add a section 605A(k). Section 605A(k)(2) requires that nationwide consumer reporting agencies provide free electronic credit monitoring services to active duty military consumers.

Section 605A(k)(3) of the FCRA requires the Commission to issue a regulation clarifying the meaning of certain terms used in section 605A(k)(2), including “electronic credit monitoring service” and “material additions or modifications to the file of a consumer.” In addition, section 605A(k)(3) requires that the Commission's regulation clarify what constitutes appropriate proof that an individual is an active duty military consumer.

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule

The proposed rule applies to nationwide consumer reporting agencies, as defined in section 603(p) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681a(p). The proposed rule requires the nationwide consumer reporting agencies to provide a free electronic credit monitoring service that notifies a consumer of material additions or modifications to the consumer's file when the consumer provides (1) contact information, (2) appropriate proof that the consumer is an active duty military consumer, and (3) appropriate proof of identity. The proposed rule specifies that the nationwide consumer reporting agency must provide notification to the consumer within 24 hours of the material addition or modification. The proposed rule also requires that the notices to consumers include a hyperlink to a summary of the consumer's rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as prescribed by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection under 15 U.S.C. 1681g(c).

The proposed rule defines certain key terms. Specifically, the proposed rule defines “electronic credit monitoring service” as a service through which nationwide consumer reporting agencies provide, at a minimum, electronic notification of material additions or modifications to a consumer's file. Electronic notification may include notification by website, mobile application, email, or text message. In addition, the proposed rule defines “material additions or modifications” as significant changes to a consumer's file, including: (1) New accounts opened in the consumer's name; (2) inquiries or requests for a consumer report; (3) changes to a consumer's name, address, or phone number; (4) changes to credit account limits; and (5) negative information, which is separately defined to include information concerning a customer's delinquencies, late payments, insolvency, or any form of default. The term “material additions or modifications” excludes requests for prescreened lists and requests to review a consumer's account, as discussed further below.

The proposed rule also specifies what constitutes appropriate proof that the consumer is an active duty military consumer. Under the proposed rule, appropriate proof includes a copy of the consumer's active duty orders; a certification of active duty status issued by the Department of Defense; verification obtained through a method or service approved by the Department of Defense; or a certification of active duty status approved by the nationwide consumer reporting agency.

Further, the proposed rule restricts nationwide consumer reporting agencies' ability to use and disclose the information they collect from consumers in order to provide the required electronic credit monitoring service. The nationwide consumer reporting agencies may use and disclose the information they collect from consumers only for the following: (1) To provide the free electronic credit monitoring service requested by the consumer; (2) to process a transaction requested by the consumer at the same time as a request for the free electronic credit monitoring service; (3) to comply with applicable legal requirements; or (4) to update information already maintained by the nationwide consumer reporting agency for the purpose of providing consumer reports.

Additionally, the proposed rule contains some limitations on communications surrounding enrollment in an electronic credit monitoring service. First, the proposed rule prohibits any advertising or marketing to a consumer who has indicated an interest in obtaining the free electronic credit monitoring service for active duty military consumers until after the consumer has enrolled in the service. Second, the proposed rule does not allow any communications or instructions that interfere with, detract from, contradict, or otherwise undermine the purpose of the proposed rule. Prohibited communications include materials that represent, expressly or by implication, that an active duty military consumer must purchase a paid product or service in order to receive the service required under § 609.3(a). They also include materials that falsely represent, expressly or by implication, that a product or service offered ancillary to the free electronic credit monitoring service, such as identity theft insurance, is free. The proposed rule also prohibits any advertising or marketing for a free service, without clearly and prominently disclosing that consumers must cancel the service to avoid being charged, if such is the case.

Finally, the proposed rule prohibits asking or requiring an active duty military consumer to agree to terms or conditions in connection with obtaining a free electronic credit monitoring service.

III. Section-by-Section Analysis Section 609.1 Scope of Regulations

Proposed § 609.1 sets forth the scope of the Commission's rule and generally tracks the statutory language in section 605A(k)(2) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 15 U.S.C. 1681c-1(k)(2). It implements the requirement that nationwide consumer reporting agencies, as defined in section 603(p) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681a(p), provide a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers that, at a minimum, notifies them of any material additions or modifications to their files.

Section 609.2 Definitions

Proposed § 609.2 contains definitions for the following terms: “active duty military consumer,” “appropriate proof of identity,” “consumer,” “consumer report,” “contact information,” “credit,” “electronic credit monitoring service,” “electronic notification,” “file,” “firm offer of credit,” “free,” “material additions or modifications,” “nationwide consumer reporting agency,” and “negative information.”

Active Duty Military Consumer, Consumer, Consumer Report, Credit, File, Firm Offer of Credit, Nationwide Consumer Reporting Agency, and Negative Information

Proposed paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (f), (i), (j), (m), and (n) incorporate the FCRA's statutory definitions of “active duty military consumer,” “consumer,” “consumer report,” “credit,” “file,” “firm offer of credit,” “nationwide consumer reporting agency,” and “negative information.” Each of these terms is used in the proposed rule.

Appropriate Proof of Identity

Proposed paragraph (b) defines “appropriate proof of identity” as having the same meaning as set forth in 12 CFR 1022.123. Although the statute requires only that consumer reporting agencies obtain contact information and appropriate proof of active duty military status before providing electronic credit monitoring to military consumers, the proposed rule adds language that would permit the nationwide consumer reporting agencies to request appropriate proof of identity before providing a military consumer with the statutorily required credit monitoring service.

The Commission believes that, before providing sensitive consumer report information to a military consumer in connection with credit monitoring, a consumer reporting agency should be able to verify the consumer's identity. Consumer report information is very sensitive and it is imperative that consumers only receive credit monitoring with respect to their own credit file. For example, under section 610 of the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must obtain “proper identification” from a consumer before providing the consumer with a disclosure of his or her credit file. More generally, consumer reporting agencies are required to establish reasonable procedures designed to limit the furnishing of consumer reports to legitimate persons with legitimate purposes for obtaining the report. See 15 U.S.C. 1681e.

The proposed rule defines “appropriate proof of identity” by cross-referencing 12 CFR 1022.123. This existing definition was established to provide guidance on what information consumers should be required to provide to constitute proof of identity for purposes of FCRA sections 605A (obtaining a fraud alert), 605B (requesting that information resulting from identity theft be blocked from one's consumer report), and 609(a)(1) (requesting a file disclosure from a consumer reporting agency). This definition is risk-based, meaning that a consumer reporting agency's policy with respect to appropriate proof of identity should be commensurate with the risk of harm to the consumer resulting from misidentification, and should not unreasonably restrict a consumer's access to statutorily required services.

Because consumer reporting agencies already are required to implement procedures for obtaining appropriate proof of identity under 12 CFR 1022.123, the Commission believes it would be efficient to permit consumer reporting agencies to comply with the proposed rule by using the same requirements, already in place.

The Commission is soliciting comments on whether the rule should cross-reference 12 CFR 1022.123, stay silent on the definition, or develop a different approach.

Contact Information

Proposed paragraph (e) contains a definition of “contact information.” The statute allows nationwide consumer reporting agencies to condition provision of the free electronic credit monitoring service to those consumers that provide both appropriate proof that they are active duty military consumers and contact information. The Commission believes that clarifying the term “contact information” is beneficial to the nationwide consumer reporting agencies and consumers. Nationwide consumer reporting agencies need a minimal amount of information from a consumer in order to provide the free credit monitoring service. Accordingly, the proposed rule defines “contact information” as information about a consumer, such as a consumer's first and last name and email address, that is reasonably necessary to collect in order to provide the electronic credit monitoring service.

Electronic Credit Monitoring Service

Proposed paragraph (g) defines “electronic credit monitoring service” as a service through which nationwide consumer reporting agencies provide electronic notifications of material additions or modifications to a consumer's file. Section 605A(k)(3) of the FCRA specifically requires the Commission to define this term. The Commission believes that this definition and the accompanying definitions of “material addition or modification” and “electronic notification” provide the detail necessary for nationwide consumer reporting agencies to provide the credit monitoring required by the statute.

Electronic Notification

Proposed paragraph (h) defines “electronic notification” as a notice provided to the consumer via a website; mobile application; email; or text message. The Commission wants to give the nationwide consumer reporting agencies and consumers the flexibility to communicate in a manner that is most convenient for them. Currently, the nationwide consumer reporting agencies typically send customers of their commercial credit monitoring services an email alerting them that changes have been made to their files. Customers then log in to the consumer reporting agency's website to see the specific changes that have occurred. Other commercial credit monitoring services provide a mobile application through which they notify customers of changes to their consumer reports. In addition to these methods, the Commission believes some consumers would find the option of receiving notifications via text message convenient. However, the Commission notes, that any nationwide consumer reporting agency electing to provide consumers the option of receiving notifications via text message must comply with Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227, and all other applicable laws and requirements. The Commission welcomes comment on this proposed definition of electronic notification.

Free

Proposed paragraph (k) defines “free” as being provided at no cost to the consumer. This definition comes from Merriam-Webster's Dictionary. The Commission seeks comment on whether a definition of “free” is necessary, and if so, whether it should include any additional requirements.

Material Additions or Modifications

Proposed paragraph (l) defines “material additions or modifications” as significant changes to a consumer's file, including: (1) New accounts opened in the consumer's name; (2) inquiries or requests for a consumer report (with the exceptions noted below); (3) changes to a consumer's name, address, or phone number; (4) changes to credit account limits; and (5) negative information.

The changes set forth in (1)-(5) above are material because they can indicate that a consumer is the victim of identity theft or other fraud. The sooner a consumer is alerted to these changes, the sooner the consumer can begin to mitigate harm. Notifications of these changes are included in many of the credit monitoring products available commercially today.

The definition also includes any other “significant changes to a consumer's file.” The enumerated list is not exhaustive, and nationwide consumer reporting agencies may elect to provide notification of other significant changes to a consumer's file. There may be other information that is useful to particular types of consumers or other significant changes that the Commission cannot contemplate today. Therefore, the Commission believes that the nationwide consumer reporting agencies should have discretion to include additional significant changes to a consumer's file within their free electronic credit monitoring service.

At the same time, the Commission proposes that the definition of “material additions or modifications” specifically exclude (1) inquiries for a prescreened list obtained for the purpose of making a firm offer of credit or insurance as described in 15 U.S.C. 1681b(c)(1)(B), and (2) inquiries for the purpose of reviewing an account of the consumer (“account review”). As to inquiries for prescreened lists, while most credit inquiries signal that a consumer is affirmatively seeking credit and may affect their credit scores, inquiries for prescreened lists are made without consumers' knowledge or specific consent and do not affect their credit scores. Consumers may opt out of prescreening. The Commission does not believe that there would be any benefit to active duty military consumers if they received notification every time an inquiry for a prescreened list is made. In fact, including inquiries for prescreened lists in the proposed rule's notification requirement could result in over-notification to the consumer, which could be confusing and make it difficult for consumers to determine when an inquiry indicates that they are potentially the victim of identity theft or other fraud.

Similarly, inquiries made for purposes of account review, such as when a credit card issuer reviews a customer's credit file in order to determine whether to change the annual percentage rate (“APR”) on a credit card, also do not indicate that a consumer is shopping for credit. These account review inquiries may not result in any changes to the consumer's credit account. In cases where account review does result in a change to the consumer's credit account, such as by increasing the APR on a credit card, the creditor must send the consumer a risk-based pricing notice. See 12 CFR 1022.70-1022.75. The risk-based pricing notice contains information about the account review and provides consumers with additional information and gives them a right to obtain a free copy of their consumer report. The Commission believes that requiring notification of account review inquiries could result in over-notification and be confusing to consumers. For those consumers for whom account review results in changes to their credit accounts, the risk-based pricing notice is more informative and valuable than a notification that simply indicates that a creditor has reviewed their credit files.

Section 609.3 Requirement To Provide Free Electronic Credit Monitoring Service

Proposed § 609.3 establishes the basic rules surrounding the provision of free electronic credit monitoring to active duty military consumers. Paragraph (a) states the general requirement that nationwide consumer reporting agencies must provide a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers.

Determining Whether a Consumer Must Receive Electronic Credit Monitoring Service

Proposed § 609.3(b) allows nationwide consumer reporting agencies to condition the provision of the free electronic credit monitoring service upon the consumer providing appropriate proof of identity, contact information, and appropriate proof that the consumer is an active duty military consumer. The Act itself specifically states that nationwide consumer reporting agencies need only provide the free electronic credit monitoring to consumers that provide contact information and appropriate proof of active duty military status.

The Commission also proposes to include the condition that consumers provide the nationwide consumer reporting agencies with appropriate proof of identity. Consumer report information is very sensitive and it is imperative that consumers only receive credit monitoring of their own file. The Commission is proposing to define “appropriate proof of identity” by cross-referencing 12 CFR 1022.123, as explained in further detail above.

Appropriate Proof of Active Duty Military Status

Proposed paragraph (c) fulfills the statutory requirement that the Commission determine what constitutes appropriate proof of active duty military status. The proposed rule allows active duty military status to be verified through: (1) A copy of the consumer's active duty military orders; (2) a copy of a certification of active duty status issued by the Department of Defense; (3) a method or service approved by the Department of Defense; or (4) a certification of active duty status approved by the nationwide consumer reporting agency.

The first two methods require consumers to provide nationwide consumer reporting agencies with documents verifying their active duty status. The third method—one approved by the Department of Defense—anticipates future developments in this area. The Commission understands from the Department of Defense that there is not currently an automated method by which nationwide consumer reporting agencies may obtain notice of a consumer's active duty military status from the Department of Defense for the purpose of fulfilling their obligations under this proposed rule. If such a method does become available, however, this language makes sure it would suffice as “appropriate proof of active duty military status” under the proposed rule. The Commission defers to the Department of Defense on what methods it may determine are appropriate to prove active duty status.

The fourth method would allow any nationwide consumer reporting agency to develop its own method for determining proof of active duty military status. The Commission believes that it may be burdensome for consumers and the nationwide consumer reporting agencies to have a system that requires documents to be uploaded in order to confirm active duty status. In an effort to provide nationwide consumer reporting agencies the flexibility to design a less burdensome method of proof, the proposed rule allows them to approve other certifications of status. For example, the proposed rule would allow the nationwide consumer reporting agencies to accept consumers' self-certification of active duty military status, e.g., by allowing consumers to check a box certifying active duty military status.

The Commission welcomes comment on the efficacy of these methods, and whether there are other methods of determining active duty military status that it should add to the definition.

Information Use and Disclosure

Proposed § 609.3(d) limits nationwide consumer reporting agencies' use and disclosure of information they collect from consumers as a result of a consumer's request to obtain the free electronic credit monitoring service. Specifically, the proposed rule allows nationwide consumer reporting agencies to use and disclose information collected from consumers only: (1) To provide the free electronic credit monitoring service requested by the consumer; (2) to process a transaction requested by the consumer at the same time as a request for the free electronic credit monitoring service; (3) to comply with applicable legal requirements; or (4) to update information already maintained by the nationwide consumer reporting agency for the purpose of providing consumer reports. Under (4), if a nationwide consumer reporting agency updates information it maintains for consumer reporting purposes, the updated information is subject to the same restrictions that apply to the original, pre-updated data. These restrictions on use and disclosure are identical to the requirements placed on the nationwide consumer reporting agencies' collection of personally identifiable information from consumers using the centralized source found in 12 CFR 1022.136(f). Restricting “secondary” use and disclosure of information collected from active duty military consumers seeking to obtain the free electronic credit monitoring service ensures that these consumers will not be subjected to unintended consequences, such as unwanted marketing. Additionally, the Commission does not believe that it would be appropriate to make an active duty military consumer's access to the free electronic credit monitoring service contingent on the consumer's willingness to allow a nationwide consumer reporting agency to use the consumer's information for unrelated, secondary uses.

The proposed rule does allow information collected from consumers as part of the free electronic credit monitoring enrollment process to be used to process transaction requests made by consumers at the same time. This provision allows consumers to avoid having to reenter information in order to obtain products and services separate from the free electronic credit monitoring. For example, a consumer would not have to reenter information if, after enrolling in the free electronic credit monitoring service, the consumer decided to also obtain identity theft insurance. The proposed rule also permits nationwide consumer reporting agencies to use and disclose information in order to comply with all applicable legal requirements. Finally, the proposed rule permits nationwide consumer reporting agencies to use the information collected to update information they already maintain for consumer reporting purposes, but does not permit them to add additional information that they do not already collect from other sources. The Commission seeks comments on whether these restrictions are appropriate and whether any modifications to the proposed restrictions are necessary.

Communications Surrounding Enrollment in Electronic Credit Monitoring Service

Proposed § 609.3(e) places limitations on the types of communications that may surround enrollment in the electronic credit monitoring service. Section 609.3(e)(1) restricts any advertising or marketing for products or services, or any communications or instructions that advertise or market any products and services to a consumer that has indicated an interest in signing up for the free electronic credit monitoring service until after the consumer has enrolled in the service. This restriction is similar to the restriction on advertising on the annual credit report website found in 12 CFR 1022.136(g). The goal of including a similar requirement is to ensure that the Act's purpose of providing active duty military consumers with a free electronic credit monitoring service is not thwarted by confusing advertisements or communications that dissuade active duty military consumers from enrolling in the free service. The proposed requirement is not intended to ban advertising on all web pages of the nationwide consumer reporting agencies. Instead, it seeks to limit advertising directed to those consumers who have indicated that they want to enroll in the free credit monitoring for active duty military consumers. Thus, for example, the proposed requirement would apply only to the pages on a nationwide consumer reporting agency's website or app dedicated to providing active duty military consumers with their rights under this regulation. The Commission appreciates that this restriction on advertising may increase costs to the nationwide consumer reporting agencies by, among other things, requiring them to create separate enrollment processes for active duty military consumers. The Commission requests comment on whether this restriction is consistent with the authority granted under the Act and necessary to ensure that active duty military consumers are able to enroll easily in the free electronic credit monitoring service.

Section 609.3(e)(2) of the proposed rule specifies that any communications, instructions, or permitted advertising or marketing may not interfere with, detract from, contradict, or otherwise undermine the purpose of providing a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers. The proposed rule provides examples of conduct that would interfere with, detract from, contradict, or undermine the purpose of the rule. For example, a nationwide consumer reporting agency would be prohibited from providing materials that represent, expressly or by implication, that in order to obtain the free credit monitoring service, active duty military consumers must also purchase identity theft insurance. This limitation on communications is identical to 12 CFR 1022.136(g)'s requirements for the centralized source for free annual file disclosures.

Sections 609.3(e)(1) and (2) are complementary and are designed to ensure that active duty military consumers are not confused or deceived by communications related to a nationwide consumer reporting agency's products and services. Using the example of the identity theft insurance product described above, section 609.3(e)(1) would prohibit any advertising of such a product from the time the consumer indicates an interest in obtaining free credit monitoring for active duty military until after that consumer has enrolled in the service. Section 609.3(e)(2) applies to any advertising before the consumer indicates such an interest, or after the consumer has enrolled in the service. It also applies to non-advertising communications or instructions relating to the free electronic credit monitoring service.

The Commission recognizes that if done appropriately, access to some identity theft services—such as identity theft insurance—may be beneficial and convenient for consumers. The Commission wants to ensure, however, that these additional services are not offered in a way that is confusing to active duty military consumers or dissuades them from enrolling in the free electronic credit monitoring service that they are entitled to under the Act. The Commission solicits comment on whether this restriction is consistent with the authority granted under the Act and necessary to ensure that active duty military consumers can easily obtain the free credit monitoring service.

Other Prohibited Practices

Proposed § 609.3(f) prohibits asking or requiring an active duty military consumer to agree to terms or conditions in connection with obtaining a free electronic credit monitoring service. This restriction is similar to the restriction for the annual credit report website found in 12 CFR 1022.136(h). The Commission believes that an active duty military consumer's right to obtain a free electronic credit monitoring service should be unfettered and without any restrictions or conditions, apart from providing appropriate proof of identity, contact information, and appropriate proof that the consumer is an active duty military consumer. The Commission solicits comment on whether this restriction is consistent with authority granted under the Act and necessary to ensure that active duty military consumers can easily obtain the free credit monitoring service.

Section 609.4 Timing of Credit Monitoring Notices

Proposed § 609.4 requires that the notices required under § 609.3(a) be provided within 24 hours of any material additions or modifications to a consumer's file. Advertisements for commercial credit monitoring services that are currently on the market suggest that consumers can be notified of changes to their files as soon as those changes are detected. Therefore, the Commission believes that 24 hours provides ample time for the nationwide consumer reporting agencies to give an electronic notification to affected consumers.

Section 609.5 Additional Information To Be Included in Electronic Credit Monitoring Notices

Proposed § 609.5 states that the electronic notifications shall include a hyperlink to a summary of the consumer's rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as prescribed by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection under 15 U.S.C. 1681g(c). The Commission believes that it will be useful for consumers to be able to easily access information about their rights to, for example, obtain consumer reports and dispute information on their reports. Including a link to the summary with each electronic notification will ensure that consumers can find that information when it may be most useful to them. The Commission welcomes comment on this proposed requirement.

Section 609.6 Severability

Proposed § 609.6 states that the provisions of the proposed rule are separate and severable from one another, so that if any provision is stayed or determined to be invalid, it is the Commission's intention that the remaining provisions shall continue in effect.

IV. Request for Comment

The Commission seeks comment on various aspects of the proposed rule. Without limiting the scope of issues on which it seeks comment, the FTC is particularly interested in receiving comments on the questions that follow. In responding to these questions, please include detailed factual supporting information if possible.

Section 609.2 Definitions

1. Does the definition of “electronic credit monitoring service” adequately describe the service that the proposed rule should cover? If not, how should the definition be modified?

2. Does the definition of “material additions or modifications” adequately cover the changes to a consumer's file that should require notification? If not, what other elements should be added to the definition? Should changes to credit account limits remain in the definition? What benefits to consumers would notifications of account limit changes provide?

3. The proposed rule does not require notice to be given if an inquiry was made for a prescreened list obtained for the purpose of making a firm offer of credit or insurance as described in 15 U.S.C. 1681b(c)(1)(B) or for the purpose of account review. Are these exceptions appropriate? Are there other exceptions that should be added to the proposed rule?

4. The proposed rule requires notice to be given if an inquiry is made for the purpose of collection of an account of the consumer. Do nationwide consumer reporting agencies have the ability to differentiate between inquiries made for the purposes of account review and collection?

5. Is the definition of “electronic notification” adequate? Are there other methods of notification that should be included in the definition?

6. Is the definition of “appropriate proof of identity” necessary? Is the current definition, referencing the requirements of 12 CFR 1022.123 appropriate? Is there a better approach to determining what constitutes “appropriate proof of identity?” What procedures are consumer reporting agencies currently employing to comply with 12 CFR 1022.123? Do consumer reporting agencies currently require customers of commercial credit monitoring services to provide appropriate proof of identity? If so, what proof of identity is being required?

Section 609.3 Requirement To Provide Electronic Credit Monitoring Service

1. The proposed rule states that “appropriate proof of active duty military status” can be verified through: (1) A copy of the consumer's active duty orders; (2) a copy of a certification of active duty status issued by the Department of Defense; (3) a method or service approved by the Department of Defense; or (4) a certification of active duty status approved by the nationwide consumer reporting agency. Are these methods adequate? Are there other methods of verifying active duty status that should be included? What is the most efficient method for providing nationwide consumer reporting agencies with proof of active duty military status? Is it burdensome for consumers to provide appropriate proof? Is there a way to minimize the burden?

2. Proposed § 609.3(d) restricts secondary uses and disclosures of information collected from a consumer requesting to obtain the service required under § 609.3(a). Is this limitation necessary to ensure that consumers seeking to obtain the free electronic credit monitoring service are not forced to provide personal information for unrelated, secondary purposes?

3. Proposed § 609.3(d) allows nationwide consumer reporting agencies to use and disclose information collected from consumers requesting to obtain the service required under § 609.3(a) only: (1) To provide the free electronic credit monitoring service requested by the consumer; (2) to process a transaction requested by the consumer at the same time as a request for the free electronic credit monitoring service; (3) to comply with specific legal requirements; or (4) to update information already maintained by the nationwide consumer reporting agency for the purpose of providing consumer reports, provided that the nationwide consumer reporting agency uses and discloses the updated information subject to the same restrictions that would apply, under any applicable provision of law or regulation, to the information updated or replaced. Are these approved uses appropriate? Are there additional uses that should be permitted?

4. Proposed § 609.3(e)(1) bans marketing until after a consumer who has indicated an interest in obtaining the service required under § 609.3(a) has enrolled in the free electronic credit monitoring service. Is this limitation necessary to ensure that active duty military consumers are able easily to obtain their free electronic credit monitoring service? Does this limitation impose undue burdens on nationwide consumer reporting agencies? If so, is there a way to minimize these burdens?

5. Proposed § 609.3(e)(2) prohibits any communications, instructions, or permitted advertising or marketing from interfering with, detracting from, contradicting, or otherwise undermining the purpose of providing a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers. Is this prohibition necessary?

6. Section 609.3(e)(3) provides the following examples of prohibited conduct: (1) Any representation that an active duty military consumer must purchase a paid product or service in order to obtain the free electronic credit monitoring service required by § 609.3(a); (2) a false representation that a product or service ancillary to receipt of the free electronic credit monitoring service, such as identity theft insurance, is free; or (3) the offering of an ongoing service without a clear and prominent disclosure that the consumer must cancel the service to avoid being charged. Are there more examples of prohibited conduct that should be included in the proposed rule? Should “clearly and prominently” be defined?

7. Proposed § 609.3(f) prohibits asking or requiring an active duty military consumer to agree to terms or conditions in connection with obtaining a free electronic credit monitoring service. Is this prohibition necessary to ensure that active duty military consumers are able easily to obtain their free electronic credit monitoring service? Do consumer reporting agencies currently require customers of commercial credit monitoring services to agree to terms or conditions? If so, does this prohibition impose undue burdens on nationwide consumer reporting agencies? If so, is there a way to minimize these burdens?

Section 609.4 Timing of Credit Monitoring Services

1. The proposed rule also requires that these notices be provided within 24 hours of any material additions or modifications to a consumer's file. Is this time requirement appropriate?

Section 609.5 Additional Information To Be Included in Electronic Credit Monitoring Notices

1. The proposed rule requires that the electronic notifications include a link to the summary of the consumer's rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Will requiring this link provide useful information to consumers or is there different information that would be more useful? Is there a different method of providing this information that would be more effective?

You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before January 7, 2019. Write “Military Credit Monitoring Rulemaking, Matter No. R811007” on the 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 https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments.

Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/militarycreditmonitoringnprm by following the instructions on the web-based form. If this Notice appears at https://www.regulations.gov, you also may file a comment through that website.

If you file your comment on paper, write “Military Credit Monitoring Rulemaking, Matter No. R811007” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex B), 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, Washington, DC 20024. If possible, please submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your comment should not include any sensitive personal information, such as your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number; financial account number; or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your comment should not include any “trade secret or any commercial or financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential”—as provided by section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)—including in particular, competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer names.

Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has been posted on the public FTC website—as legally required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or remove your comment from the FTC website, unless you submit a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.

Visit the FTC website to read this Notice and the news release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before January 7, 2019. 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.

V. Communications by Outside Parties to the Commissioners or Their Advisors

Written communications and summaries or transcripts of oral communications respecting the merits of this proceeding, from any outside party to any Commissioner or Commissioner's advisor, will be placed on the public record.1

1See 16 CFR 1.26(b)(5).

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”), 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, requires federal agencies to seek and obtain OMB approval before undertaking a collection of information directed to ten or more persons.2 Under the PRA, the Commission may not conduct, or sponsor, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person is not required to respond to an information collection, unless the information displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.

2 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)(i).

As the proposed notification requirements fall upon the three nationwide consumer reporting agencies, it does not meet the PRA threshold count of ten or more persons to constitute a “collection of information.” Further, the proof of identity the proposed rule would require of those for whom the rulemaking is designed to benefit, consumers on active duty military status, falls within OMB's general exception for disclosures that require persons to provide or display only facts necessary to identify themselves.3

3See 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(1).

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, requires an agency to either provide an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis with a proposed rule, or certify that the proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.4 The Commission does not expect the proposed Rule will have a significant economic impact on small entities. The proposed Rule applies to nationwide consumer reporting agencies. The Commission has not identified any nationwide consumer reporting agencies that are small entities.5 This document serves as notice to the Small Business Administration of the agency's certification of no effect. Nonetheless, the Commission has determined that it is appropriate to publish an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in order to inquire into the impact of the proposed Rule on small entities. The Commission invites comment on the burden on any small entities and has prepared the following analysis.

4 5 U.S.C. 603-605.

5 The size standard the Small Business Administration has identified by the North American Industry Classification System code for credit bureaus (code number 561450), i.e., consumer reporting agencies, is $15 million. See 13 CFR 121.201. The Rule only applies to nationwide consumer reporting agencies. There are currently only three nationwide consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, and all exceed this size standard.

1. Reasons for the Proposed Rule

The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 115-174, directs the Commission to promulgate regulations to implement section 302(d)(1) of the Act, which shall at a minimum: (1) Define “electronic credit monitoring service” and “material additions or modifications to the file of a consumer,” and (2) establish what constitutes appropriate proof that a consumer is an active duty military consumer. In this action, the Commission proposes, and seeks comment on, a rule that would fulfill the statutory mandate. The Act requires that the Commission promulgate this rule not later than one year after the date of enactment, or May 24, 2019.

2. Statement of Objectives and Legal Basis

The objectives of the proposed Rule are discussed above. The legal basis for the proposed rule is section 302(d) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.

3. Description of Small Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply

The proposed rule will apply only to nationwide consumer reporting agencies. The Commission has not identified any nationwide consumer reporting agencies that are small entities.

4. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements

Under the proposed rule, nationwide consumer reporting agencies will have to provide free electronic credit monitoring services to active duty military consumers. There are no reporting or recordkeeping requirements, or types of professional skills necessary for preparation of any such report or record, under the proposed rule. In any event, as noted earlier, the proposed rule applies only to nationwide consumer reporting agencies, and they are not small entities.

5. Identification of Duplicative, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules

The Commission has not identified any other federal statutes, rules, or policies that would duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule. The proposed definitions and requirements of the proposed rule have been designed to work in conjunction with the existing definitions and requirements found in the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and Regulation V, 12 CFR part 1022. The Commission invites comment and information on that issue.

6. Discussion of Significant Alternatives

The Commission has not identified any particular alternative methods of compliance as necessary to reduce burdens on small entities, because the Commission does not believe any nationwide consumer reporting agencies subject to the proposed rule are small entities, as noted earlier.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 609

Consumer reporting agencies, Consumer reports, Credit, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Trade practices.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Federal Trade Commission proposes to amend chapter I, title 16, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

1. Revise the heading of subchapter F to read as follows: SUBCHAPTER F—FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 2. Add part 609 to subchapter F to read as follows: PART 609—FREE ELECTRONIC CREDIT MONITORING FOR ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY Sec. 609.1 Scope of regulations in this part. 609.2 Definitions. 609.3 Requirement to provide free electronic credit monitoring service. 609.4 Timing of electronic credit monitoring notices. 609.5 Additional information to be included in electronic credit monitoring notices. 609.6 Severability. Authority:

15 U.S.C. 1681c-1(k).

§ 609.1 Scope of regulations in this part.

This part implements Section 605A(k)(2) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681c-1(k)(2), which requires consumer reporting agencies that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis to provide a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers that, at a minimum, notifies them of any material additions or modifications to their files.

§ 609.2 Definitions.

For purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:

(a) Active duty military consumer means a consumer in military service as defined in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(q)(1) and 1681c-1(k)(1).

(b) Appropriate proof of identity has the meaning set forth in 12 CFR 1022.123.

(c) Consumer has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(c).

(d) Consumer report has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(d).

(e) Contact information means information about a consumer, such as a consumer's first and last name and email address, that is reasonably necessary to collect in order to provide the electronic credit monitoring service.

(f) Credit has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(r)(5).

(g) Electronic credit monitoring service means a service through which nationwide consumer reporting agencies provide, at a minimum, electronic notification of material additions or modifications to a consumer's file.

(h) Electronic notification means a notice provided to the consumer via:

(1) A website;

(2) Mobile application;

(3) Email; or

(4) Text message.

(i) File has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(g).

(j) Firm offer of credit has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(l).

(k) Free means provided at no cost to the consumer.

(l) Material additions or modifications means significant changes to a consumer's file, including:

(1) New accounts opened in the consumer's name;

(2) Inquiries or requests for a consumer report;

(i) However, an inquiry made for a prescreened list obtained for the purpose of making a firm offer of credit or insurance as described in 15 U.S.C. 1681b(c)(1)(B) or for the purpose of reviewing an account of the consumer shall not be considered a material addition or modification.

(ii) [Reserved].

(3) Changes to a consumer's name, address, or phone number;

(4) Changes to credit account limits; and

(5) Negative information.

(m) Nationwide consumer reporting agency has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681a(p).

(n) Negative information has the meaning provided in 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(7)(G)(i).

§ 609.3 Requirement to provide free electronic credit monitoring service.

(a) General requirements. Nationwide consumer reporting agencies must provide a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers.

(b) Determining whether a consumer must receive electronic credit monitoring service. Nationwide consumer reporting agencies may condition provision of the service required under paragraph (a) of this section upon the consumer providing:

(1) Appropriate proof of identity,

(2) Contact information, and

(3) Appropriate proof that the consumer is an active duty military consumer.

(c) Appropriate proof of active duty military status. A consumer's status as an active duty military consumer can be verified through:

(1) A copy of the consumer's active duty orders;

(2) A copy of a certification of active duty status issued by the Department of Defense;

(3) A method or service approved by the Department of Defense; or

(4) A certification of active duty status approved by the nationwide consumer reporting agency.

(d) Information use and disclosure. Any information collected from consumers as a result of a request to obtain the service required under paragraph (a) of this section, may be used or disclosed by the nationwide consumer reporting agency only:

(1) To provide the free electronic credit monitoring service requested by the consumer;

(2) To process a transaction requested by the consumer at the same time as a request for the free electronic credit monitoring service;

(3) To comply with applicable legal requirements; or

(4) To update information already maintained by the nationwide consumer reporting agency for the purpose of providing consumer reports, provided that the nationwide consumer reporting agency uses and discloses the updated information subject to the same restrictions that would apply, under any applicable provision of law or regulation, to the information updated or replaced.

(e) Communications surrounding enrollment in electronic credit monitoring service. (1) Once a consumer has indicated that the consumer is interested in obtaining the service required under paragraph (a) of this section, such as by clicking on a link for services provided to active duty military consumers, any advertising or marketing for products or services, or any communications or instructions that advertise or market any products and services, must be delayed until after the consumer has enrolled in that service.

(2) Any communications, instructions, or permitted advertising or marketing shall not interfere with, detract from, contradict, or otherwise undermine the purpose of providing a free electronic credit monitoring service to active duty military consumers that notifies them of any material additions or modifications to their files.

(3) Examples of interfering, detracting, inconsistent, and/or undermining communications include:

(i) Materials that represent, expressly or by implication, that an active duty military consumer must purchase a paid product or service in order to receive the service required under paragraph (a) of this section; or

(ii) Materials that falsely represent, expressly or by implication, that a product or service offered ancillary to receipt of the free electronic credit monitoring service, such as identity theft insurance, is free, or that fail to clearly and prominently disclose that consumers must cancel a service, advertised as free for an initial period of time, to avoid being charged, if such is the case.

(f) Other prohibited practices. A nationwide consumer reporting agency shall not ask or require an active duty military consumer to agree to terms or conditions in connection with obtaining a free electronic credit monitoring service.

§ 609.4 Timing of electronic credit monitoring notices.

The notice required in section 609.3(a) must be provided within 24 hours of any material additions or modifications to a consumer's file.

§ 609.5 Additional information to be included in electronic credit monitoring notices.

The notice required in section 609.3(a) shall include a hyperlink to a summary of the consumer's rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as prescribed by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection under 15 U.S.C. 1681g(c).

§ 609.6 Severability.

The provisions of this part are separate and severable from one another. If any provision is stayed, or determined to be invalid, it is the Commission's intention that the remaining provisions shall continue in effect.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-24940 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R06-OAR-2007-0314; FRL-9985-97-Region 6] Air Plan Approval; Oklahoma; Interstate Transport Requirements for the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Proposed rule, withdrawal of proposed rule.

SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a portion of an Oklahoma State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal that pertains to the good neighbor provision requirements of the CAA with respect to interstate transport of air pollution which will interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The good neighbor provision requires, in part, that each state, in its SIP, prohibit emissions that will interfere with maintenance of a new or revised NAAQS in another state. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the Oklahoma SIP submittal as having met the interfere with maintenance requirement of the good neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS in accordance with section 110 of the CAA. EPA is also withdrawing its October 17, 2011 proposed rule to disapprove this portion of Oklahoma SIP submittal.

DATES:

Written comments must be received on or before December 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2007-0314, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected]. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact Carl Young, 214-665-6645, [email protected]. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carl Young, 214-665-6645, [email protected]. To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Mr. Young or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665-7253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

I. Background A. The 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS and Interstate Transport of Air Pollution

Under section 109 of the CAA, we are required to establish NAAQS that are protective of human health (primary NAAQS) and public welfare (secondary NAAQS). In 1997, we established new primary and secondary 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per million (July 18, 1997, 62 FR 38856).1 Ground level ozone is formed when nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react in the presence of sunlight.

1 In 2008, we revised the primary and secondary 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.075 ppm (73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008) and in 2015 we revised the primary and secondary 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm (80 FR 65292, October 26, 2015). This proposal pertains to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS only.

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires states to submit, within three years after promulgation of a new or revised standard, SIPs meeting the applicable “infrastructure” elements of sections 110(a)(2). One of these applicable infrastructure elements, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), requires SIPs to contain “good neighbor” provisions to prohibit certain adverse air quality effects on neighboring states due to interstate transport of pollution. There are four sub-elements within CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). The first two sub-elements are to prohibit emissions to any other state which would (1) significantly contribute to nonattainment or (2) interfere with maintenance of the new or revised NAAQS. The State of Oklahoma provided a May 1, 2007 SIP submittal to address these two sub-elements. The portion of the submittal addressing sub-element 1 (prohibit significant contribution to nonattainment in other states) was approved on December 29, 2011 (76 FR 81838). This action addresses the second sub-element of that submittal (prohibit interference with maintenance in other states).

The EPA has addressed the interstate transport requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in several past regulatory actions. Most relevant to this action, EPA promulgated the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in 2005 to address the requirements of the good neighbor provision for the 1997 (fine particulate) (PM2.5) and 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005). In the CAIR rulemaking, we did not analyze the contributions to downwind ozone nonattainment for Oklahoma and 5 other states along the western border of the CAIR modeling domain (70 FR 25162, 25246). CAIR was remanded to the EPA by the D.C. Circuit in North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), modified on reh'g, 550 F.3d 1176. The court determined that CAIR was “fundamentally flawed” and ordered EPA to “redo its analysis from the ground up.” 531 F.3d at 929.

In 2011, we promulgated the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to address the remand of CAIR.2 CSAPR addressed the state and federal obligations under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to prohibit air pollution contributing significantly to nonattainment in, or interfering with maintenance by, any other state with regard to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, as well as the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. To address the transport obligation under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with regard to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, CSAPR established Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) requirements for affected electric generating units (EGUs) in 20 states.3 The air quality modeling conducted for CSAPR projected that emissions from Oklahoma would impact a receptor (or monitor) located in Allegan County, Michigan (monitor ID 260050003), which would have difficulty maintaining the 19978-hour ozone NAAQS (76 FR 48208, 48213, August 8, 2011). Thus, we issued a CSAPR supplemental rule that promulgated similar FIP requirements for Oklahoma and four other states (76 FR 80760, December 27, 2011).

2 Federal Implementation Plans; Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011); and Federal Implementation Plans for Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin and Determination for Kansas Regarding Interstate Transport of Ozone, 76 FR 80760 (December 27, 2011) (codified as amended at 40 CFR 52.38 and 52.39 and 40 CFR part 97).

3 Including an emissions budget that applied to the EGUs' collective ozone-season emissions of NOX.

The CSAPR set emissions budgets which were to be implemented in two phases, with phase 1 to be implemented beginning with the 2012 ozone season and phase 2 to be implemented beginning with the 2014 ozone season. However, the CSAPR budgets were stayed by the D.C. Circuit in December 2011 pending further litigation. The D.C. Circuit issued a decision in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (EME Homer City I), vacating CSAPR, but in April 2014, the Supreme Court issued an opinion reversing the D.C. Circuit and remanding the case for further proceedings. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584, 1600-01 (2014). After the Supreme Court issued its decision, the D.C. Circuit granted our motion to lift the stay and toll the compliance timeframes by three years.4 Thus, phase 1 of CSAPR was implemented beginning in 2015 and phase 2 was set to be implemented beginning in 2017(81 FR 13275).

4See Respondents' Motion to Lift the Stay Entered on December 30, 2011, Document #1499505, EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir. filed June 26, 2014); Order, Document #1518738, EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir. issued Oct. 23, 2014).

On July 28, 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued its opinion on CSAPR regarding the remaining legal issues raised by the petitioners on remand from the Supreme Court, EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (EME Homer City II). This decision largely upheld our approach to addressing interstate transport in CSAPR, leaving the rule in place and affirming the EPA's interpretation of various statutory provisions and the EPA's technical decisions. The decision also remanded CSAPR without vacatur for reconsideration of the EPA's emission budgets for certain states.5 The court declared the CSAPR phase 2 ozone season emission budgets of 11 states invalid, holding that those budgets over-control with respect to the downwind air quality problems to which those states were “linked” for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, id. at 129-30, 138.6 For 10 of these states, the court found the budgets were invalid because modeling conducted as part of the CSAPR rulemaking showed that downwind air quality problems to which the states were linked in 2012 would be resolved in 2014, id. We addressed the remand of the ozone-season emissions budgets in the CSAPR Update.7 In doing so, EPA relieved all 11 states of the obligation to comply with the remanded phase 2 ozone season emission budgets, which would have gone into effect in 2017, 40 CFR 52.38(b)(2)(ii).

5 The Oklahoma emission budgets were not part of this court case and were not addressed in the ruling.

6 States are considered “linked” to a downwind air quality problem when their emissions contribute more than a threshold amount of ozone pollution to a receptor (monitor) projected to have problems attaining or maintaining the ozone NAAQS in a future year.

7 Promulgated in 2016 to address the requirements of the good neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. CSAPR Update Rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 81 FR 74504, October 26, 2016.

Various petitioners also filed legal challenges in the D.C. Circuit to the 2011 supplemental rule that promulgated a FIP for four states including Oklahoma.8 Considering the court's decision in EME Homer City II, we examined the record supporting this supplemental rule and determined that, like the 10 states with remanded budgets, our modeling demonstrated that air quality problems at the downwind air quality problems to which four of the states added to CSAPR in the supplemental rule, including Oklahoma, were linked in 2012 would resolve by 2014 without further transport regulation (81 FR 74525). Accordingly, we removed the FIP requirements associated with the 1997 ozone NAAQS and sources in each of the four states are no longer subject to the phase 2 ozone season budget calculated to address that standard. 40 CFR 52.38(b)(2)(ii) (relieving sources in these four states, including Oklahoma, of the obligation to comply with the CSAPR phase 2 ozone season emission budgets after 2016).9

8See Public Service Company of Oklahoma v. EPA, No. 12-1023 (D.C. Cir., filed Jan. 13, 2012), the case was held in abeyance during the pendency of the litigation in EME Homer City and as of the time of this rule making is still held in abeyance.

9 We note that, because Oklahoma was linked to downwind air quality problems with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS in its analysis, we promulgated a new ozone season NOX emission budget to address that standard at 40 CFR 97.810(a).

B. Oklahoma SIP Submittal Pertaining to the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS and Interstate Transport of Air Pollution

As noted above, relevant to this proposed action, Oklahoma made a May 1, 2007 SIP submittal to address CAA requirements to prohibit emissions which will significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in other states. Oklahoma provided additional information pertaining to the requirements in a supplemental December 5, 2007 letter. The submittals document the State's assessments that Oklahoma emissions will not contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in other states.

Consistent with EPA guidance at the time and EPA's approach in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), the State's May 1, 2007 submittal focused primarily on whether emissions from Oklahoma sources significantly contribute to nonattainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in other states.10 The State did not evaluate whether Oklahoma emissions interfere with maintenance of these NAAQS in other states separately from significant contribution to nonattainment in other states. Like our CAIR approach, the SIP submittal presumed that if Oklahoma sources were not significantly contributing to violations of the NAAQS in other states, then no further specific evaluation was necessary for purposes of the interfere with maintenance sub-element of section 110(a)(2)(D). However, CAIR was remanded to EPA, in part because the court found that EPA had not correctly addressed whether emissions from sources in a state interfere with maintenance of the standards in other states. See North Carolina, 531 F.3d at 910-11. Therefore, we evaluated the May 1, 2007, Oklahoma submittal in light of the decision of the court.

10 On August 15, 2006, we issued our “Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards”. The document is available in the regulations.gov docket at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-R06-OAR-2007-0314-0030.

Because EPA's 2011 CSAPR modeling projected that Oklahoma would be linked to a downwind maintenance receptor with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, but not to a nonattainment receptor, EPA proposed to approve the portion of the SIP submittal asserting that Oklahoma emissions do not contribute significantly to nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in other states (76 FR 64065, October 17, 2011).11 EPA finalized approval of this portion of the SIP submittal on December 29, 2011 (76 FR 81838).

11 A maintenance receptor is a monitor projected to have difficulty maintaining the ozone NAAQS while a nonattainment is a monitor projected to have trouble attaining and maintaining the ozone NAAQS. Oklahoma was linked to an Allegan, Michigan maintenance receptor as discussed above.

Because EPA's CSAPR modeling projected that Oklahoma would be linked to a downwind maintenance receptor with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, we proposed to disapprove, or in the alternative, approve, the portion of the May 7, 2007 SIP submittal asserting that Oklahoma does not interfere with maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in other states (76 FR 64065, October 17, 2011). We proposed to finalize our approval or disapproval action based on the final action for Oklahoma in the then-proposed supplemental CSAPR rule.12 We are now withdrawing the October 17, 2011 proposal with respect to the “interfere with maintenance” clause of the good neighbor provision and instead proposing to approve this portion of the SIP submittal based on the rationale described below.

12 The supplemental CSAPR rule was proposed on July 11, 2011 (76 FR 40662) and finalized on December 27, 2011 76 FR 80760). It added EGUs in Oklahoma, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, and Wisconsin to CSAPR.

II. The EPA's Evaluation

More recent information provides support for our proposed approval of the conclusion in the SIP submittals that the State will not interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in any other state. As discussed above, air quality modeling conducted for the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking projected that emissions from Oklahoma would be linked to a maintenance receptor in Allegan County, Michigan, in 2012. In CSAPR, we used air quality projections for the year 2012, which was also the intended start year for implementation of the CSAPR Phase 1 EGU emission budgets, to identify receptors projected to have air quality problems. The CSAPR final rule record also contained air quality projections for 2014, which was the intended start year for implementation of the CSAPR Phase 2 EGU emission budgets. The 2014 modeling results projected that the Allegan County receptor would have a maximum 8-hour ozone “design value” of 83.6 part per billion (ppb) before considering the emissions reductions anticipated from implementation of CSAPR.13 This value is below the value of 85 ppb that we used to determine whether a particular ozone receptor should be identified as having air quality problems that may trigger transport obligations in upwind states with regard to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (76 FR 48208, 48236). The 2014 modeling results show that the Allegan County, Michigan monitor to which Oklahoma was linked in the 2012 modeling was projected to no longer have air quality problems sufficient to trigger transport obligations with regard to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus, Oklahoma would no longer interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS at the Allegan County receptor in 2014.

13 Design values are used to determine whether a NAAQS is being met. See projected 2014 base case maximum design value for Allegan County, Michigan receptor 26005003 at page B-16 of the June 2011 Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document for CSAPR, Document ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4140, available in regulations.gov.

As discussed above, in light of the remand of 10 other states' CSAPR phase 2 ozone season budgets by the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City II, we also evaluated the validity of the emissions budget promulgated for Oklahoma in the supplemental CSAPR rule, and determined that Oklahoma's emissions would no longer contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other state with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS at either receptor or in any other state. (81 FR 74524-25). This conclusion is based on EPA's most recent modeling analysis.

III. Proposed Action

We are proposing to approve the portion of a May 1, 2007 Oklahoma SIP submittal pertaining to the interfere with maintenance requirement of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. We propose to find that the state's conclusion that Oklahoma emissions do not interfere with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in another state is consistent with our conclusion regarding this good neighbor obligation.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone.

Authority:

42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: November 7, 2018. Anne Idsal, Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2018-24873 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0153; FRL-9986-62-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Amendment to Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds From Consumer Products AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reopening the comment period for the proposed approval to a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland pertaining to the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) 26.11.32—Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) from Consumer Products. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on August 8, 2018 (83 FR 39009). Written comments on the proposed rule were to be submitted to EPA on or before September 7, 2018. The purpose of this document is to reopen the comment period for an additional 30 days. This extension of the comment period is provided to allow the public additional time to provide comment on the August 8, 2018 proposed rule. All comments submitted between the close of the original comment period and the reopening of this comment period will be accepted and considered.

DATES:

Written comments must be received on or before December 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0153 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Susan Spielberger, Associate Director, Office of Air Planning and Programs, [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gregory Becoat (215) 814-2036, or by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On August 8, 2018 (83 FR 39009), EPA proposed approval to a SIP revision submitted by the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) for COMAR 26.11.32—Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds from Consumer Products. The amendment is part of Maryland's strategy to achieve and maintain the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) throughout the State.

I. Extension of Comment Period

EPA is reopening the comment period due to a comment noting that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) model rules referenced in the NPR were not in the docket on www.regulations.gov. EPA has now put these documents into the docket identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0153 at www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Consumer products, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority:

42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: November 1, 2018. Cosmo Servidio, Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018-25078 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 600 [Docket No. 180212158-8158-01] RIN 0648-BH73 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Regional Fishery Management Council Membership; Financial Disclosure and Recusal AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Proposed rule; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

NMFS proposes changes to the regulations that address disclosure of financial interests by, and voting recusal of, council members appointed by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to the regional fishery management councils established under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The regulatory changes are needed to provide guidance to ensure consistency and transparency in the calculation of a Council member's financial interests; determine whether a close causal link exists between a Council decision and a benefit to a Council member's financial interest; and establish regional procedures for preparing and issuing recusal determinations. This proposed rule is intended to improve regulations implementing the statutory requirements governing disclosure of financial interests and voting recusal at section 302(j) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

DATES:

Written comments must be received on or before March 6, 2019.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments on this document, identified by FDMS Docket Number NOAA-NMFS-2018-0092, by any of the following methods:

Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0092, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

Fax: 301-713-1175.

Mail: Submit written comments to Alan Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, SSMC3, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Please mark the outside of the envelope “Financial Disclosure/Recusal.”

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

Electronic copies of NMFS Policy Directive 01-116 Fishery Management Council Financial Disclosures and NMFS Procedural Directive 01-116-01 Procedures for Review of Fishery Management Council Financial Disclosures may be obtained at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/laws-and-policies/fisheries-management-policy-directives.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brian Fredieu, 301-427-8505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 302 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1852) includes provisions for the establishment and administration of the regional fishery management councils (Councils). Section 302(j) (16 U.S.C. 1852(j)) sets forth the statutory requirements for the disclosure of financial interests, and the circumstances under which a Council member is prohibited, or recused, from voting on a matter before a Council. These requirements apply to “affected individuals.” The Magnuson-Stevens Act defines “affected individual” at section 302(j)(1)(A) as individuals who are nominated by the Governor of a State for appointment as a voting member of a Council under section 302(b)(2), and voting members of a Council appointed under section 302(b)(2), or (b)(5) if the individual is not subject to disclosure and recusal requirements under the laws of an Indian tribal government. An affected individual is required to disclose any financial interest in any harvesting, processing, lobbying, advocacy, or marketing activity that is being, or will be, undertaken within a fishery over which the Council concerned has jurisdiction or with respect to an individual or organization with a financial interest in such activity (16 U.S.C. 1852(j)(2)). See also 50 CFR 600.235(a) (further defining “financial interest in harvesting, processing, lobbying, advocacy, or marketing activity”). Disclosure is required for the above types of financial interests held by that individual; the individual's spouse, minor child or partner; or any organization in which the individual is serving as an officer, director, trustee, partner or employee (16 U.S.C. 1852(j)(2)).

Regulations implementing the provisions at section 302(j) appear at 50 CFR 600.235. NMFS also has issued policy and procedural directives (see ADDRESSES) to provide additional guidance on the disclosure of financial interests and recusal.

Pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(d)), this proposed rule would modify the regulations at 50 CFR 600.235 to provide guidance to (1) ensure consistency and transparency in the calculation of an affected individual's financial interests; (2) determine whether a close causal link exists between a Council decision and a benefit to an affected individual's financial interest; and (3) establish regional procedures for preparing and issuing recusal determinations. This proposed rule also makes several minor modifications to the regulations governing financial disclosure. The remainder of this preamble provides detailed information on the background and application of the recusal regulations, the issues that have arisen given the lack of regulations addressing certain aspects of recusal, and a detailed description of the regulatory changes being proposed to determine when a voting recusal is required and the process for issuing recusal determinations.

Background on the Financial Disclosure and Recusal Regulations at 50 CFR 600.235

In 1986, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, originally called the Fishery Conservation and Management Act, was amended by Public Law 99-659 to require voting members and Executive Directors of each Council to disclose any financial interest they held in harvesting, processing, or marketing of fishery resources under the jurisdiction of their respective Council. With passage of the Sustainable Fisheries Act in 1996 (Pub. L. 104-297), Congress amended the Magnuson-Stevens Act to include provisions that prohibit an affected individual from voting on Council decisions that would have a significant and predictable effect on the individual's disclosed financial interests. Section 302(j)(7) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1852(j)(7)) includes a substantive threshold that requires a voting recusal when met, and procedural provisions that apply if an affected individual is prohibited from voting on a Council decision. The substantive threshold requires a voting recusal when a Council decision would have a “significant and predictable effect” on an affected individual's disclosed financial interests. Section 302(j)(7)(A) states that a council decision is considered to have a “significant and predictable effect” on a financial interest if there is “a close causal link between the Council decision and an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the financial interests of the affected individual relative to the financial interests of other participants in the same gear type or sector of the fishery.” The procedural provisions (1) identify a designated official as the person making determinations on whether a Council decision would have a significant and predictable effect on an affected individual's financial interest (recusal determination), (2) allow a Council member to request the Secretary of Commerce's (Secretary's) review of a recusal determination, (3) permit an affected individual who is recused from voting to state how he or she would have voted, and (4) state that any reversal of a recusal determination may not be cause for the invalidation or reconsideration of the Council decision. Section 302(j)(7)(F) requires NMFS to promulgate regulations implementing the provisions of section 302(j)(7).

In August 1997, NMFS published a proposed rule to implement the new voting restriction and procedural provisions at section 302(j)(7) (62 FR 42474; August 7, 1997). Most relevant to this proposed rulemaking, NMFS proposed regulations that implemented the Magnuson-Stevens Act's substantive threshold for recusal and defined the phrase “expected and substantially disproportionate benefit”. This definition established a 10 percent interest threshold in either the total harvest, marketing or processing, or ownership of vessels as an indicator of whether an affected individual's interest in the fishery was significant enough to constitute an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit for purposes of recusal determinations. In the proposed rule preamble, NMFS explained that it interpreted the statutory term “benefit” to include both positive and negative impacts on the affected individual's financial interests, noting that, “Avoiding a negative is as advantageous as gaining a positive.” NMFS also explained that the choice of a particular percentage as “indicative of a `significant' interest” was a difficult one. NMFS stated that it was considering “a tiered approach, with different percentage indicators for different-sized sectors of the fishing industry,” but that it had been unable to develop a workable model and invited suggestions from the public on dealing with the issue.

The proposed regulations also defined the term “designated official” as “an attorney designated by the NOAA General Counsel” and included a process for the issuance and review of recusal determinations. The proposed regulations did not define the term “Council decision,” provide any formula for calculating harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of an affected individual's financial interests relative to the 10 percent thresholds, or provide any regulatory guidance on how to determine the existence of “close causal link.”

NMFS received a number of comments on the proposed rule and published a final rule implementing the voting recusal provisions in November 1998 (63 FR 64182; November 19, 1998). In response to one comment, NMFS added a regulatory definition for the term “Council decision.” Several comments addressed the proposed definition of “expected and substantially disproportionate benefit.” In response to one comment, NMFS explained that the agency had focused on the comparative aspect of the defined term and emphasized that, “The disqualifying effect is not that the Council action will have a significant impact on the member's financial interest; the action must have a disproportionate impact as compared with that of other participants in the fishery sector.” Additionally, some commenters said the 10 percent thresholds were too high for any fishery; other commenters said the 10 percent thresholds were too low for small fisheries. NMFS maintained the 10 percent thresholds, and responded “While NMFS has no quantitative data on which to base the selection of 10 percent as the disqualifying industry share, qualitative information available from existing disclosure forms and other sources indicates that this value would accomplish the Congressional intent of disqualifying from voting only those current Council members whose financial interests would be disproportionately affected by Council actions, in comparison with the financial interests of other participants in the fishery sector.” NMFS received no comments on, and made no changes in the final rule to address, the calculation of harvesting, processing and marketing activity relative to the 10 percent thresholds or regulatory guidance on determining the existence of “close causal link.” The recusal regulations, located at 50 CFR 600.235, became effective on February 17, 1999.

No changes were made to the statutory or regulatory provisions governing financial disclosure and recusal until January 2007, when the Magnuson-Stevens Act was reauthorized (Pub. L. 109-479). The Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act amended section 302(j) to include advocacy and lobbying as types of activities that must be disclosed by affected individuals and to require members of each Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee to disclose their financial interests. NMFS modified the regulations governing disclosure of financial interests and recusal to address these changes in 2010 (75 FR 59143, September 27, 2010). No further amendments to section 302(j) have occurred since the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act and NMFS has made no modifications to the financial disclosure and recusal regulations since 2010.

Agency Application of the Recusal Regulations

Since the effective date of the recusal regulations in February 1999, designated officials within the regional offices of the NOAA Office of General Counsel have followed and applied the recusal regulations and have prepared and issued recusal determinations when requested and as necessary for affected individuals within each of the Councils. However, because the regulations lack guidance on several key aspects of reaching a recusal determination, and provide little guidance on the procedures to be followed when preparing and issuing a recusal determination, designated officials have developed practice principles and interpretations over time to fill in these regulatory gaps and to address new factual circumstances that have arisen. The following describes the current practice, principles, and interpretations that have been used in preparing and issuing recusal determinations, which are being either modified or supplemented through this rulemaking.

Attribution Principles

Without a regulatory formula for calculating harvesting, processing or marketing activity (i.e., covered activity) and vessel ownership relative to the 10 percent thresholds, designated officials have applied a “full attribution” principle. Under the full attribution principle, all covered activity of, and all vessels owned by, a financial interest that is wholly or partially owned by an affected individual are fully attributed to the affected individual. Percentage of ownership has not been a relevant factor under the full attribution principle; the determining factor has been that there is some percentage of ownership in the financial interest. The full attribution principle has also been applied to employment; and to all covered activity of, including all vessels owned by, a financial interest that employs an affected individual. The full attribution principle also extends to financial interests that are wholly or partially owned by an affected individual's financial interests.

A slightly different attribution principle has been applied for financial interests that wholly or partially own an affected individual's financial interests. A designated official will apply the full attribution principle when a financial interest owns fifty percent or more of an affected individual's financial interest. However, if a financial interest owns less than fifty percent of an affected individual's financial interest, then the designated official has not attributed to an affected individual any covered activity of, or vessels owned by, the financial interest.

Finally, designated officials have followed certain guidelines in applying attribution principles when the financial interest is an association or organization, or when a spouse, partner, or minor child holds the financial interest. For associations and organizations, designated officials have applied the full attribution principle when the affected individual's association or organization receives from NMFS an allocation of harvesting or processing privileges, owns vessels, or is directly engaged in a covered activity. However, if the association or organization, as an entity separate from its members, does not own any vessels and is not directly engaged in any covered activity, designated officials have not attributed to the affected individual the covered activity of, or vessel ownership by, the members of the association or organization. For spouses, partners, and minor children, application of the attribution principle depends on whether there is ownership of, or employment with, the financial interest. Designated officials apply the full attribution principle and attribute to an affected individual all covered activity of, and vessels owned by, a financial interest that is wholly or partially owned by a spouse, partner, or minor child. Similarly, designated officials have applied the full attribution principle and attributed to an affected individual all covered activity of, and vessels owned by, a financial interest that employs a spouse, partner or minor child when the spouse's, partner's, or minor child's compensation is influenced by, or fluctuates with, the financial performance of the company. Conversely, designated officials have not attributed to an affected individual any covered activity of, or vessels owned by, a financial interest that employs a spouse, partner or minor child when the spouse's, partner's, or minor child's compensation is not influenced by, or fluctuates with, the financial performance of the company.

Close Causal Link

Since implementation of the recusal regulations in 1999, designated officials have understood that the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the regulations require a voting recusal when there is a close causal link between the Council decision and an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to an affected individual's financial interest in the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council decision relative to other participants and using the most recent fishing year for which information is available. However, without any regulatory guidance concerning the close causal link requirement, the issue has sometimes been subsumed in the determination of whether there is an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit.

Process and Procedure for Preparing and Issuing Recusal Determinations

Regulations at 50 CFR 600.235(f) set forth two paths for initiating a recusal determination. First, an affected individual may request a recusal determination by notifying the designated official either within a reasonable time before the Council meeting at which the Council decision will be made or during a Council meeting before a Council vote on the decision. Second, a designated official may initiate a recusal determination. The designated official may initiate based on his or her knowledge of the fishery and the financial interests disclosed by an affected individual or based on written and signed information received either within a reasonable time before a Council meeting or, if the issue could not have been anticipated before the meeting, during a Council meeting before a Council vote on the decision. Regulations at § 600.235(f) also state that the recusal determination will be based upon a review of the information contained in the affected individual's financial interest form and any other reliable and probative information provided in writing and that all information considered will be made part of the public record for the decision.

While the regulations at § 600.235(f) provide some structure for the initiation, development, and issuance of a recusal determination, they are silent on other important procedural aspects of preparing and issuing a recusal determination. For example, the regulations do not address: (1) The process by which the designated official will make the affected individual, the Council, and the public aware of recusal determinations, (2) how and when designated officials are identified, or (3) the timing of issuing a recusal determination relative to the start of a Council meeting and the request for review process. Without additional regulatory guidance concerning the procedure for preparing and issuing recusal determinations, regional practices have developed to address these gaps.

Concerns With the Recusal Regulations and Need for Action

Several recent determinations resulting in voting recusals have raised concerns among the Regional Fishery Management Councils. In April 2015, the NOAA General Counsel received a request for review (i.e., appeal) of a recusal determination issued in March 2015 that concluded that a voting recusal was required for an affected individual on the North Pacific Council. The appeal challenged the use of the full attribution approach and argued that the regulations and common business practices support using a proportional share, or partial attribution, approach to calculating financial interests. Under such an approach, an affected individual would be attributed with covered activity and vessel ownership commensurate with the affected individual's percentage of ownership in the company. The appeal noted that the language of the regulations refers to the interests of the affected individual and explained that if an affected individual owns five percent of a fishing company, then the affected individual only receives five percent of the company distributions because the affected individual does not have a financial interest in more than five percent of the company. According to the appeal, to attribute all activity of a partially-owned company unreasonably credits the affected individual with more of the financial interest than is actually owned. The appeal also argued that in an employment situation, the affected individual should only be attributed with a proportional share of the harvesting and processing activity of companies that are partially-owned subsidiary companies of the affected individual's employer.

After reviewing the appeal, the NOAA General Counsel upheld the use of the full attribution approach, concluding that (1) the term “interest” as used in the recusal regulations is broad and not limited solely to direct financial benefit from harvest; (2) that the full attribution approach is more consistent with the purpose of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the regulations; and (3) while past practice is not necessarily binding, consistency and predictability are important for all stakeholders in the fisheries management process.

After receiving another recusal determination in May 2015 that used the full attribution approach, the North Pacific Council submitted a letter to NMFS in August 2015, asking NMFS to consider changes to the way in which covered activity is calculated. Specifically, the North Pacific Council asked NMFS to consider using a proportional share approach similar to the approach described in the appeal. Under the approach, the designated official would attribute to the affected individual the percentage of the company's covered activity that is commensurate with the affected individual's ownership percentage. The North Pacific Council argued that use of the full attribution approach is an “unfair and illogical interpretation of the recusal regulations, and results in unintended recusals of Council members.” The North Pacific Council also stated that it had general concerns with the lack of transparency and predictability of the recusal process and asked that NMFS provide more clarity and predictability to the process of issuing recusal determinations.

While NMFS was considering the North Pacific Council's requests, another determination requiring a voting recusal of an affected individual of the North Pacific Council was issued in March 2017. The recusal determination applied the full attribution approach and determined that a voting recusal was required because the action before the North Pacific Council was a Council decision and the affected individual's financial interests harvested more than ten percent of the total harvest in the affected fishery during the previous fishing year. However, the Council decision was a fishery management plan amendment that required no implementing regulations. The North Pacific Council argued that because the action had no real possibility of affecting the affected individual's financial interests, there was no close causal link between the Council decision and the expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the affected individual's financial interests and no voting recusal should have been required. Around this same time, the Western Pacific Council raised similar concerns with regard to “close causal link” between a benefit and a Council decision, and what constituted an “expected and substantially disproportionate benefit” regarding an affected individual's financial interest, especially when the affected individual is an employee of a fishing company versus an owner of a fishing company.

NMFS discussed these concerns with the Council Coordination Committee and decided to initiate this rulemaking to address the concerns. NMFS tasked a recusal working group, comprised of experts in both NMFS and the NOAA Office of General Counsel, to consider whether the agency should take any action regarding how the recusal provisions should be applied in such circumstances in the future. The group considered the attribution principles for recusal determinations and sought solutions to clarify the application of the close causal link requirement in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The group also discussed ways in which to improve the transparency of regional procedures employed in preparing and issuing recusal determinations.

Proposed Changes to the Financial Disclosure and Recusal Regulations

NMFS proposes to make the following changes to the financial disclosure and recusal regulations at § 600.235.

Decision-Making Process for Recusal Determinations

NMFS proposes regulations that explain the steps to be followed in determining whether an affected individual is required to be recused from voting. Regulations at 50 CFR 600.235(c)(3) would be modified to clarify the multi-part test that is used in making this determination. First, the designated official would need to determine if the action being taken by a Council is a “Council decision” and whether an affected individual (i.e., member, spouse, partner, minor child) had an interest in the fishery affected by the Council decision. If the action before the Council is not a “Council decision” or no affected individuals have any financial interests in the fishery affected by the decision, the designated official's inquiry would end. But if the answer to these factors is yes, the designated official would then need to examine the next two factors: Whether there is an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the affected individual's financial interests and whether there is a close causal link between the Council decision and the expected and substantially disproportionate benefit. Under the proposed rule, a designated official would be able to decide the order in which these factors are examined. If the answer to either of these factors is no, then the designated official's inquiry would end and a voting recusal would not be required. But if the answer to both of these factors is yes, then a voting recusal would be required.

Expected and Substantially Disproportionate Benefit

NMFS proposes to make minor adjustments to the current regulatory definition of “expected and substantially disproportionate benefit.” One of these changes would be to remove the ten percent recusal thresholds from the definition of “expected and substantially disproportionate benefit” and use them to define the term “significant financial interest.”

NMFS also proposes to add § 600.235(c)(5) to provide guidance on determining whether an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit exists. This proposed regulation clarifies that an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit will be determined to exist if an affected individual has a significant financial interest in the fishery that is likely to be positively or negatively impacted by the Council decision. An affected individual's significant financial interest in a fishery indicates that the affected individual will experience an expected and substantially disproportionate impact, either positive or negative, relative to the financial interests of other participants in the fishery. The magnitude of the positive or negative impact is not determinative of whether there is an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit. NMFS also proposes regulatory guidance on how to calculate an affected individual's financial interests in order to determine whether the affected individual has a significant financial interest, which is described later in the preamble.

Close Causal Link

NMFS proposes to create a definition of close causal link to better guide the application of the requirement for causation between a Council decision and an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the financial interests of an affected individual. The proposed definition would state that a close causal link means that “a Council decision would reasonably be expected to directly impact or affect the financial interests of an affected individual.”

NMFS also proposes regulatory guidance on determining whether a close causal link exists. Due to the nature of Council decisions, NMFS concluded that it generally is likely that a close causal link between a benefit and a Council decision exists for all Council decisions, especially those with implementing regulations, as regulations typically impact the public directly in some way. However, NMFS also recognizes that there may be instances where no impact would occur or where the chain of causation is attenuated. Therefore, NMFS proposes exceptions under which a designated official may determine that a close causal link does not exist. One proposed exception would be for a Council decision affecting a fishery or sector of a fishery in which an affected individual has a financial interest but the chain of causation between the Council decision and the affected individual's financial interest is attenuated or is contingent on the occurrence of events that are speculative or that are independent and unrelated to the Council decision. The other proposed exception would be for a Council decision affecting a fishery or sector of a fishery in which an affected individual has a financial interest but there is no real, as opposed to speculative, possibility that the Council decision will affect the affected individual's financial interest. This proposed language provides guidance on how to determine an element of causation in those instances where a Council decision is not reasonably expected to directly impact or affect the financial interest of an affected individual.

Calculating Significant Financial Interest

In response to the requests for increased transparency and predictability, NMFS proposes to amend the regulations to provide guidance on the attribution principles to be applied when calculating whether an affected individual has a significant financial interest in a fishery. The proposed attribution principles address (1) direct ownership and employment, (2) indirect ownership, (3) parent ownership, (4) financial interests in associations and organizations, and (5) financial interests of a spouse, partner, or minor child. The proposed attribution principles for parent ownership, associations and organizations, and financial interests of a spouse, partner, or minor child represent the approach NMFS has been following and would continue to follow if this proposed rule is finalized. However, NMFS proposes to adopt a partial attribution approach when calculating direct and indirect ownership.

NMFS recognizes a distinction between two different types of partial interest: (1) Direct ownership, and (2) indirect ownership (i.e., a subsidiary relationship). A direct ownership interest exists where a council member (or the member's employer) directly owns some interest—whether full ownership or some share—in a particular company. An indirect or subsidiary ownership interest exists where a company in which the council member (or the member's employer) has a direct interest owns a share of another company. NMFS believes the direct and indirect ownership situations should be distinguished because an individual has a direct interest in, and more control over, a company that he or she owns, even if the interest represents a partial interest in the company. On the other hand, an individual's indirect ownership interest in a subsidiary company is more attenuated. Note also that in some cases employees are treated differently than owners because an employee cannot be “partially” employed by a company.

An affected individual would be considered to have a direct ownership interest when the affected individual wholly or partially owns, or is employed by, a business, vessel, or other entity (i.e., company) reported on the individual's financial interest form. For direct ownership, NMFS proposes that a designated official fully attribute to an affected individual all covered activity and vessel ownership of a company when the affected individual is employed by, or owns 50 percent or more of, the company. If the affected individual owns less than 50 percent of the company, NMFS proposes that a designated official attribute covered activity and vessel ownership commensurate with the affected individual's percentage of ownership.

In the case of direct ownership, NMFS determined that affected individuals owning 50 percent or more of a company should continue to be attributed with 100 percent of the covered activity and vessel ownership of that company because an individual has a direct interest in, and more control over, a company that he or she owns, even if the interest represents less than a 100 percent interest in the company. NMFS believes that when a Council member owns a controlling interest in a company, the member can also control a company's response to any particular council decision and the potential for a conflict of interest is heightened. Additionally, NMFS determined that an employee of a company should continue to be attributed with 100 percent of the covered activity and vessel ownership of that company because an employee cannot be “partially” employed and thus the employee's interest is always fully attributed to a company through the nature of their employment. However, NMFS determined that a partial attribution approach for less than 50 percent direct ownership would more closely align the owner's actual ownership interest in a company and better reflect the ability to control the company's activities. Therefore NMFS proposes to only attribute the proportional level of interest to the owner.

In the case of indirect (or subsidiary) ownership, an affected individual would be considered to have an indirect ownership interest when the affected individual's company or employer wholly or partially owns a company that must be reported on the individual's financial interest form. For subsidiary ownership, NMFS proposes to apply a partial attribution approach and attribute to the affected individual the harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and vessels owned by, a company that is owned by an affected individual's company or employer commensurate with the member's percentage ownership in the directly owned company, and the directly owned company's ownership in the indirectly owned company. For example, if Jones owns 25 percent of Acme, and Acme owns 50 percent of Zenith, then Jones should be attributed 12.5 percent of Zenith's activity in an affected fishery. NMFS determined that this partial attribution approach better captures the attenuated nature of indirect ownership and reflects that an affected individual has less control or a more partial interest in the activities of a company indirectly owned by the affected individual's directly owned company or employer. In any of these cases, the burden would be on the Council member to provide reliable information concerning partial ownership interests. In the absence of such information, a 100 percent interest would be assumed.

NMFS recognizes that the proposed revisions to the direct and indirect attribution principles may not address every situation in which an affected individual's interest may seem attenuated. However, under the proposed multi-part test for determining whether recusal is required, a designated official must specifically determine whether there is a close causal link between a council decision and an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to an affected individual's financial interests. The proposed guidance on close causal link will further address situations where an affected individual's interest is attenuated from a Council decision.

Process for Development and Issuance of Recusal Determinations

In order to increase transparency and to add clarity to the process for development and issuance of recusal determinations, NMFS intends to require that each NMFS Regional Office, in conjunction with NOAA Office of General Counsel, will publish and make available to the public a Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook, which explains the process and procedure typically followed by the region in preparing and issuing recusal determinations. The handbook would include: A statement that the Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook is intended as guidance to describe the recusal determination process and procedure typically followed within the region; identification of the Council(s) to which the Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook applies; a description of the process for identifying the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the action before the Council; a description of the process for preparing and issuing a recusal determination relative to the timing of a Council decision; a description of the process by which the Council, Council members, and the public will be made aware of recusal determinations; and a description of the process for identifying the designated official(s) who will prepare recusal determinations and attend Council meetings.

Other Proposed Changes

In addition to the proposed changes described above, NMFS proposes to make several minor changes to section 600.235 to provide additional clarity to the financial disclosure regulations and guidance concerning the length of time Regional Administrators and NMFS Regional Offices must retain financial disclosure forms submitted by Council and Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) members. First, NMFS proposes to amend the heading for section 600.235 to include reference to recusal. The current heading for section 600.235 only refers to financial disclosure but this section has included the recusal regulations since 1998. The addition of “recusal” to the heading would provide clarity as to the subject of the regulations at section 600.235.

Second, the proposed rule would modify regulations at 600.235(h) to change “financial disclosure report” to “Financial Interest Form” to provide the accurate title of the financial disclosure form when it is referenced in the regulations. The proposed modifications would provide clarity and consistency in the financial disclosure regulations by including an accurate reference to the financial disclosure form.

Third, the proposed rule would add a new paragraph 600.235(b)(5), which would require a Regional Administrator to retain a Council member's financial disclosure forms for 20 years from the date the form is signed by the Council member, or in accordance with the records retention schedule published by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and as implemented by NOAA, if the schedule requires retention of such forms for longer than 20 years. Currently, the financial disclosure regulations do not provide Regional Administrators or NMFS Regional Offices with any guidance on the length of time a Council member's financial disclosure forms should be retained by NMFS. NMFS has determined that financial disclosure forms submitted by Council members are important documents worthy of retention for 20 years after their submission, or for as long as required by NARA. The proposed change would ensure that a Council member's financial disclosure forms are available for public inspection and agency examination for a sufficient period of time during and following the Council member's tenure on a regional fishery management council.

Finally, the proposed rule would make minor clarifying changes through proposed § 600.235(b)(8) by changing the phrase “shall maintain on file” to “must retain.”

Classification

The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.

This proposed action is significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866.

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule regulates only those Council members who have voting privileges and are appointed to their position by the Secretary of Commerce.

This proposed rule would modify regulations at 50 CFR 600.235 to provide guidance to: (1) Ensure consistency and transparency in the calculation of an affected individual's financial interests; (2) determine whether a close causal link exists between a Council decision and a benefit to an affected individual's financial interest; and (3) establish regional procedures for preparing and issuing recusal determinations. NMFS invites public comment on whether the changes proposed are sufficient and effective in distinguishing the calculation of direct ownership, indirect ownership and employment interests; whether the proposed language appropriately defines when a close causal link exists between a Council decision and a benefit; and whether the establishment of regional procedures provides consistency and transparency in the preparation and issuance of recusal determinations. Specifically, NMFS invites public comment on whether partial attribution should extend to cases where the affected individual is an employee, a member of an association or organization, a spouse, partner, or minor child of a council member, or in cases of parent ownership; on whether there are additional circumstances that merit an exception from the standard that a close causal link exists for all Council decision that require implementing regulations and that affect a fishery or sector of a fishery in which an affect individual has a financial interest; whether partial attribution appropriately reflects the attenuated nature of indirect ownership. NMFS also invites comment on whether a 50 percent ownership threshold captures the nature of direct ownership, including whether an interest of less than 50 percent might in some cases be controlling, but also notes that any subjective control test would likely require council members to submit additional financial information and would require NMFS to develop a process and expertise to analyze control. In accordance with 50 CFR 600.235, Council members may be required to recuse themselves from voting on a Council decision that would have a significant and predictable effect on a disclosed financial interest. This proposed rule would have no effect on any small entities, as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601. As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 600

Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Statistics.

Dated: November 8, 2018. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

For reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR part 600 as follows:

PART 600—MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 600 continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 561 and 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

2. In § 600.235: a. Revise the section heading; b. In paragraph (a) add in alphabetical order the definitions for “Close causal link,” “Expected and substantially disproportionate benefit,” and “Significant financial interest;” c. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(5) through (b)(7) as paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(8), respectively, add new paragraph (b)(5), and revise newly redesignated paragraph (b)(8); d. Revise paragraph (c)(3), redesignate paragraph (c)(4) as (c)(7), and add new paragraphs (c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6); e. Revise the heading of paragraph (f), (f)(1), and add paragraph (f)(6); f. Revise paragraphs (g)(2) and (h).

The additions and revisions to read as follows:

§ 600.235 Financial disclosure and recusal.

(a) * * *

Close causal link means that a Council decision would reasonably be expected to directly impact or affect the financial interests of an affected individual.

Expected and substantially disproportionate benefit means a positive or negative impact with regard to a Council decision that is likely to affect a fishery or sector of a fishery in which the affected individual has a significant financial interest.

Significant financial interest means:

(1) A greater than 10-percent interest in the total harvest of the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council decision;

(2) A greater than 10-percent interest in the marketing or processing of the total harvest of the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council decision; or

(3) Full or partial ownership of more than 10 percent of the vessels using the same gear type within the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council decision.

(b) * * *

(5) The Regional Administrator must retain the Financial Interest Form for a Council member for 20 years from the date the form is signed by the Council member or in accordance with the current NOAA records schedule.

(8) The Regional Administrator must retain the Financial Interest Forms of all SSC members for at least five years after the expiration of that individual's term on the SSC. Such forms are not subject to sections 302(j)(5)(B) and (C) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

(c) * * *

(3) In making a determination under paragraph (f) of this section as to whether a Council decision will have a significant and predictable effect on an affected individual's financial interests, the designated official will:

(i) Initially determine whether the action before the Council is a Council decision, and whether the affected individual has any financial interest in the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the action.

(ii) If the designated official determines that the action is not a Council decision or that the affected individual does not have any financial interest in the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the action, the designated official's inquiry ends and the designated official will determine that a voting recusal is not required under 50 CFR 600.235.

(iii) However, if the designated official determines that the action is a Council decision and that the affected individual has a financial interest in the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council decision, a voting recusal is required under 50 CFR 600.235 if there is:

(A) An expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the affected individual's financial interest (see paragraph (c)(5) of this section), and

(B) A close causal link (see paragraph (c)(4) of this section) between the Council decision and the expected and substantially disproportionate benefit to the affected individual's financial interest.

(4) Determining close causal link. (i) For all Council decisions that require implementing regulations and that affect a fishery or sector of a fishery in which an affected individual has a financial interest, a close causal link exists unless:

(A) The chain of causation between the Council decision and the affected individual's financial interest is attenuated or is contingent on the occurrence of events that are speculative or that are independent of and unrelated to the Council decision; or

(B) There is no real, as opposed to speculative, possibility that the Council decision will affect the affected individual's financial interest.

(ii) For Council decisions that do not require implementing regulations, a close causal link exists if there is a real, as opposed to speculative, possibility that the Council decision will affect the affected individual's financial interest.

(5) Determining expected and substantially disproportionate benefit. A designated official will determine that an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit exists if an affected individual has a significant financial interest (see paragraph (c)(6) of this section) in the fishery or sector of the fishery that is likely to be positively or negatively affected by the Council decision. The magnitude of the positive or negative impact is not determinative of whether there is an expected and substantially disproportionate benefit. The determining factor is the affected individual's significant financial interest in the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council decision.

(6) Calculating significant financial interest—(i) Information to be used. (A) The designated official will use the information included in the Financial Interest Form and any other reliable and probative information provided in writing.

(B) The designated official may contact an affected individual to better understand the reported financial interest or any information provided in writing.

(C) The designated official will presume that the information reported on the Financial Interest Form is true and correct and the designated official is not responsible for determining the veracity of the reported information when preparing a determination under paragraph (f) of this section.

(D) If an affected individual does not provide information concerning the specific percentage of ownership of a financial interest reported on his or her Financial Interest Form, the designated official will attribute all harvesting, processing, or marketing activity of, and vessels owned by, the financial interest to the affected individual.

(ii) Attribution principles to be applied when calculating an affected individual's financial interests relative to the significant financial interest thresholds. The designated official will apply the following principles when calculating an affected individual's financial interests relative to the significant financial interest thresholds for the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the action. For purposes of this paragraph, use of the term “company” includes any business, vessel, or other entity.

(A) Direct ownership (companies owned by, or that employ, an affected individual). The designated official will attribute to an affected individual all harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and all vessels owned by, a company when the affected individual owns 50 percent or more of that company. If an affected individual owns less than 50 percent of a company, the designated official will attribute to the affected individual the harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and vessels owned by, the company commensurate with the affected individual's percentage of ownership. The designated official will attribute to an affected individual all harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and all vessels owned by, a company that employs the affected individual.

(B) Indirect ownership (companies owned by an affected individual's company or employer). The designated official will attribute to the affected individual the harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and vessels owned by, a company that is owned by that affected individual's company or employer commensurate with the affected individual's percentage ownership in the directly owned company, and the directly owned company's ownership in the indirectly owned company.

(C) Parent ownership (companies that own some percentage of an affected individual's company or employer). The designated official will attribute to an affected individual all harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and all vessels owned by, a company that owns fifty percent or more of a company that is owned by the affected individual or that employs the affected individual. The designated official will not attribute to an affected individual the harvesting, processing, or marketing activity of, or any vessels owned by, a company that owns less than fifty percent of a company that is owned by the affected individual or that employs the affected individual.

(D) Associations and Organizations. An affected individual may be employed by or serve, either compensated or unpaid, as an officer, director, board member or trustee of an association or organization. The designated official will not attribute to the affected individual the vessels owned by, or the harvesting, processing, or marketing activity conducted by, the members of that association or organization if such organization or association, as an entity separate from its members, does not own any vessels and is not directly engaged in harvesting, processing or marketing. However, if such organization or association receives from NMFS an allocation of harvesting or processing privileges, owns vessels, or is directly engaged in harvesting, processing or marketing, the designated official will attribute to the affected individual the vessels owned by, and all harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, that association or organization.

(E) Financial interests of a spouse, partner or minor child—(1) Ownership. The designated official will attribute to an affected individual all harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and all vessels owned by, a company when the affected individual's spouse, partner or minor child owns 50 percent or more of that company. If an affected individual's spouse, partner or minor child owns less than 50 percent of a company, the designated official will attribute to the affected individual the harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and vessels owned by, the company commensurate with the spouse's, partner's or minor child's percentage of ownership.

(2) Employment. The designated official will not attribute to an affected individual the harvesting, processing, or marketing activity of, or any vessels owned by, a company that employs the affected individual's spouse, partner or minor child when the spouse's, partner's or minor child's compensation are not influenced by, or fluctuate with, the financial performance of the company. The designated official will attribute to an affected individual all harvesting, processing, and marketing activity of, and all vessels owned by, a company that employs the Council member's spouse, partner or minor child when the spouse's, partner's or minor child's compensation are influenced by, or fluctuate with, the financial performance of the company.

(f) Process and procedure for determination. (1) At the request of an affected individual, and as provided under paragraphs (c)(3) through (6), the designated official shall determine for the record whether a Council decision would have a significant and predictable effect on that individual's financial interest. Unless subject to confidentiality requirements, all information considered will be made part of the public record for the decision. The affected individual may request a determination by notifying the designated official—

(i) Within a reasonable time before the Council meeting at which the Council decision will be made; or

(ii) During a Council meeting before a Council vote on the decision.

(6) Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook. (i) Each NMFS Regional Office, in conjunction with NOAA Office of General Counsel, will publish and make available to the public its Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook, which explains the process and procedure typically followed in preparing and issuing recusal determinations.

(ii) A Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook must include:

(A) A statement that the Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook is intended as guidance to describe the recusal determination process and procedure typically followed within the region.

(B) Identification of the Council(s) to which the Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook applies. If the Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook applies to multiple Councils, any procedure that applies to a subset of those Councils should clearly identify the Council(s) to which the procedure applies.

(C) A description of the process for identifying the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the action before the Council.

(D) A description of the process for preparing and issuing a recusal determination relative to the timing of a Council decision.

(E) A description of the process by which the Council, Council members, and the public will be made aware of recusal determinations.

(F) A description of the process for identifying the designated official(s) who will prepare recusal determinations and attend Council meetings.

(iii) A Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook may include additional material related to the region's process and procedure for recusal determinations not specifically identified in paragraph (f)(6)(ii) of this section. A Regional Recusal Determination Procedure Handbook may be revised at any time upon agreement by the NMFS Regional Office and NOAA Office of General Counsel.

(g) * * *

(2) A Council member may request a review of any aspect of the recusal determination, including but not limited to, whether the action is a Council decision, the description of the fishery or sector of the fishery affected by the Council action, the calculation of an affected individual's financial interests or the finding of a significant financial interest, and the existence of a close causal link. A request for review must include a full statement in support of the review, including a concise statement as to why the Council member believes that the recusal determination is in error and why the designated official's determination should be reversed.

(h) The provisions of 18 U.S.C. 208 regarding conflicts of interest do not apply to an affected individual who is a voting member of a Council appointed by the Secretary, as described under section 302(j)(1)(A)(ii) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and who is in compliance with the requirements of this section for filing a Financial Interest Form. The provisions of 18 U.S.C. 208 do not apply to a member of an SSC, unless that individual is an officer or employee of the United States or is otherwise covered by the requirements of 18 U.S.C. 208.

[FR Doc. 2018-24905 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
83 222 Friday, November 16, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Salmon-Challis National Forest; Idaho; Plan Development AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Notice of intent to initiate the plan development phase of the land management plan revision for the Salmon-Challis National Forest.

SUMMARY:

The Salmon-Challis National Forest is initiating the land management planning process pursuant to the 2012 Planning Rule. This process will result in a revised land management plan that describes the strategic direction for management of forest resources for the next 10 to 15 years on the Salmon-Challis National Forest. The Salmon-Challis is inviting the public to help us identify the need to change the existing Challis and Salmon Land Management Plans, as well as, the appropriate plan components that will become a proposed action for the land management plan revision.

DATES:

The assessment for the Salmon-Challis National Forest was completed July 19, 2018, and posted on the web at http://bit.ly/SCNF_Final_Assessment.

From November 2018 through February 2019, the public is invited to engage in a collaborative process to identify the primary concepts to be considered for the proposed action and associated plan components. The Salmon-Challis will then initiate procedures pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and prepare a revised land management plan.

ADDRESSES:

Send written comments or questions concerning this notice to Salmon-Challis National Forest, Attn.: Plan Revision, 1206 South Challis Street, Salmon, Idaho, 83467. Comments may also be sent via email to [email protected]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Josh Milligan, Planning Team Leader, 208-756-5560. Individuals who use telecommunication devices 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. More information on the planning process can also be found on the Salmon-Challis National Forest website at https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/scnf/landmanagement/planning/?cid=fseprd544724.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976 requires that every National Forest System (NFS) unit develop a land management plan. The 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR 219) provides broad programmatic direction to national forests and national grasslands for developing and implementing their land management plans. These plans describe the strategic direction for management of forest resources for ten to fifteen years, and are adaptive and amendable as conditions change over time.

Under the 2012 Planning Rule, the assessment of ecological, social, and economic trends and conditions is the first stage of the planning process. The assessment phase began in January 2018 and interested parties were invited to contribute in the development of the assessment (36 CFR 219.6). The Salmon-Challis hosted several public meetings and on-line webinars throughout the assessment phase. The assessment was completed in July 2018. The trends and conditions identified in the assessment will help to develop the needs for change and the development of plan components.

The second stage is a development and decision process guided, in part, by NEPA and includes the preparation of a draft environmental impact statement and revised land management plan for public review and comment, and the preparation of the final environmental impact statement and revised land management plan. The third stage of the process is monitoring and feedback, which is ongoing over the life of the revised plan.

With this notice, the agency invites other governments, non-governmental parties, and the public to contribute to the development of the proposed action. The intent of public engagement during development of the proposed action is to identify the appropriate plan components that the Forest Service should consider in developing its land management plan. We encourage contributors to share material about desired conditions, standards and guidelines, land suitability determinations, management area designations, and plan monitoring.

Collaboration in the development of the proposed action supports the development of relationships of key stakeholders throughout the plan development process and is an essential step to understanding current conditions, available data, and feedback needed to support a strategic, efficient planning process.

As public meetings, other opportunities for public engagement, and public review and comment opportunities are identified to assist with the development of the land management plan revision, public announcements will be made, notifications will be posted on the Salmon-Challis website at https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/scnf/landmanagement/planning/?cid=fseprd544724, and information will be sent out to the Salmon-Challis land management plan revision mailing list.

If anyone is interested in being on the Salmon-Challis land management plan revision mailing list to receive these notifications, please contact Planning Team Leader Josh Milligan at the mailing address identified above, by sending an email to [email protected], or by telephone at 208-756-5560.

Responsible Official

The responsible official for the revision of the Salmon-Challis National Forest Land Management Plan is Chuck Mark, Forest Supervisor, Salmon-Challis National Forest, 1206 South Challis Street, Salmon, Idaho, 83467.

Dated: October 4, 2018. Allen Rowley, Acting Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
[FR Doc. 2018-25057 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Umatilla National Forest, Oregon, Ellis Integrated Vegetation Management Project AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY:

The Heppner and North Fork John Day Ranger Districts propose the Ellis Integrated Vegetation Project (Ellis Project) to reduce overstocking, improve ecosystem health, and enhance resilient landscapes by creating and maintaining heterogeneous vegetative conditions at multiple scales. As a result, this action will reduce the risk of uncharacteristic disturbances; enhance vegetative communities; provide well-distributed, high quality wildlife habitat for associated species; aid in protecting values at risk; promote the health and safety of the public and firefighters; and contribute to social, cultural, and economic needs. The project area is approximately 15 miles southeast of Heppner and 7 miles west of Ukiah, Oregon, in Morrow, Umatilla, and Grant Counties. Based on internal and external issues raised early in proposal development; and the scope, scale, and potentially significant beneficial impacts to distribution of wildlife, forest health, and fuels reduction, the Umatilla National Forest plans to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS).

DATES:

Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received by January 15, 2019. The draft EIS is expected November 2019 and the final EIS is expected July 2020.

ADDRESSES:

Send written comments to Heppner District Ranger, Brandon Houck; c/o Leslie Taylor, PO Box 7, Heppner, Oregon, 97836, or they can be hand delivered to the Heppner Ranger District (117 So. Main St., Heppner, OR 97836). Comments may also be submitted electronically via https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=41350 selecting the “Comment on Project” link in the “Get Connected” group at the right hand side of the project web page, or via facsimile to 541-278-3730.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth Berkley, 541-278-3814, [email protected].

Individuals who use telecommunication devices 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 Ellis Project is located within the Upper Butter Creek, Upper Willow Creek, Rhea Creek, Lower Camas Creek, and the Potamus Creek-North Fork John Day River 5th field watersheds. Private land accounts for approximately 4,626 acres within the project boundary, leaving about up to 110,000 acres that may be considered for treatment on National Forest System lands.

Purpose and Need for Action

The Ellis Project is an interdisciplinary project developed to meet a wide variety of program needs. The key purposes are to reduce the risk of undesirable wildfire, improve ingress and egress for firefighters, increase forest health and vigor for timber and non-timber values, and improve wildlife habitat. This project is needed to protect values at risk, create healthy, fire-resistant landscapes and improve wildlife habitat and forage variability. Additional program purposes include improving the quality of rangelands, enhancing unique vegetation communities, improving ethnographically important foods, and improving and maintaining recreational opportunities.

Proposed Action

The Ellis Project is expected to include the following types of treatments: commercial thinning; small diameter thinning; mechanical fuels treatments; pile, jackpot, and broadcast burning; landscape burning; pruning and planting. Target basal area for thinning will be dependent on species composition, stand age, size classes and desired future conditions. Varying desired stand density will create or maintain a clumpy, patchy, uneven mosaic of trees across the landscape. Regeneration harvest will occur in cold and cool moist forest areas affected by insect and disease. Areas of additional treatment will be focused on the ember reduction zone, areas of scenic recreational value, and areas of conifer encroachment on aspen stands, wet meadows and shrub-steppe. Additional wildlife habitat improvements will include forage plantings and road closures to increase security. Rangeland improvements may include water developments and fencing. Project outputs include a variety of forest products including fuelwood, posts and poles, saw logs, and other wood fiber products.

Responsible Officials

Brandon Houck (Heppner) and Paula Guenther (North Fork John Day) District Rangers.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

Given the purpose and need, the responsible officials will review the proposed action and comments on the scope of the project to develop any alternatives to address issues identified by the public. Alternatives and the environmental consequences will be drafted and analyzed in the draft decision. The responsible officials will compare the proposed action and alternatives and consider environmental consequences of the Ellis Project in order to decide how well the selected alternative meets the purpose and need described in the EIS; how well the selected alternative moves the project area toward the desired conditions; and if the selected alternative mitigates potential adverse effects.

Preliminary Issues

Issues identified so far include potential impact of treatments in cold and cool moist forest and wildlife movement/displacement. Vegetation treatments in cold and cool moist forest remains a contentious topic among stakeholders as these areas are considered more sensitive to disturbance, but the need still exists to reduce stand density for forest vigor and to reestablish historical fire regimes. Wildlife movement and distribution, particularly for elk, is also a growing concern. Early stakeholder engagement has identified a need to improve security and forage on National Forest System lands to better retain elk, which are pushed off-forest onto private lands, creating conflict in agricultural areas. High road use and road density exacerbate this issue.

Scoping Process

The Heppner and North Fork John Day Ranger Districts have scheduled three public workshops to help facilitate conversations about the project area and solicit input on the proposal. These workshops are scheduled for November 8, November 15, and December 13, 2018, from 1800 to 2000 hours (6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.). Two will be held at the Heppner Ranger District (117 So. Main St., Heppner, OR 97836) and the other at the North Fork John Day Ranger District office (401 W. Main, Ukiah, OR 97880). Exact locations will be announced closer to scheduled dates in consideration of weather and road conditions.

Comments should be as specific as possible and focus on desired conditions or means to address concerns about the proposed action. It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the commenter's suggestions for alternatives.

Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, anonymous comments will not allow the Agency to provide the respondent with updates or subsequent environmental documents.

Dated: November 1, 2018. Gregory C. Smith, Acting Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
[FR Doc. 2018-25059 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Notice of Intent to Re-establish the Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board Charter.

SUMMARY:

The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), intends to re-establish the Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board (Board) charter. In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the Board is being re-established to continue obtaining advice and recommendations on a broad range of forest issues such as forest plan revisions or amendments, forest health including fire management and mountain pine beetle infestations, travel management, forest monitoring and evaluation, recreation fees, and site-specific projects having forest wide implications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Jacobson, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Black Hills National Forest, by telephone at 605-673-9216, by fax at 605-673-9208 or by email at [email protected]

Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Board is a non-scientific program advisory Board established by the Secretary of Agriculture in 2003 to provide advice and counsel to the U.S. Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest, in the wake of increasingly severe and intense wild fires and mountain pine beetle epidemics.

The Board serves to meet the needs of the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2005 (FLREA) as a Recreation Resource Advisory Committee (RRAC) for the Black Hills of South Dakota and provides timely advice and recommendations to the regional forester through the forest supervisor regarding programmatic forest issues and project-level issues that have forest-wide implications for the Black Hills National Forest.

The Board meets approximately ten times a year, with one month being a field trip, held in August and focusing on both current issues and the educational value of seeing management strategies and outcomes on the ground. This Board has been established as a truly credible entity and a trusted voice on forest management issues and is doing often astonishing work in helping to develop informed consent for forest management.

For years, the demands made on the Black Hills National Forest have resulted in conflicts among interest groups resulting in both forest-wide and site-specific programs being delayed due to appeals and litigation. The Board provides a forum to resolve these issues to allow for the Black Hills National Forest to move forward in its management activities. The Board is believed to be one of the few groups with broad enough scope to address all of the issues and include all of the jurisdictional boundaries.

Significant Contributions

The Board's most significant accomplishments include:

1. A 2004 report on the Black Hills Fuels Reduction Plan, a priority following the major fires including the 86,000 acre Jasper Fire in 2000;

2. A 2004 initial Off-Highway Vehicle Travel Management Subcommittee report;

3. A report on their findings regarding the thesis, direction, and assumptions of Phase II of our Forest Plan produced in 2005;

4. The Invasive Species Subcommittee Report in 2005 covering recommendations to better stop invasive species from infiltrating the Forest;

5. A final Travel Management Subcommittee Report in 2006 in which the Board made 11 recommendations regarding characteristics of a designated motor vehicle trail system, the basis for our initial work to prepare our Motor Vehicle Use Map in 2010-2011;

6. The Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project in 2012 covering landscape scale treatments on portions of 248,000 acres of ponderosa pine stands at high risk for infestation.

7. The Board's annual work to attract funding through grants based on the Collaborative Landscape Forest Restoration Program (CFLRP), a program of the Secretary of Agriculture CFLR Program to encourage the collaborative, science-based ecosystem restoration of priority forest landscapes;

8. A letter to the Secretary and the Chief of the Forest Service to work, restore and maintain open space for wildlife habitat and recreation needs like snowmobile trails; and

9. The annual reports to the Secretary detailing the Board's activities, issues, and accomplishments.

The Board is deemed to be among the most effective public involvement strategies in the Forest Service and continues to lead by example for Federal, State, and local government agencies working to coordinate and cooperate in the Black Hills of South Dakota and Wyoming.

Background

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Secretary of Agriculture intends to reestablish the Black Hills National Forest Advisory Board charter. The Board provides advice and recommendations on a broad range of forest planning issues and, in accordance with FLREA, more specifically will provide advice and recommendations on Black Hills National Forest recreation fee issues (serving as the RRAC for the Black Hills National Forest). The Board membership consists of individuals representing commodity interests, amenity interests, and State and local government.

The Board has been determined to be in the public interest in connection with the duties and responsibilities of the Black Hills National Forest. National forest management requires improved coordination among the interests and governmental entities responsible for land management decisions and the public that the agency serves.

Advisory Committee Organization

The Board consists of 16 members that are representatives of the following interests (this membership is similar to the membership outlined by the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act for Resource Advisory Committees):

1. Economic development;

2. Developed outdoor recreation, off-highway vehicle users, or commercial recreation;

3. Energy and mineral development;

4. Timber products industry;

5. Permittee (grazing or other land use within the Black Hills area);

6. Nationally recognized environmental organizations;

7. Regionally or locally recognized environmental organizations;

8. Dispersed recreation;

9. Archeology or history;

10. Nationally or regionally recognized sportsmen's groups, such as anglers or hunters;

11. South Dakota State-elected offices;

12. Wyoming State-elected offices;

13. South Dakota or Wyoming county-or local-elected officials;

14. Tribal government elected or- appointed officials;

15. South Dakota State natural resource agency official; and

16. Wyoming State natural resource agency official.

The members of the Board will elect and determine the responsibilities of the Chairperson and the Vice-Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice-Chairperson will act in the Chairperson's stead. The Forest Supervisor of the Black Hills National Forest serves as the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) under sections 10(e) and (f) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

The Committee will meet approximately nine times, and will attend at least one summer field tour as designated by the DFO. Members will serve without compensation, but may be reimbursed for travel expenses while performing duties on behalf of the Board, subject to approval by the DFO.

Equal opportunity practices are followed in all appointments to the Board in accordance with USDA policies. To ensure that the recommendations of the Board have been taken into account the needs of diverse groups, served by the Black Hills National Forest, membership shall include, to the extent practicable, individuals with demonstrated ability to represent minorities, women and persons with disabilities.

Dated: October 31, 2018. Donald Bice, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-25060 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meetings of the Oklahoma 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 Oklahoma Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Monday, December 10, 2018 at 1:00 p.m. Central time. The Committee will discuss the implementation stage of their study of the state's 2012 “Civil Rights Initiative,” which prohibited preferential treatment or discrimination based on race, color, sex, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education, and contracting.

DATES:

Monday, December 10, 2018 at 1:00 p.m. Central.

Public Call Information: Dial: 1-877-260-1479, Conference ID: 1713750.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alejandro Ventura, DFO, at [email protected] or (213) 894-3437.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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, Oklahoma 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.

Dated: November 9, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
[FR Doc. 2018-25011 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-73-2018] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 41—Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Notification of Proposed Production Activity, Jeneil Biotech, Inc. (Natural Fragrance Intermediates), Saukville, Wisconsin

The Port of Milwaukee, grantee of FTZ 41, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board on behalf of Jeneil Biotech, Inc. (Jeneil), located in Saukville, Wisconsin. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on September 27, 2018.

The Jeneil facility is located within Site 16 of FTZ 41. The facility is used for the biotransformation of a plant-derived raw material into a natural fragrance intermediate molecule. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status material/component and specific finished product described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board.

Production under FTZ procedures could exempt Jeneil from customs duty payments on the foreign-status component used in export production. On its domestic sales, for the foreign-status material/component noted below, Jeneil would be able to choose the duty rate during customs entry procedures that applies to sclareolide (off-white powder) (duty rate 3.7%). Jeneil would be able to avoid duty on foreign-status components which become scrap/waste. Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment.

The component/material sourced from abroad is sclareol (off-white powder) (duty rate 5.5%).

Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is December 26, 2018.

A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the Board's website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at [email protected] or (202) 482-0473.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Elizabeth Whiteman, Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25062 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-72-2018] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 122—Corpus Christi, Texas; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Gulf Coast Growth Ventures LLC; (Ethylene, Polyethylene and Monoethylene Glycol and Related Co-Products); San Patricio County, Texas

The Port of Corpus Christi Authority, grantee of FTZ 122, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board on behalf of Gulf Coast Growth Ventures LLC (GCGV), at sites located in San Patricio County, Texas. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on November 1, 2018.

The applicant has submitted a separate application for FTZ designation at the GCGV sites under FTZ 122 (B-59-2018). The facilities (currently proposed for construction) will be used for the production of ethylene, polyethylene and monoethylene glycol and related co-products. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status materials and components and specific finished products described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board.

Production under FTZ procedures could exempt GCGV from customs duty payments on the foreign-status components used in export production. On its domestic sales, for the foreign-status materials/components noted below, GCGV would be able to choose the duty rates during customs entry procedures that apply to: Ethylene; polyethylene; monoethylene glycol; dilute propylene; crude C4; pyrolysis gasoline; fuel oil; spent caustic; heavy glycol; and, glycol bleed (duty rates range from duty-free to 5.25 cents/barrel to 6.5%). GCGV would be able to avoid duty on foreign-status components which become scrap/waste. Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment.

The components and materials sourced from abroad include: Butene; hexene; furnace selective catalyst reduction catalyst; front end acetylene converter catalyst; and, molecular sieve desiccant (duty free). The request indicates that certain materials/components are subject to special duties under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Section 301), depending on the country of origin. The applicable Section 301 decisions require subject merchandise to be admitted to FTZs in privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41).

Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is December 26, 2018.

A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the Board's website, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

For further information, contact Diane Finver at [email protected] or (202) 482-1367.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Elizabeth Whiteman, Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25061 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG629 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Notice of public meetings.

SUMMARY:

The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold meetings of the following: Personnel Committee (Closed Session); Standard Operating, Policy, and Procedure (SOPPs) Committee; Habitat Protection and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee; Dolphin Wahoo Committee; Snapper Grouper Committee; Executive Finance Committee; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) Committee (Partially Closed Session) and the Citizen Science Committee. The Council meeting week will include the swearing in of a new member, a formal public comment period, and a meeting of the full Council. A Federal For-Hire Electronic Reporting Training Session will also be held as part of the Council meeting week.

DATES:

The Council meetings will be held from 1:30 p.m. on Monday, December 3, 2018 until 12 p.m. on Friday, December 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Meeting address: The meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn/Outer Banks, 5353 N Virginia Dare Trail, Kitty Hawk, NC 27949; phone: (252) 261-1290; fax: (252) 255-0153.

Council address: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N Charleston, SC 29405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, SAFMC; phone: (843) 302-8440 or toll free: (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520; email: [email protected] Meeting information is available from the Council's website at: http://safmc.net/safmc-meetings/council-meetings/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public comment: Written comments may be directed to Gregg Waugh, Executive Director, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (see Council address) or electronically via the Council's website at http://safmc.net/safmc-meetings/council-meetings/. Comments received by close of business the Monday before the meeting (11/26/18) will be compiled, posted to the website as part of the meeting materials, and included in the administrative record; please use the Council's online form available from the website. For written comments received after the Monday before the meeting (after 11/26/18), individuals submitting a comment must use the Council's online form available from the website. Comments will automatically be posted to the website and available for Council consideration. Comments received prior to noon on Thursday, December 6, 2018 will be a part of the meeting administrative record.

The items of discussion in the individual meeting agendas are as follows:

Swearing in of New Council Member, Monday, December 3, 2018 From 1:30 p.m. Until 1:40 p.m.

Newly appointed Council member David Whitaker (South Carolina) will be sworn to duty by the NOAA Fisheries Regional Administrator.

Personnel Committee (Closed Session), Monday, December 3, 2018, 1:40 p.m. Until 5 p.m.

The Committee will meet in Closed Session to provide a performance review for the Executive Director, review and discuss Council staff medical benefits, and review other recommendations from the Personnel Committee.

SOPPs Committee, Tuesday, December 4, 2018, 8:30 a.m. Until 9:30 a.m.

The Committee will review and approve proposed changes to the Council Handbook and develop recommendations as appropriate.

Habitat Protection and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee, Tuesday, December 4, 2018, 9:30 a.m. Until 11 a.m.

1. The Committee will discuss ways to address species moving northwards along the Atlantic Coast.

2. The Committee will receive an update on the Fishery Ecosystem Plan II Dashboard and tools development, ecosystem modelling and regional partner coordination, and take action as needed.

3. The Committee will also receive a report from the Habitat Advisory Panel meeting; presentations on renewable energy development including the Kitty Hawk Wind Energy Project; and take action as needed.

Dolphin Wahoo Committee, Tuesday, December 4, 2018, 11 a.m. Until 2:30 p.m.

1. The Committee will receive updates from NOAA Fisheries on the status of recreational and commercial catches versus annual catch limits (ACLs).

2. The Committee will receive a presentation on issues affecting bullet and frigate mackerels as prey for dolphin and wahoo, and provide guidance to staff.

3. The Committee will review draft actions for dolphin to include in Amendment 10 to the Dolphin Wahoo Fishery Management Plan including revising the Optimum Yield, modifying annual catch targets (ACTs), adaptive management of sector ACLs, and addressing authorized gear. The Committee will take action as needed.

Snapper Grouper Committee Meeting, Tuesday, December 4, 2018, 2:30 p.m. Until 5 p.m. and Wednesday, December 5, 2018, 8:30 a.m. Until 3:45 p.m.

1. The Committee will receive updates from NOAA Fisheries on commercial and recreational catches versus quotas for species under ACLs and the status of amendments under formal Secretarial review.

2. The Committee will receive a report from the Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel and from the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee and take action as appropriate.

3. The Committee will review Snapper Grouper Regulatory Amendment 30 addressing the rebuilding plan for red grouper, discuss timing for the amendment, modify the draft amendment as necessary, and provide guidance to staff.

4. The Committee will receive an overview of Vision Blueprint Regulatory Amendment 26 addressing recreational management actions and alternatives as identified in the 2016-2020 Vision Blueprint for the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan. The Committee will modify the document as necessary and consider recommending for formal Secretarial review.

5. The Committee will review Regulatory Amendment 42 addressing sea turtle release gear requirements and snapper grouper framework modifications, select preferred management alternatives and consider approving the amendment for public hearings.

6. The Committee will receive an overview for a draft Allocation Review Trigger Plan to establish criteria for reviewing sector allocations and provide guidance to staff on timing and approach.

7. The Committee will receive an overview and review public comments for Snapper Grouper Regulatory Amendment 32 addressing yellowtail snapper accountability measures, review public comments, modify actions as needed, and consider approval for formal review.

8. The Committee will also review options for a Recreational Accountability Amendment, review the Vision Blueprint Biennial Evaluation, receive an update on the Catch Per Unit Effort for red snapper, and receive a review of the Characterization of the Snapper Grouper Commercial Fishery, and provide direction to staff as appropriate.

Executive/Finance Committee, Wednesday, December 5, 2018, 3:45 p.m. Until 4 p.m. and Thursday, December 6, 2018 From 1:30 p.m. Until 3 p.m.

1. The Committee will review the Council's ranking of amendments for its work schedule, receive an update on Magnuson-Stevens Act Reauthorization efforts and the CCC Working Paper which includes positions on reauthorization, discuss, and provide guidance to staff.

2. The Committee will receive an update on the Calendar-Year 2018 expenditures, review a preliminary list of items for the 2019 budget, and take action as appropriate.

3. The committee will review the Council's Follow Up Document, Priorities and Tiering List, discuss, and provide guidance to staff.

Formal Public Comment, Wednesday, December 5, 2018, 4 p.m.

Public comment will be accepted on items on the Council meeting agenda scheduled to be approved for Secretarial Review: Snapper Grouper Vision Blueprint Regulatory Amendment 26 (recreational measures) and Snapper Grouper Regulatory Amendment 32 (yellowtail snapper accountability measures). Public comment will also be accepted on all agenda items. The Council Chair, based on the number of individuals wishing to comment, will determine the amount of time provided to each commenter.

SEDAR Committee, Thursday, December 6, 2018, 8:30 a.m. Until 10 a.m. (Partially Closed Session)

1. The Committee will make recommendations for appointments to the tilefish stock assessment and to the Scamp Stock Identification Workshop (Closed Session).

2. In open session, the Committee will review the SSC Report and provide recommendations on snowy grouper terms of reference (TORs), and the stock assessment schedule and TORs for scamp and tilefish.

3. The Committee will also receive an assessment activities update and an overview of the next SEDAR Steering Committee meeting, and provide guidance to staff as needed.

Citizen Science Committee, Thursday, December 6, 2018, 10 a.m. Until 12 p.m.

1. The Committee will review the Draft Citizen Science Program SOPPs, modify as needed and provide recommendations for approval.

2. The Committee will also receive an update on the Citizen Science Program and projects and take action as needed.

Council Session: Thursday, December 6, 2018, 3:15 p.m. Until 5 p.m. and Friday, December 7, 2018, 8:30 a.m. Until 12 p.m. (Partially Closed Session if Needed)

The Full Council will begin with the Call to Order, adoption of the agenda, approval of minutes, and awards/recognition. The Council will receive a Legal Briefing on Litigation from NOAA General Counsel (if needed) during Closed Session. The Council will receive staff reports including the Executive Director's Report, updates on the MyFishCount pilot project, recent hurricane impacts on fishing communities, and a report from the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team. Updates will be provided by NOAA Fisheries including a report on the status of recreational and commercial catches versus ACLs for species not covered during an earlier committee meeting, status of amendments under formal review, data-related reports, protected resources updates, update on the status of the of the Commercial Electronic Logbook Program, and the status of the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) conversions for recreational fishing estimates. The Council will discuss and take action as necessary.

The Council will review any Exempted Fishing Permits received as necessary. The Council will also receive a presentation on recent research activities conducted by the NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer.

The Council will receive committee reports from the Snapper Grouper, Habitat, Dolphin Wahoo, SEDAR, Citizen Science, Personnel, SOPPs, and Executive Finance Committees, and take action as appropriate.

The Council will receive agency and liaison reports; and discuss other business and upcoming meetings. Under other business, the Council will receive a presentation on the Monitor National Marine Sanctuary and take action as necessary.

Federal For-Hire Electronic Reporting Training Session, Thursday, December 6, 2018, 6 p.m.

Council staff will provide a hands-on training session to learn about new electronic reporting requirements for federally permitted for-hire captains and practice using tools that will be available to meet the reporting requirements.

Documents regarding these issues are available from the Council office (see ADDRESSES).

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before these groups for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Special Accommodations

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES) 5 days prior to the meeting.

Note:

The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: November 13, 2018. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-25054 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG621 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Hearings AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Notice of public hearings.

SUMMARY:

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council will hold five public hearings to solicit public comments on the Chub Mackerel Amendment to the Mackerel, Squid, Butterfish Fishery Management Plan.

DATES:

The meetings will be held in December 2018 and January 2019. Written comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. EST, January 18, 2019. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for the dates and times of each hearing.

ADDRESSES:

Meeting addresses: Public hearings will be held in Virginia Beach, VA; Berlin, MD; Narragansett, RI; Cape May, NJ; and via webinar. For specific locations, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

Public comments: Written comments may also be sent by any of the following methods:

Email to: [email protected]

Via webform at: http://www.mafmc.org/comments/chub-mackerel-amendment

Mail to: Dr. Christopher M. Moore, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N. State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901. Please write “chub mackerel comments” on the outside of the envelope.

Fax to: (302) 674-5399.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council is developing an amendment to consider adding Atlantic chub mackerel (Scomber colias) as “stock in the fishery” in the Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan. Additional information is available at: http://www.mafmc.org/actions/chub-mackerel-amendment.

The Council will hold five public hearings on this amendment, during which Council staff will summarize the management alternatives under consideration prior to opening the hearing for public comments. The hearings schedule is as follows:

1. Monday December 3, 2018 at 6 p.m., at the Hilton Garden Inn Virginia Beach Oceanfront, 3315 Atlantic Avenue, Virginia Beach, VA 23451.

2. Tuesday December 4, 2018 at 6 p.m., at the Worcester County Library—Ocean Pines Branch, 11107 Cathell Road, Berlin, MD 21811.

3. Monday December 17, 2018 at 6 p.m., at the University of Rhode Island Bay Campus, Corless Auditorium, 215 South Ferry Road, Narragansett, RI 02882.

4. Tuesday December 18, 2018 at 6 p.m., at the Congress Hall Hotel, 200 Congress Place, Cape May, NJ 08204.

5. Monday January 14, 2019 at 6 p.m., via webinar, which can be accessed at http://mafmc.adobeconnect.com/chub_mackerel_public_hearing/. Audio only can be accessed via telephone by dialing 1-800-832-0736 and entering room number 5068871.

Public comments will be accepted at the public hearings and can also be submitted via email, an online form, mail, or fax, as described in the ADDRESSES section, above.

Special Accommodations

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to M. Jan Saunders at the Mid-Atlantic Council Office (302) 526-5251 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

Dated: November 13, 2018. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-25056 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG622 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Notice; public hearings and webinar.

SUMMARY:

The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold ten in-person public hearings and a webinar public hearing to solicit public comments on Draft Amendment 50—State Management of Recreational Red Snapper.

DATES:

The public hearings will take place December 3, 2018-January 17, 2019. The meetings and webinar will begin at 6 p.m. and will conclude no later than 9 p.m. For specific dates and times, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Written public comments must be received on or before 5 p.m. EST on Tuesday, January 22, 2019.

ADDRESSES:

The public documents can be obtained by contacting the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 4107 West Spruce Street, Suite 200, Tampa, FL 33607; (813) 348-1630 or on their website at www.gulfcouncil.org.

Meeting addresses: The public hearings will be held in Pensacola, Destin, Ft. Myers, and St. Petersburg, FL; Mobile, AL; Baton Rouge, LA; Biloxi, MS; and Brownsville, Corpus Christi, and League City, TX. For specific locations, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

Public comments: Comments may be submitted online through the Council's public portal by visiting www.gulfcouncil.org and clicking on “CONTACT US”.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Ava Lasseter, Anthropologist; [email protected], Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone: (813) 348-1630.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The agenda for the following ten in-person hearings and one webinar are as follows: Council staff will brief the public on the purpose and need of the amendment. The Council is currently considering state management that would provide flexibility to the Gulf states to set the recreational red snapper fishing season and potentially other management measures. Council staff will also provide an overview of the actions and alternatives considered in the amendment including the Council's preferred alternatives.

Staff and a State Representative Council member will be available to answer any questions, and the public will have the opportunity to provide testimony on the amendment and other related testimony.

The schedule is as follows:

Locations

Monday, December 3, 2018; Sanders Beach-Corrine Jones Center, 913 South I Street, Pensacola, FL 35202; telephone: (850) 436-5670.

Tuesday, December 4, 2018; City of Destin Community Center, 101 Stahlman Ave., Destin, FL 32541; telephone: (850) 654-5184.

Wednesday, December 5, 2018; Renaissance Mobile Riverview Plaza Hotel, 64 South Water Street, Mobile, AL 36602; telephone: (251) 438-4000.

Monday, December 10, 2018; Embassy Suites, 4914 Constitution Avenue, Baton Rouge, LA 70808; telephone: (225) 228-7164.

Tuesday December 11, 2018; Imperial Palace (IP) Casino and Resort, 850 Bayview Avenue, Biloxi, MS 39530; telephone: (228) 436-3000.

Monday, January 7, 2019; Hyatt Place Fort Myers at the Forum; 2600 Champion Ring Road, Ft. Myers, FL 33905; telephone: (239) 418-1844.

Tuesday, January 8, 2019; Hilton St. Petersburg Carillon Park, 950 Lake Carillon Drive, St. Petersburg, FL 33716; telephone: (727) 540-0050.

Monday, January 14, 2019; Courtyard by Marriott Brownsville, 3955 N Expressway, Brownsville, TX 78520; telephone: (956) 350-4600.

Tuesday, January 15, 2019; Omni Hotels Corpus Christi, 900 North Shoreline Blvd., Corpus Christi, TX 78401; telephone: (361) 887-1600.

Wednesday, January 16, 2019; League City Civic Center and Recreation Center, 300 West Walker St., League City, TX 77573; telephone: (281) 554-1190.

Thursday, January 17, 2019, Webinar—6 p.m. EST at: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/2288573373994739724. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Special Accommodations

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kathy Pereira (see ADDRESSES), at least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.

Authority:

16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: November 13, 2018. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-25055 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration Nevada Broadband Workshop AGENCY:

National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

ACTION:

Notice of open meeting.

SUMMARY:

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) BroadbandUSA Program will host a Broadband Workshop in Carson City, Nevada on January 11, 2019. The purpose of the Workshop is to engage the public and stakeholders with information to accelerate broadband connectivity, improve digital inclusion, and support local priorities. The Workshop will provide information on topics including local broadband planning, funding, and engagement with service providers. Speakers and attendees from Nevada, federal agencies, and across the country will come together to explore ways to facilitate the expansion of broadband capacity, access, and utilization.

DATES:

The Broadband Workshop will be held on January 11, 2019, from 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. Pacific Time.

ADDRESSES:

The Broadband Workshop will be held in Carson City, Nevada at the Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau, 401 South Carson Street, Carson City, NV 89701.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Janice Wilkins, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4678, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5791; email: [email protected]. Please direct media inquiries to NTIA's Office of Public Affairs, (202) 482-7002; email: [email protected]oc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The NTIA's BroadbandUSA program promotes innovation and economic growth by supporting efforts to expand broadband access and meaningful use across America.

The Broadband Workshop is open to the public. Pre-registration is requested because space may be limited. NTIA asks registrants to provide their first and last name, title, organization/company, and email address for registration purposes, name tags to be provided at the workshop, and to receive any updates on the workshop. Information about the workshop is subject to change. Registration information, meeting updates, including changes in the agenda, and relevant documents will be available on NTIA's website at https://broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/NevadaBroadbandWorkshop2019.

The public meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as language interpretation or other ancillary aids, should notify Janice Wilkins at the contact information listed above at least ten (10) business days before the meeting so that accommodations can be made.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Kathy D. Smith, Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-25008 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Additions and Deletions AGENCY:

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

ACTION:

Proposed Additions to and Deletions From the Procurement List.

SUMMARY:

The Committee is proposing to add products to the Procurement List that will be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes products and services previously furnished by such agencies.

DATES:

Comments must be received on or before: December 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information or to submit comments contact: Michael R. Jurkowski, Telephone: (703) 603-2117, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

Additions

If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice will be required to procure the products listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

The following products are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 8465-00-NIB-0263—Airborne Rucksack, Modular Lightweight Load Carrying Equipment (MOLLE), OCP2015 Mandatory Sources of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Peckham Vocational Industries, Inc., Lansing, MI Mandatory for: 20,000 units annually for the requirement for the U.S. Army Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE ARMY, W6QK ACC-APG NATICK Distribution: C-List NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6135-01-616-5152—Battery, Non-Rechargeable, AA, 1.5V, Alkaline, NEDA 15A, PG/8 6135-01-308-5688—Battery, Non-Rechargeable, BR-2/3A, 3V, Lithium, EA/1 6135-01-435-5558—Battery, Non-Rechargeable, Cylindrical, 3.6V, Lithium, EA/1 Mandatory Source of Supply: Eastern Carolina Vocational Center, Inc., Greenville, NC Mandatory for: Total Government Requirement Contracting Activity: DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY LAND AND MARITIME Distribution: A-List Deletions

The following products and services are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 10722—Sticker Book, Halloween, Includes Shipper 20722 MR 378—Christmas Sticker Book MR 10663—Pouf Balls, Bath, Toddler MR 833—Onion Saver Mandatory Source of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency Services Service Type: Laundry Service Mandatory for: USDA, National Animal Disease Center: 2300 Dayton Avenue, Ames, IA Mandatory Source of Supply: Genesis Development, Jefferson, IA Contracting Activity: ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE, USDA APHIS MRPBS Service Type: Janitorial/Custodial Service Mandatory for: U.S. Army Reserve Center: 1635 Berks Road, Norristown, PA U.S. Army Reserve Center: Santa Rosa, CA Mandatory Source of Supply: The Chimes, Inc., Baltimore, MD Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE ARMY, W40M NORTHEREGION CONTRACT OFC Service Type: Distribution Service Mandatory for: Department of Transportation: 400 7th Street SW Library and Distribution Services, Washington, DC Mandatory Source of Supply: ServiceSource, Inc., Oakton, VA Contracting Activity: Government Printing Office Michael R. Jurkowski, Business Management Specialist, Business Operations.
[FR Doc. 2018-25067 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Deletions AGENCY:

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

ACTION:

Deletions from the Procurement List.

SUMMARY:

This action deletes a product and services from the Procurement List previously furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

DATES:

Date deleted from the Procurement List: December 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael R. Jurkowski, Telephone: (703) 603-2117, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Deletions

On 10/12/2018 (83 FR 198), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the product and services listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the product and services to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the product and services deleted from the Procurement List.

End of Certification

Accordingly, the following product and services are deleted from the Procurement List:

Product NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 377—Socks, Holiday Mandatory Source of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency Services Service Types: Grounds Maintenance Service Janitorial/Custodial Service Mandatory for: U.S. Army Reserve Facility: 4415 N Market Street, Mann Hall, Spokane, WA N 3800 Sullivan Road, Spokane, WA Mandatory Source of Supply: Good Works, Inc., Spokane, WA Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE ARMY, W6QM MICC FT MCCOY (RC) Service Type: Disposal Support Service Mandatory for: Columbus Air Force Base Columbus AFB, MS Mandatory Source of Supply: Alabama Goodwill Industries, Inc., Birmingham, AL Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE AIR FORCE, FA3022 14 CONS LGCA Michael R. Jurkowski, Business Management Specialist, Business Operations.
[FR Doc. 2018-25069 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

Docket Numbers: EG19-17-000.

Applicants: Bridgewater Power Company, L.P.

Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Bridgewater Power Company, L.P.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5164.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

Docket Numbers: EG19-18-000.

Applicants: Peony Solar LLC.

Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Peony Solar LLC.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5026.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

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

Docket Numbers: ER18-2231-001.

Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

Description: Compliance filing: DEC Revised Depreciation Rates (Compliance Filing) to be effective 8/1/2018.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5029.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-154-001.

Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Harry Allen Interconnection Agreement to be effective 10/23/2018.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5147.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-298-001.

Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

Description: Tariff Amendment: Errata—Amendment to ISAs, SA Nos. 4682 & First Revised 4332; Queue No. AA1-139 to be effective 11/17/2017.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5143.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-313-000.

Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. ALLETE, Inc.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-08 SA 3207 MP-GRE ICA (Langola) to be effective 11/9/2018.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5165.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-314-000.

Applicants: Bridgewater Power Company, L.P.

Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Bridgewater Power Company, L.P. Market Based Rates Tariff to be effective 1/8/2019.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5166.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-315-000.

Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Unsecured credit scoring model revisions to be effective 1/9/2019.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5027.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-316-000.

Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: ATSI submits IA SA No. 5132 to be effective 1/9/2019.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5040.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-317-000.

Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. 115 EPE E & P Agreement with EDF Renewables Development, Inc. to be effective 11/10/2018.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5041.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-319-000.

Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., ALLETE, Inc.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-10_SA 3209 MP-GRE ICA (Brainerd) to be effective 11/10/2018.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5069.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-320-000.

Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., ALLETE, Inc.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-09_SA 3208 MP-GRE T-L IA (Taft) to be effective 11/10/2018.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5074.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-321-000.

Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.

Description: Tariff Cancellation: DEP-FBEMC (Rate Schedule No. 195) Cancellation Filing to be effective 12/31/2017.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5083.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-322-000.

Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: First Amended Interconnection Agreement for the Bob Switch to be effective 11/10/2018.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5095.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-323-000.

Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to the OATT and OA re Transmission Constraint Penalty Factors to be effective 2/1/2019.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5099.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-324-000.

Applicants: Central Maine Power Company.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: First Amendment to Bilateral, Cost-Based Trans. Service Agreements (Eversource) to be effective 1/9/2019.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5137.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-325-000.

Applicants: Central Maine Power Company.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: First Amendment to Bilateral, Cost-Based Trans. Service Agreements (NG) to be effective 1/9/2019.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5142.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-326-000.

Applicants: Central Maine Power Company.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: First Amendment to Bilateral, Cost-Based Trans. Service Agreements (Unitil) to be effective 1/9/2019.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5144.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

Docket Numbers: ER19-327-000.

Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: E&P Agreement for Gonzaga Ridge Wind Farm to be effective 11/10/2018.

Filed Date: 11/9/18.

Accession Number: 20181109-5153.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/18.

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 9, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25073 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

Docket Number: PR19-13-000.

Applicants: Cypress Gas Pipeline, LLC.

Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): 20180327 Petition for Rate Approval and Revised SOC to be effective 11/8/2018.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 201803275001.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/18.

284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/19.

Docket Numbers: RP19-265-000.

Applicants: Garden Banks Gas Pipeline, LLC.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: Garden Banks FERC Form 501-G.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5048.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-266-000.

Applicants: Southeast Supply Header, LLC.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: SESH FERC Form 501-G.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5049.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-267-000.

Applicants: Southeast Supply Header, LLC.

Description: eTariff filing per 1440: SESH Limited Section 4 to be effective 1/1/2019.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5056.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-268-000.

Applicants: Elba Express Company, L.L.C.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: FERC Form No. 501-G Report.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5059.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-269-000.

Applicants: Southern LNG Company, L.L.C.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: FERC Form No. 501-G Report.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5060.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-270-000.

Applicants: Dominion Energy Carolina Gas Transmission.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: DECG—FERC Form No. 501-G Report.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5061.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-271-000.

Applicants: Big Sandy Pipeline, LLC.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: BSP FERC Form 501-G.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5084.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-272-000.

Applicants: KPC Pipeline, LLC.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: FERC Form No. 501-G Filing.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5101.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

Docket Numbers: RP19-273-000.

Applicants: MarkWest New Mexico, L.L.C.

Description: eTariff filing per 1430: FERC Form No. 501-G Filing.

Filed Date: 11/8/18.

Accession Number: 20181108-5106.

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/18.

The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25074 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2520-076] Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC; Notice of Technical Meeting

a. Date and Time of Meeting: November 28, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.

b. Place: Telephone conference.

c. FERC Contact: Adam Peer at [email protected], or (202) 502-8449.

d. Purpose of Meeting: Commission Staff is hosting a technical meeting to discuss Endangered Species Act consultation as it relates to relicensing the Mattaceunk Hydroelectric Project.

e. A summary of the meeting will be prepared and filed in the Commission's public file for the project.

f. All local, state, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other interested parties are invited to participate by phone. Please contact Adam Peer at [email protected], or (202) 502-8449 by November 26, 2018, to RSVP and to receive specific instructions on how to participate.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25075 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9986-59-OW] Meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Notice of a public meeting.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing a meeting of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC or Council) as authorized under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The purpose of the meeting is to allow the EPA to present an overview of the Agency's Safe Drinking Water Act programs for the fiscal year 2019, including an introduction of the benefits of improving public drinking water system's capacity through partnerships. A public comment period will be provided.

DATES:

The meeting will be held on December 6, 2018, from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., eastern time, and on December 7, 2018 from 8:45 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., eastern time.

ADDRESSES:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1201 Constitution Avenue NW, WJC South, Room 6226, ARS NETI Training Room, Washington, DC 20004.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Details about Attending the Meeting: The meeting is open to the general public. If you wish to attend the meeting, you may register by sending an email to Tracey M. Ward, the NDWAC Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at: [email protected] The email subject line should read: “NDWAC 2018 Attendee.” Your email should include your name, address, and telephone number.

Guests from the private sector must present an unexpired, government-issued photo identification (ID) that comports with requirements of the REAL ID Act, be screened through security equipment, sign in, and be verified/met in the lobby by an EPA employee. Please Note: driver's licenses from some states may not be compliant with the REAL ID Act and, therefore, will not be accepted; alternative ID documents will be necessary in those cases. Foreign national visitors are strongly encouraged to provide advanced notice of attendance, must present a valid passport for entry, and must meet all pre-clearance requirements.

The EPA will allocate one hour for the public to present comments at the meeting on December 7, 2018. Oral statements will be limited to five minutes per person during the public comment period. It is preferred that only one person present a statement on behalf of a group or organization. To ensure adequate time for public involvement, individuals or organizations interested in presenting an oral statement should notify: Tracey M. Ward, the NDWAC DFO, by email at: [email protected], no later than November 26, 2018. Any person who wishes to file a written statement can do so before or after the Council meeting. Send written statements to: Tracey Ward, NDWAC DFO, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (Mail Code 4601), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; or email at: [email protected]

Written statements intended for the meeting must be received before November 26, 2018, to be distributed to all members of the Council for their consideration. Any statements received on or after the date specified will become part of the permanent file for the meeting and will be forwarded to the Council members after conclusion of the meeting.

Special Accommodations: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Tracey Ward at: (202) 564-3796 or by email at: [email protected] To request an accommodation for a disability, please contact Tracey Ward at least 15 days prior to the meeting date to allow the EPA as much time as possible to attend to your request.

National Drinking Water Advisory Council: The NDWAC was created by Congress on December 16, 1974, as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1974, Public Law 93-523, 42 U.S.C. 300j-5, and is operated in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2. The NDWAC was established under the SDWA to provide practical and independent advice, consultation, and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on the activities, functions, policies, and regulations required by the SDWA.

Dated: November 7, 2018. Peter Grevatt, Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water.
[FR Doc. 2018-25081 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9042-3] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-5632 or https://www.epa.gov/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 11/05/2018 Through 11/09/2018 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. Notice

Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20180267, Final, USFS, CO, Golden Peak Improvements 2016, Review Period Ends: 12/26/2018, Contact: Max Forgensi 970-309-4861 EIS No. 20180268, Draft Supplement, FHWA, NH, Derry-Londonderry I-93 Exit 4A, Comment Period Ends: 01/04/2019, Contact: Jamison S. Sikora 603-410-4870 EIS No. 20180269, Draft, FHWA, NV, Interstate 80/Interstate 580/US Highway 395 Freeway-to-Freeway Interchange and Connecting Road Improvements, Comment Period Ends: 01/15/2019, Contact: Abdelmoez Abdalla 775-687-1231 EIS No. 20180270, Final, NSF, NM, Sacramento Peak Observatory, Review Period Ends: 12/17/2018, Contact: Elizabeth Pentecost 703-292-4907 EIS No. 20180271, Final, APHIS, PRO, Fruit Fly Cooperative Control Program, Review Period Ends: 12/17/2018, Contact: Jim E. Warren 212-316-3216 EIS No. 20180272, Draft, USN, NV, Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization, Comment Period Ends: 01/15/2019, Contact: Sara Goodwin 619-532-4463 EIS No. 20180273, Final, NRC, LA, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Supplement 58, Regarding River Bend Station, Unit 1, Final Report, Review Period Ends: 12/17/2018, Contact: David Drucker 301-415-6223 EIS No. 20180274, Final, NMFS, AK, Final Environmental Impact Statement for Issuing Annual Catch Limits To the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission for A Subsistence Hunt On Bowhead Whales for The Years 2019 And Beyond, Review Period Ends: 12/17/2018, Contact: John Henderschedt, ATTN: Carolyn Doherty 301-427-8385 EIS No. 20180275, Final, USACE, VA, Final Integrated City of Norfolk Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study, Review Period Ends: 12/17/2018, Contact: Katherine Perdue 757-201-7218 Amended Notices EIS No. 20180235, Draft, USACE, VA, Draft Integrated City of Norfolk Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study, Contact: Katherine Perdue 757-201-7218

Revision to FR Notice Published 10/12/2018; Retracted due to erroneous filing.

Dated: November 13, 2018. Robert Tomiak, Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2018-25045 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meeting

Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's Board of Directors will meet in open session at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 20, 2018, to consider the following matters:

Summary Agenda: No substantive discussion of the following items is anticipated. These matters will be resolved with a single vote unless a member of the Board of Directors requests that an item be moved to the discussion agenda.

Disposition of minutes of previous Board of Directors' Meetings.

Memorandum and resolution re: Regulatory Capital Rule: Capital Simplification for Qualifying Community Banking Organizations.

Memorandum and resolution re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Increase the Appraisal Threshold for Residential Real Estate Transactions, Implement the Residential Rural Exemption, and Require Appropriate Appraisal Review.

Memorandum and resolution re: Final Rule on Transferred OTS Regulations Regarding Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations and Consent Requirements for the Exercise of Trust Powers.

Memorandum and resolution re: Final Rule to Revise the FDIC's Regulations Concerning Inflation-Adjusted Maximum Civil Money Penalty Amounts.

Report of actions taken pursuant to authority delegated by the Board of Directors.

Discussion Agenda:

Memorandum and resolution re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Proposed Changes to Applicability Thresholds for Regulatory Capital Requirements and Liquidity Requirements.

The meeting will be held in the Board Room located on the sixth floor of the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC.

This Board meeting will be webcast live via the internet and subsequently made available on-demand approximately one week after the event. Visit http://fdic.windrosemedia.com to view the event. If you need any technical assistance, please visit our Video Help page at: https://www.fdic.gov/video.html.

The FDIC will provide attendees with auxiliary aids (e.g., sign language interpretation) required for this meeting. Those attendees needing such assistance should call 703-562-2404 (Voice) or 703-649-4354 (Video Phone) to make necessary arrangements.

Requests for further information concerning the meeting may be directed to Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary of the Corporation, at 202-898-7043.

Dated: November 14, 2018.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25184 Filed 11-14-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed

The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreements to the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by mail, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of agreements are available through the Commission's website (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202) 523-5793 or [email protected]

Agreement No.: 201282.

Agreement Name: Hyundai Glovis/Grimaldi West Africa Space Charter Agreement.

Parties: Hyundai Glovis Co. Ltd. and Grimaldi Deep Sea S.P.A.

Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen O'Connor.

Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes the parties to charter space to/from one another on an “as needed/as available” basis in the trade between ports on the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts on the other hand and ports in West Africa and South Africa on the other hand.

Proposed Effective Date: 11/2/2018.

Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/20303.

Agreement No.: 011550-018.

Agreement Name: ABC Discussion Agreement.

Parties: Crowley Caribbean Services LLC; King Ocean Services Limited, Inc.; and Seaboard Marine Ltd.

Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen O'Connor.

Synopsis: The amendment adds Crowley Caribbean Services, LLC as a party to the Agreement.

Proposed Effective Date: 12/22/2018.

Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/883.

Agreement No.: 011741-023.

Agreement Name: U.S. Pacific Coast-Oceania Agreement.

Parties: ANL Singapore Pte Ltd; Hapag Lloyd AG; and Maersk Line A/S.

Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen O'Connor.

Synopsis: The amendment revises Article 5.1(a) to clarify the operational capacity of the vessels operated under this Agreement.

Proposed Effective Date: 12/24/2018.

Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/601.

Dated: November 9, 2018. Rachel Dickon, Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-24986 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS-3360-FN] Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Continued Approval of the Community Health Accreditation Partner's Hospice Accreditation Program AGENCY:

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

ACTION:

Final notice.

SUMMARY:

This final notice announces our decision to approve the Community Health Accreditation Partner (CHAP) for continued recognition as a national accrediting organization for hospices that wish to participate in the Medicare or Medicaid programs. A hospice that participates in Medicaid must also meet the Medicare Conditions for Participation (CoPs).

DATES:

The approval is effective November 20, 2018 through November 20, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lillian Williams, (410) 786-8636, or Monda Shaver, (410) 786-3410.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

Under the Medicare program, eligible beneficiaries may receive covered services in a hospice, provided certain requirements are met by the hospice. Section 1861(dd) of the Social Security Act (the Act) establishes distinct criteria for facilities seeking designation as a hospice. Regulations concerning provider agreements are at 42 CFR part 489 and those pertaining to activities relating to the survey and certification of facilities are at 42 CFR part 488. The regulations at 42 CFR part 418 specify the conditions that a hospice must meet in order to participate in the Medicare program, the scope of covered services and the conditions for Medicare payment for hospices.

Generally, to enter into an agreement, a hospice must first be certified as complying with the conditions set forth in part 418 and recommended to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for participation by a state survey agency. Thereafter, the hospice is subject to periodic surveys by a state survey agency to determine whether it continues to meet these conditions. However, there is an alternative to certification surveys by state agencies. Accreditation by a nationally recognized Medicare accreditation program approved by CMS may substitute for both initial and ongoing state review.

Section 1865(a)(1) of the Act provides that, if the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) finds that accreditation of a provider entity by an approved national accrediting organization meets or exceeds all applicable Medicare conditions, CMS may treat the provider entity as having met those conditions, that is, we may “deem” the provider entity to be in compliance. Accreditation by an accrediting organization is voluntary and is not required for Medicare participation.

If an accrediting organization is recognized by the Secretary as having standards for accreditation that meet or exceed Medicare requirements, any provider entity accredited by the national accrediting organization's approved program may be deemed to meet the Medicare conditions. A national accrediting organization applying for CMS approval of their accreditation program under 42 CFR part 488, subpart A, must provide CMS with reasonable assurance that the accrediting organization requires the accredited provider entities to meet requirements that are at least as stringent as the Medicare conditions. Our regulations concerning the approval of accrediting organizations are set forth at § 488.5. Section 488.5(e)(2)(i) requires accrediting organizations to reapply for continued approval of its Medicare accreditation program every 6 years or sooner as determined by CMS. The Community Health Accreditation Partner's (CHAP'S) term of approval as a recognized accreditation program for its hospice accreditation program expires November 20, 2018.

II. Application Approval Process

Section 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act provides a statutory timetable to ensure that our review of applications for CMS-approval of an accreditation program is conducted in a timely manner. The Act provides us 210 days after the date of receipt of a complete application, with any documentation necessary to make the determination, to complete our survey activities and application process. Within 60 days after receiving a complete application, we must publish a notice in the Federal Register that identifies the national accrediting body making the request, describes the request, and provides no less than a 30-day public comment period. At the end of the 210-day period, we must publish a notice in the Federal Register approving or denying the application.

III. Provisions of the Proposed Notice

On June 15, 2018, we published a proposed notice (83 FR 27992) in the Federal Register announcing CHAP's request for continued approval of its Medicare hospice accreditation program. In the June 15, 2018 proposed notice, we detailed our evaluation criteria. Under section 1865(a)(2) of the Act and in our regulations at § 488.5, we conducted a review of CHAP's Medicare hospice accreditation application in accordance with the criteria specified by our regulations, which include, but are not limited to, the following:

• An onsite administrative review of CHAP's: (1) Corporate policies; (2) financial and human resources available to accomplish the proposed surveys; (3) procedures for training, monitoring, and evaluation of its hospice surveyors; (4) ability to investigate and respond appropriately to complaints against accredited hospices; and (5) survey review and decision-making process for accreditation.

• A comparison of CHAP's Medicare hospice accreditation program standards to our current Medicare hospice Conditions of Participation (CoPs).

• A documentation review of CHAP's survey process to:

++ Determine the composition of the survey team, surveyor qualifications, and CHAP's ability to provide continuing surveyor training.

++ Compare CHAP's processes to those we require of state survey agencies, including periodic resurvey and the ability to investigate and respond appropriately to complaints against accredited hospices.

++ Evaluate CHAP's procedures for monitoring hospices found to be out of compliance with CHAP's program requirements. This pertains only to monitoring procedures when CHAP identifies non-compliance. If noncompliance is identified by a state survey agency through a validation survey, the state survey agency monitors corrections as specified at § 488.9(c).

++ Assess CHAP's ability to report deficiencies to the surveyed hospice and respond to the hospice's plan of correction in a timely manner.

++ Establish CHAP's ability to provide CMS with electronic data and reports necessary for effective validation and assessment of the organization's survey process.

++ Determine the adequacy of CHAP's staff and other resources.

++ Confirm CHAP's ability to provide adequate funding for the completion of required surveys.

++ Confirm CHAP's policies to surveys being unannounced.

++ Obtain CHAP's agreement to provide CMS with a copy of the most current accreditation survey together with any other information related to the survey as we may require, including corrective action plans.

In accordance with section 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the June 15, 2018 proposed notice also solicited public comments regarding whether CHAP's requirements met or exceeded the Medicare CoPs for hospices. No comments were received in response to our proposed notice.

IV. Provisions of the Final Notice A. Differences Between CHAP's Standards and Requirements for Accreditation and Medicare Conditions and Survey Requirements

We compared CHAP's hospice accreditation requirements and survey process with the Medicare CoPs of part 418, and the survey and certification process requirements of parts 488 and 489. Our review and evaluation of CHAP's hospice application, which were conducted as described in section III of this final notice, yielded the following areas where, as of the date of this notice, CHAP has completed revising its standards and certification processes in order to ensure that hospices accredited by CHAP meet the requirements at:

• § 418.64(d)(2), to ensure the dietary needs of patients are met.

• § 418.76(b)(1), to ensure training is conducted by a registered nurse, or a licensed practical nurse under the supervision of a registered nurse.

• § 418.76(b)(3)(xiii), to ensure that any other task that the hospice may choose to have an aide perform must be included in the content of the hospice aide classroom and supervised practical training.

• § 418.76(d)(1), to ensure that in-service training is supervised by a registered nurse.

• § 418.76(h)(3)(iv) and (v), to address the requirement that the supervising nurse must assess an aide's ability to demonstrate initial and continued satisfactory performance in meeting outcome criteria for the hospice's infection control policy and procedures and for reporting changes in the patient's conditions.

• § 418.76(k)(3), to address the requirement for homemakers to report concerns to the member of the interdisciplinary group who is responsible for coordinating homemaker services.

• § 418.104, to address the requirement allowing medical records to be maintained electronically.

• § 418.110(d)(3), to address the requirement that provisions of the adopted edition of the Life Safety Code do not apply in a state if CMS finds that a fire and safety code imposed by state law adequately protects patients in hospices.

• § 418.113, to ensure compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local emergency preparedness requirements.

• § 488.5(a)(7) through (9), to ensure that new surveyors receive the required initial orientation training, and that all new surveyors receive an evaluation of performance, in accordance with CHAP policies.

• § 488.5(a)(12), to ensure that complaint surveys are conducted in a manner that meets or exceeds the processes and investigation practices of CMS; that the rationale for the decision whether to conduct an onsite survey or not, is clearly documented in the complaint file, according to CHAP policy; and, to ensure that complaints are closed out properly with appropriate notification to complainants.

B. Term of Approval

Based on our review and observations described in section III of this final notice, we approve CHAP as a national accreditation organization for hospices that request participation in the Medicare program, effective November 20, 2018 through November 20, 2024.

V. Collection of Information Requirements

This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. Consequently, there is no need for 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).

Dated: November 7, 2018. Seema Verma, Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 2018-25066 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request

Title: National Evaluation of the Sexual Risk Avoidance Education (SRAE) Program—National Descriptive Study

OMB NO.: [NEW]

Description: The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) proposes a data collection effort related to the National Evaluation of the Sexual Risk Avoidance Education (SRAE) Program—National Descriptive Study.

The National Descriptive Study (of the National Evaluation of the SRAE Program) has multiple components. This information collection request only pertains to the Early Implementation Study, which will provide an early catalogue of SRAE programs' implementation. ACF seeks approval to collect the following information:

—Survey for Use with SRAE grantees. The purpose of this collection effort is to conduct surveys with administrators/program directors in each of the states/organizations that received SRAE grants to better understand what key decisions states/organizations made regarding the design of their SRAE-funded programs and why they made those decisions.

Interview Guide for Use with SRAE grantees. The purpose of this collection effort is to conduct semi-structured interviews, that follow-on the surveys, with administrators/program directors in each of the states/organizations that received SRAE grants: The interviews will offer long-answer, qualitative responses to key questions, to better understand what key decisions states/organizations made regarding the design of their SRAE-funded programs and why they made those decisions.

Respondents: State level administrators; Agency administrators; Organization heads; Project directors

Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Total
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Annual
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • hours per
  • response
  • Annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • Survey for SRAE Grantees 125 1 1 1 125 Interview Guide for SRAE Grantees 125 1 1 1 125

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 250 hours.

    In compliance with the requirements of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201, Attn: OPRE Reports Clearance Officer. Email address: [email protected] All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. The Department specifically requests comments 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 of the proposed collection of information; (c) 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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Emily Jabbour, ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24997 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD) and Youth Outcomes Survey.

    OMB No.: 0970-0340.

    Description: The Foster Care Independence Act of 1999 (42 U.S.C. 1305 et seq.) as amended by Public Law 106-169 requires State child welfare agencies to collect and report to the Administration on Children and Families (ACF) data on the characteristics of youth receiving independent living services and information regarding their outcomes. The regulation implementing the National Youth in Transition Database, listed in 45 CFR 1356.80, contains standard data collection and reporting requirements for States to meet the law's requirements. Additionally, the Family First Prevention Services Act of 2017 (H.R. 253) further outlines the expectation of the collection and reporting of data and outcomes regarding youth who are in receipt of independent living services. ACF will use the information collected under the regulation to track independent living services, assess the collective outcomes of youth, and potentially to evaluate State performance with regard to those outcomes consistent with the law's mandate.

    Respondents: State agencies that administer the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program. The U.S. Virgin Islands have been included in this request as they are expected to begin participating in NYTD data collection efforts during this approval period.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours
  • per response
  • Total burden hours
    Data file 53 2 1,430 151,580 Youth Outcomes Survey 16,333 1 .50 8,167

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 155,529.

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Attention Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget Paperwork Reduction Project Email: [email protected] Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25053 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket Nos. FDA-2017-M-6970, FDA-2017-M-6971, FDA-2017-M-6983, FDA-2017-M-6984, FDA-2017-M-7004, FDA-2018-M-0411, FDA-2018-M-0528, FDA-2018-M-0620, FDA-2018-M-0736, FDA-2018-M-0737, FDA-2018-M-00-0738, FDA-2018-M-0792, FDA-2018-M-1371, FDA-2018-M-1215, FDA-2018-M-1237, FDA-2018-M-1372, FDA-2018-M-1446, FDA-2018-M-1447, FDA-2018-M-1580, FDA-2018-M-1581, FDA-2018-M-1634, FDA-2018-M-1727, FDA-2018-M-1791, FDA-2018-M-1753, FDA-2018-M-1970, FDA-2018-M-2118, FDA-2018-M-2119, FDA-2018-M-2237, FDA-2018-M-2269, FDA-2018-M-2335, FDA-2018-M-2460, FDA-2018-M-2461, FDA-2018-M-2462, FDA-2018-M-2463, FDA-2018-M-2571, FDA-2018-M-2883, FDA-2018-M-2884, FDA-2018-M-2885, FDA-2018-M-2886, FDA-2018-M-2887, FDA-2018-M-2983, FDA-2018-M-3131, FDA-2018-M-3153, FDA-2018-M-3212, FDA-2018-M-3503, FDA-2018-M-3505, and FDA-2018-M-3548] Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval Applications AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing a list of premarket approval applications (PMAs) and humanitarian device exemption applications (HDEs), that have been approved. This list is intended to inform the public of the availability of safety and effectiveness summaries of approved PMAs through the internet and the Agency's Dockets Management Staff.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket Nos. FDA-2017-M-6970, FDA-2017-M-6971, FDA-2017-M-6983, FDA-2017-M-6984, FDA-2017-M-7004, FDA-2018-M-0411, FDA-2018-M-0528, FDA-2018-M-0620, FDA-2018-M-0736, FDA-2018-M-0737, FDA-2018-M-00-0738, FDA-2018-M-0792, FDA-2018-M-1371, FDA-2018-M-1215, FDA-2018-M-1237, FDA-2018-M-1372, FDA-2018-M-1446, FDA-2018-M-1447, FDA-2018-M-1580, FDA-2018-M-1581, FDA-2018-M-1634, FDA-2018-M-1727, FDA-2018-M-1791, FDA-2018-M-1753, FDA-2018-M-1970, FDA-2018-M-2118, FDA-2018-M-2119, FDA-2018-M-2237, FDA-2018-M-2269, FDA-2018-M-2335, FDA-2018-M-2460, FDA-2018-M-2461, FDA-2018-M-2462, FDA-2018-M-2463, FDA-2018-M-2571, FDA-2018-M-2883, FDA-2018-M-2884, FDA-2018-M-2885, FDA-2018-M-2886, FDA-2018-M-2887, FDA-2018-M-2983, FDA-2018-M-3131, FDA-2018-M-3153, FDA-2018-M-3212, FDA-2018-M-3503, FDA-2018-M-3505, and FDA-2018-M-3548 for “Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval Applications.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joshua Nipper, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1650, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-6524.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    In accordance with section 515(d)(4) and (e)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360e(d)(4) and (e)(2)), notification of an order approving, denying, or withdrawing approval of a PMA will continue to include a notice of opportunity to request review of the order under section 515(g) of the FD&C Act. The 30-day period for requesting reconsideration of an FDA action under § 10.33(b) (21 CFR 10.33(b)) for notices announcing approval of a PMA begins on the day the notice is placed on the internet. Section 10.33(b) provides that FDA may, for good cause, extend this 30-day period. Reconsideration of a denial or withdrawal of approval of a PMA may be sought only by the applicant; in these cases, the 30-day period will begin when the applicant is notified by FDA in writing of its decision.

    The regulations provide that FDA publish a list of available safety and effectiveness summaries of PMA approvals and denials that were announced during that quarter. The following is a list of approved PMAs for which summaries of safety and effectiveness were placed on the internet from January 1, 2018, through September 18, 2018. There were no denial actions during this period. The list provides the manufacturer's name, the product's generic name or the trade name, and the approval date.

    Table 1—List of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Approved PMAs and Safety and Probable Benefit Summaries for Approved HDEs Made Available From January 1, 2018, Through September 18, 2018 PMA No., Docket No. Applicant Trade name Approval date P150005/S014, FDA-2017-M-6970 Boston Scientific Blazer® Open-Irrigated Ablation Catheter and IntellaNavTM Open-Irrigated Ablation Catheter 12/21/2017 P100030/S008, FDA-2017-M-6971 Mallinckrodt Pharma IP Trading DAC PREVELEAK Surgical Sealant 12/21/2017 P160012, FDA-2017-M-6983 Physio-Control, Inc LIFEPAK CR® Plus Defibrillator, LIFEPAK EXPRESS® Defibrillator and CHARGE-PAK® Battery Charger 12/21/2017 P140032, FDA-2017-M-6984 Medtronic, Inc Implantable System for Remodulin® 12/22/2017 P160022, FDA-2017-M-7004 ZOLL Medical Corp X Series®, R Series®, AED Pro®, and AED 3TM BLS® Professional Defibrillators, Pro-Padz Radiotransparent Electrode, SurePowerTM Battery Pack, SurePower IITM Battery Pack, AED Pro® Non-Rechargeable Lithium Battery Pack, AED 3TM Battery Pack, SurePowerTM Charger, and SurePowerTM Single Bay Charger 12/27/2017 P170025, FDA-2018-M-0411 Hologic, Inc Aptima® HBV Quant Assay 1/23/2018 P160032, FDA-2018-M-0528 Defibtech, LLC Lifeline/ReviveR DDU-100, Lifeline/ReviveR AUTO DDU-120, Lifeline/ReviveR VIEW DDU-2300, Lifeline/ReviveR VIEW AUTO DDU-2200, Lifeline/ReviveR ECG DDU-2450, and Lifeline/ReviveR ECG+ DDU-2475 Automated External Defibrillators 2/1/2018 P140003/S018, FDA-2018-M-0620 Abiomed, Inc Impella Ventricular Support Systems 2/7/2018 P160037, FDA-2018-M-0736 Becton, Dickinson and Co BD Onclarity HPV Assay 2/12/2018 P150001/S021, FDA-2018-M-0737 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc MiniMed 630G System 2/13/2018 P160017/S017, FDA-2018-M-0738 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc MiniMed 670G System 2/13/2018 P960043/S097, FDA-2018-M-0792 Abbott Vascular Perclose ProGlide® Suture-Mediated Closure System 2/16/2018 P160007, FDA-2018-M-1371 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc Guardian Connect System 3/8/2018 H170002, FDA-2018-M-1215 Kaneka Pharma America LLC LIPOSORBER® LA-15 System 3/20/2018 P160013, FDA-2018-M-1237 TransMedics, Inc Organ Care System (OCSTM) Lung System 3/22/2018 P050006/S060, FDA-2018-M-1372 W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc GORE® CARDIOFORM Septal Occluder 3/30/2018 P160018/S001, FDA-2018-M-1446 Foundation Medicine, Inc FoundationFocusTM CDx BRCA LOH 4/6/2018 P150009, FDA-2018-M-1447 Angel Medical Systems, Inc AngelMed Guardian System 4/9/2018 P160052, FDA-2018-M-1581 Parsagen Diagnostics, Inc PartoSure Test 4/11/2018 P950039/S036, FDA-2018-M-1580 Hologic, Inc ThinPrep Integrated Imager 4/18/2018 P140010/S037, FDA-2018-M-1634 Medtronic Vascular, Inc IN.PACTTM AdmiralTM Paclitaxel-Coated Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) Balloon Catheter 4/19/2018 P960009/S219, FDA-2018-M-1727 Medtronic, Inc Medtronic DBS System for Epilepsy 4/27/2018 P170035, FDA-2018-M-1791 Bausch + Lomb, Inc Bausch + Lomb ULTRA (samfilcon A) Contact Lenses 4/30/2018 P170016, FDA-2018-M-1753 Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc SYNOJOYNTTM 5/8/2018 P040024/S099, FDA-2018-M-1970 Galderma Laboratories, LP Restylane® Lyft with Lidocaine 5/18/2018 P170013, FDA-2018-M-2118 MicroVention, Inc Low-Profile Visualized Intraluminal Support (LVIS) and LVIS Jr 5/30/2018 P170039, FDA-2018-M-2119 Clinical Research Consultants, Inc CustomFlexTM Artificial Iris 5/30/2018 P910056/S027, FDA-2018-M-2237 Bausch + Lomb, Inc enVista® One-Piece Hydrophobic Acrylic Toric Intraocular Lens (Model MX60T) 6/8/2018 P150013/S009, FDA-2018-M-2269 Dako North America, Inc PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx 6/12/2018 P100006/S005, FDA-2018-M-2335 BioMimetic Therapeutics, LLC AUGMENT® Injectable 6/12/2018 P170043, FDA-2018-M-2460 Glaukos Corp iStent inject Trabecular Micro-Bypass System (Model G2-M-IS) 6/21/2018 P160017/S031, FDA-2018-M-2461 Medtronic MiniMed, Inc MiniMed 670G System 6/21/2018 P160048, FDA-2018-M-2463 Senseonics, Inc Eversense Continuous Glucose Monitoring System 6/21/2018 P180008, FDA-2018-M-2462 Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc t:slim X2 Insulin Pump with Basal-IQ Technology 6/21/2018 P180002, FDA-2018-M-2571 Pulmonx Corp Zephyr® Endobronchial Valve System 6/29/2018 P160026, FDA-2018-M-2883 Physio-Control, Inc LIFEPAK® 1000 Defibrillator, LIFEPAK® 1000 Defibrillator Lithium-Ion Rechargeable Battery, LIFEPAK® 1000 Defibrillator Non-Rechargeable Battery, LIFEPAK® 20 Defibrillator/Monitor (Refurbished), LIFEPAK® 20e Defibrillator/Monitor, LIFEPAK® 15 Monitor/Defibrillator, LIFEPAK® Lithium-ion Rechargeable Battery (for use with the LIFEPAK® 15 Monitor/Defibrillator) 7/2/2018 P170024, FDA-2018-M-2884 Stryker Neurovascular Surpass Streamline Flow Diverter 7/13/2018 P170041, FDA-2018-M-2885 Abbott Molecular, Inc Abbott RealTime IDH1 7/20/2018 P160030/S017, FDA-2018-M-2886 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc FreeStyle Libre 14 Day Flash Glucose Monitoring System 7/23/2018 P160053, FDA-2018-M-2887 Endomagnetics Ltd MagtraceTM and Sentimag® Magnetic Localization System 7/24/2018 P170042, FDA-2018-M-2983 C.R. Bard, Inc COVERATM Vascular Covered Stent 7/30/2018 P150048/S012, FDA-2018-M-3131 Edwards Lifesciences LLC Edwards Pericardial Mitral Bioprosthesis, Model 11000M 8/9/2018 P170034, FDA-2018-M-3153 Ivantis, Inc Hydrus® Microstent 8/10/2018 P150013/S011, FDA-2018-M-3212 Dako North America, Inc PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx 8/16/2018 P030016/S001, FDA-2018-M-3503 STAAR Surgical Co Visian® TORIC ICL (Implantable Collamer® Lens) 9/13/2018 H170004, FDA-2018-M-3505 BIOTRONIK, Inc PK Papyrus Covered Coronary Stent System 9/14/2018 P180011, FDA-2018-M-3548 Boston Scientific Corp ELUVIATM Drug-Eluting Vascular Stent System 9/18/2018 II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the documents at https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/PMAApprovals/default.htm.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25071 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4002] Electronic Submission of Adverse Event Reports to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System Using International Council for Harmonisation E2B(R3) Standards; Public Meetings; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is announcing three public meetings entitled “Electronic Submission of Adverse Event Reports to FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Using International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) E2B(R3) Standards.” The purpose of these public meetings is to provide the pharmaceutical industry and other interested parties with information on the plans, progress, and technical specifications to upgrade electronic submission standards for drug, biological, and drug/biologic-led combination products for the premarket and postmarket safety surveillance programs managed by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). These meetings will focus on enhancements to electronic submission of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) in FAERS using ICH E2B(R3) standards.

    FDA is seeking input from stakeholders as it fulfills its commitment to implement ICH E2B(R3) standards by holding three public meetings. FDA will use the information provided by the public to inform the enhancements to FAERS required for the implementation of ICH E2B(R3) standards and relevant regional variations.

    DATES:

    The first public meeting will be held on January 25, 2019, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. The second public meeting will be held on July 17, 2019, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. The third public meeting will be held on February 19, 2020 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Submit either electronic or written comments on these public meetings by February 25, 2019, for the first public meeting; by August 16, 2019, for the second public meeting, and by March 20, 2020, for the third public meeting. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for registration dates and information.

    ADDRESSES:

    Each public meeting will be held at the FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503, Section A), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. 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/default.htm.

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. For timely consideration, we request that electronic comments be submitted before or within 30 days after each public meeting (i.e., comments submitted by or before February 25, 2019, for the first public meeting; August 16, 2019, for the second public meeting; and March 20, 2020, for the third public meeting. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of February 25, 2019; August 16, 2019; and March 20, 2020, after the first, second, and the third meeting, respectively. 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-4002 for “Electronic Submission of Adverse Event Reports to FAERS Using ICH E2B(R3) Standards.” 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:

    Suranjan De, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 4307, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-0498, email: [email protected]; or Judith Richardson, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7309A, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-6473, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is committed to achieve the long-term goal of improving the predictability and consistency of the electronic submission process and enhancing transparency and accountability of FDA information technology-related activities. FDA participated in the development of ICH E2B guideline 1 pertaining to the submission of adverse event reports to the FAERS system: “Implementation Guide for Electronic Transmission of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) E2B(R3) Data Elements and Message Specification.” FDA plans to incorporate ICH E2B(R3) recommended standards into the requirements for the electronic submission of adverse event reports to FAERS tentatively by April 2020. Consistent with the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) VI commitments, FDA is organizing several public meetings to allow industry the opportunity to provide feedback and/or participate in user acceptance testing in advance of the Agency's planned implementation of ICH E2B(R3) data standards. FDA's performance goals and procedures under the PDUFA program for the years 2018 to 2022 are outlined in the commitment letter available at: https://www.fda.gov/forindustry/userfees/prescriptiondruguserfee/ucm446608.htm.

    1 The ICH E2B(R3) IG guideline (http://estri.ich.org/e2br3/index.htm) provides technical and business specifications for the harmonized, core set of ICH data elements.

    II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Meetings

    FDA will present its plan to incorporate ICH E2B(R3) recommended standards into the requirements for the electronic submission of adverse event reports to FAERS. The meetings will include a general discussion of CDER's and CBER's plans to revise the FDA Regional Implementation Specifications for premarketing and postmarketing adverse event reporting. The goal of this revision is to enhance the quality of adverse event reports received by the Agency by incorporating ICH E2B(R3) recommendations into FDA Regional Implementation Specifications. The information exchange at the meetings will enhance the pharmaceutical industry's knowledge of the processes needed to implement ICH E2B(R3) into their systems. In addition, the comments provided by participating stakeholders will inform CDER's and CBER's plans for the implementation of ICH E2B(R3) for drugs, biologics, and drug/biologic-led combination products.

    During the public meetings, FDA intends to discuss: (1) E2B(R3) Regional (U.S.) Data Elements; (2) Usage of Data Standards in E2B(R3); (3) Submission paths for premarket and postmarket ICSRs; (4) Data Migration Exceptions; and (5) FDA Regional Implementation Specifications for ICH E2B(R3) Implementation. One or more of the above topics may be discussed in each meeting. FDA will consider all comments made at these public meetings or received through the docket (see ADDRESSES).

    III. Participating in the Public Meeting

    Registration: To register for the public meetings, please visit the following website to register: https://fdae2br3.eventbrite.com by December 20, 2018, for the first meeting, June 14, 2019, for the second meeting, and January 17, 2020, for the third meeting. Please provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email, telephone, and method of attendance (in-person or web conference).

    Registration is free and based on space availability, with priority given to early registrants. Persons interested in attending the public meetings must register by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 20, 2018, for the first meeting, June 14, 2019, for the second meeting, and January 17, 2020, for the third meeting. Early registration is recommended because seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization. Registrants will receive confirmation when they have been accepted. If time and space permit, onsite registration on the day of the public meeting/public workshop will be provided beginning at 8 a.m.

    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Chenoa Conley, 301-796-0035, email: [email protected], at least 7 days before each meeting.

    Request for Oral Presentations: During online registration you may indicate if you wish to present during the public comment session. All requests to make oral presentations must be received by the close of registration at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 20, 2018, for the first meeting, June 14, 2019, for the second meeting, and January 17, 2020, for the third meeting. We will do our best to accommodate requests to make public comments. Individuals and organizations with common interests are urged to consolidate or coordinate their presentations and request time for a joint presentation. Following the close of registration, we will determine the amount of time allotted to each presenter and the approximate time each oral presentation is to begin and will select and notify participants by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on January 4, 2019, for the first meeting, June 26, 2019, for the second meeting, and January 30, 2020, for the third meeting. FDA will notify registered presenters of their scheduled presentation time. If selected for presentation, any presentation materials must be emailed to [email protected] no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on January 18, 2019, for the first meeting, July 10, 2019, for the second meeting, and February 12, 2020, for the third meeting. Persons registered to speak should check in before the meeting and are encouraged to arrive early to ensure their designated order of presentation. Participants who are not present when called may not be permitted to speak at a later time. No commercial or promotional material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public meeting. An agenda will be made available at least 3 days before each public meeting at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm621215.htm.

    Streaming Webcast of the Public Meetings and Video of the Public Meetings: These public meetings will also be webcast; the URL will be posted at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm621215.htm at least 1 day before each meeting. A video record of the public workshops will be available at the same website address for 1 year.

    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). A link to the transcript will also be available on the internet at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Surveillance/AdverseDrugEffects/ucm115894.htm.

    Dated: November 8, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25063 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3789] Request for Nominations for Individuals and Consumer Organizations for Advisory Committees AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is requesting that any consumer organizations interested in participating in the selection of voting and/or nonvoting consumer representatives to serve on its advisory committees or panels notify FDA in writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for voting and/or nonvoting consumer representatives to serve on advisory committees and/or panels for which vacancies currently exist or are expected to occur in the near future. Nominees recommended to serve as a voting or nonvoting consumer representative may be self-nominated or may be nominated by a consumer organization.

    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities on its advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.

    DATES:

    Any consumer organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate voting or nonvoting member to represent consumer interests on an FDA advisory committee or panel may send a letter or email stating that interest to FDA (see ADDRESSES) by December 17, 2018, for vacancies listed in this notice. Concurrently, nomination materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA (see ADDRESSES) by December 17, 2018. Nominations will be accepted for current vacancies and for those that will or may occur through December 30, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    All statements of interest from consumer organizations interested in participating in the selection process should be submitted electronically to [email protected], by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5122, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or by Fax: 301-847-8640.

    Consumer representative nominations should be submitted electronically by logging into the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm, by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5122, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or by Fax: 301-847-8640. Additional information about becoming a member of an FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions relating to participation in the selection process: Kimberly Hamilton, Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5122, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-6319, [email protected]

    For questions relating to specific advisory committees or panels, contact the appropriate contact person listed in table 1.

    Table 1—Advisory Committee Contacts Contact person Committee/panel Lauren Tesh, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2426, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-2721, [email protected] Antimicrobial Advisory Committee. Kalyani Bhatt, Center for Drugs Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2438, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-9005, [email protected] Bone Reproductive and Urological Drugs Advisory Committee. Jennifer Shepherd, Center for Drugs Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2434, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-4043, [email protected] Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee, Medical Imaging Advisory Committee. Cindy Chee, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2430, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-0889, [email protected] Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee. Patricio Garcia, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. G610, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-6875, [email protected] Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Toxicology Devices Panel, Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel. Evella Washington, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. G640, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-6683, [email protected] Ear, Nose and Throat Devices Panel. Pamela Scott, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2647, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-5433, [email protected] Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel. Aden Asefa, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. G642, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-0400, [email protected] Microbiology Devices Panel, Radiology Devices Panel. Sara Anderson, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. G616m Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, Phone: 301-796-7047, [email protected] Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel.
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FDA is requesting nominations for voting and/or nonvoting consumer representatives for the vacancies listed in table 2:

    Table 2—Committee Descriptions, Type of Consumer Representative Vacancy, and Approximate Date Needed Committee/panel/area of expertise needed Type of vacancy Approximate date needed Antimicrobial Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of infectious disease, internal medicine, microbiology, pediatrics, epidemiology or statistics, and related specialties 1—Voting Immediately. Bone, Reproductive, and Urological Drugs Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of obstetrics, gynecology, endocrinology, pediatrics, epidemiology or statistics and related specialties 1—Voting Immediately. Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of cardiology, hypertension, arrhythmia, angina, congestive heart failure, diuresis, and biostatistics 1—Voting Immediately. Medical Imaging Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of nuclear medicine, radiology, epidemiology, statistics, and related specialties 1—Voting Immediately. Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of pharmaceutical compounding, pharmaceutical manufacturing pharmacy, medicine, and other related specialties 1—Voting Immediately. Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Toxicology Devices Panel—Doctors of medicine or philosophy with experience in clinical chemistry (e.g., cardiac markers), clinical toxicology, clinical pathology, clinical laboratory medicine, and endocrinology 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel—Gastroenterologists, urologists and nephrologists 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Radiology Devices Panel—Physicians with experience in general radiology, mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computed tomography, other radiological subspecialties and radiation oncology; scientists with experience in diagnostic devices, radiation physics, statistical analysis, digital imaging, and image analysis 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Ear, Nose and Throat Devices Panel—Experts in otology, neurology, and audiology 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Medical Devices Dispute Resolution—Experts with broad, cross-cutting scientific, clinical, analytical, or mediation skills 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Microbiology Devices Panel—Clinicians with expertise in infectious disease, e.g., pulmonary disease specialists, sexually transmitted disease specialists, pediatric infectious disease specialists, experts in tropical medicine and emerging infectious diseases, mycologists; clinical microbiologists and virologists; clinical virology and microbiology laboratory directors, with expertise in clinical diagnosis and in vitro diagnostic assays, e.g., hepatologists; molecular biologists 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel—Orthopedic surgeons (joint spine, trauma, and pediatric); rheumatologists; engineers (biomedical, biomaterials, and biomechanical); experts in rehabilitation medicine, sports medicine, and connective tissue engineering; and biostatisticians 1—Nonvoting Immediately. I. Functions and General Description of the Committee Duties A. Antimicrobial Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates available data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in the treatment of infectious diseases and disorders.

    B. Bone, Reproductive, and Urological Drugs Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data on the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drugs for use in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology, and related specialties.

    C. Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates available data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in the treatment of cardiovascular and renal disorders.

    D. Medical Imaging Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures using radioactive pharmaceuticals and contrast media used in diagnostic radiology.

    E. Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee

    Provides advice on scientific, technical, and medical issues concerning drug compounding by pharmacists and licensed practitioners.

    F. Certain Panels of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data on the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices and makes recommendations for their regulation. With the exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according to its specialty area, advises on the classification or reclassification of devices into one of three regulatory categories; advises on any possible risks to health associated with the use of devices; advises on formulation of product development protocols; reviews premarket approval applications for medical devices; reviews guidelines and guidance documents; recommends exemption of certain devices from the application of portions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; advises on the necessity to ban a device; and responds to requests from the Agency to review and make recommendations on specific issues or problems concerning the safety and effectiveness of devices. With the exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according to its specialty area, may also make appropriate recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs on issues relating to the design of clinical studies regarding the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices.

    The Dental Products Panel also functions at times as a dental drug panel. The functions of the dental drug panel are to evaluate and recommend whether various prescription drug products should be changed to over-the-counter status and to evaluate data and make recommendations concerning the approval of new dental drug products for human use.

    The Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel provides advice to the Commissioner on complex or contested scientific issues between FDA and medical device sponsors, applicants, or manufacturers relating to specific products, marketing applications, regulatory decisions and actions by FDA, and Agency guidance and policies. The Panel makes recommendations on issues that are lacking resolution, are highly complex in nature, or result from challenges to regular advisory panel proceedings or Agency decisions or actions.

    II. Criteria for Members

    Persons nominated for membership as consumer representatives on committees or panels should meet the following criteria: (1) Demonstrate an affiliation with and/or active participation in consumer or community-based organizations, (2) be able to analyze technical data, (3) understand research design, (4) discuss benefits and risks, and (5) evaluate the safety and efficacy of products under review. The consumer representative should be able to represent the consumer perspective on issues and actions before the advisory committee; serve as a liaison between the committee and interested consumers, associations, coalitions, and consumer organizations; and facilitate dialogue with the advisory committees on scientific issues that affect consumers.

    III. Selection Procedures

    Selection of members representing consumer interests is conducted through procedures that include the use of organizations representing the public interest and public advocacy groups. These organizations recommend nominees for the Agency's selection. Representatives from the consumer health branches of Federal, State, and local governments also may participate in the selection process. Any consumer organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate voting or nonvoting member to represent consumer interests should send a letter stating that interest to FDA (see ADDRESSES) within 30 days of publication of this document.

    Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will compile a list of consumer organizations that will participate in the selection process and will forward to each such organization a ballot listing at least two qualified nominees selected by the Agency based on the nominations received, together with each nominee's current curriculum vitae or resume. Ballots are to be filled out and returned to FDA within 30 days. The nominee receiving the highest number of votes ordinarily will be selected to serve as the member representing consumer interests for that particular advisory committee or panel.

    IV. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person or organization may nominate one or more qualified persons to represent consumer interests on the Agency's advisory committees or panels. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations must include a current, complete résumé or curriculum vitae for each nominee and a signed copy of the Acknowledgement and Consent form available at the FDA Advisory Nomination Portal (see ADDRESSES), and a list of consumer or community-based organizations for which the candidate can demonstrate active participation.

    Nominations must also specify the advisory committee(s) or panel(s) for which the nominee is recommended. In addition, nominations must also acknowledge that the nominee is aware of the nomination unless self-nominated. FDA will ask potential candidates to provide detailed information concerning such matters as financial holdings, employment, and research grants and/or contracts to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest. Members will be invited to serve for terms up to 4 years.

    FDA will review all nominations received within the specified timeframes and prepare a ballot containing the names of qualified nominees. Names not selected will remain on a list of eligible nominees and be reviewed periodically by FDA to determine continued interest. Upon selecting qualified nominees for the ballot, FDA will provide those consumer organizations that are participating in the selection process with the opportunity to vote on the listed nominees. Only organizations vote in the selection process. Persons who nominate themselves to serve as voting or nonvoting consumer representatives will not participate in the selection process.

    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25076 Filed 11-15-18; 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: MCH Jurisdictional Survey Instrument for the Title V MCH Block Grant Program, OMB No. 0906-XXXX, New 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, or any other aspect of the ICR related to the Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Jurisdictional Survey that is to be administered in the U.S. territories and jurisdictions (excluding the District of Columbia) for purposes of collecting information related to the well-being of all mothers, children, and their families.

    DATES:

    Comments on this ICR must be received no later than January 15, 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: MCH Jurisdictional Survey Instrument for the Title V MCH Block Grant Program, OMB No. 0906-XXXX New.

    Abstract: The purpose of the Title V MCH Block Grant is to improve the health of the nation's mothers, infants, children, including children with special health care needs, and their families by creating federal/state partnerships that provide each state/jurisdiction with needed flexibility to respond to its individual MCH population needs. Unique to the MCH Block Grant is a commitment to performance accountability, while assuring state flexibility. Utilizing a three-tiered national performance measure framework, which includes National Outcome Measures (NOMs), National Performance Measures (NPMs), and Evidence-Based and Evidence-Informed Strategy Measures, State Title V programs report annually on their performance relative to the selected national performance and outcome measures. Such reporting enables the state and federal program offices to assess the progress achieved in key MCH priority areas and to document Title V program accomplishments.

    By legislation (Section 505(a) of Title V of the Social Security Act), the MCH Block Grant Application/Annual Report must be developed by, or in consultation with, the State MCH Health agency. In establishing state reporting requirements, HRSA's Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) considers the availability of national data from other federal agencies. Data for the national performance and outcome measures are pre-populated for states in the Title V Information System. National data sources identified for the NPMs and NOMs in the MCH Block Grant program seldom include data from the Title V jurisdictions, with the exception of the District of Columbia. The eight remaining jurisdictions (American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands) have limited access to significant data and MCH indicators, with limited capacity for collecting these data.

    Sponsored by HRSA's MCHB, the MCH Jurisdictional Survey is designed to produce data on the physical and emotional health of mothers and children under 18 years of age in the following eight jurisdictions—American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands. More specifically, the MCH Jurisdictional Survey collects information on factors related to the well-being of children, including health status, visits to health care providers, health care costs, and health insurance coverage. In addition, the MCH Jurisdictional Survey collects information on factors related to the well-being of mothers, including health risk behaviors, health conditions, and preventive health practices. This data collection will enable the jurisdictions to meet federal performance reporting requirements and to demonstrate the impact of Title V funding relative to MCH outcomes for the U.S. jurisdictions in reporting on their unique MCH priority needs.

    The MCH Jurisdictional Survey was designed based on information-gathering activities with Title V leadership and program staff in the jurisdictions, experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other organizations with relevant data collection experience. Survey items are based on the National Survey of Children's Health, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), the Youth Behavior Surveillance System, and selected other federal studies. The Survey is designed as a core questionnaire to be administered across all jurisdictions with a supplemental set of survey questions customized to the needs of each jurisdiction.

    Need and Proposed Use of the Information: Data from the MCH Jurisdictional Survey will be used to measure progress on national performance and outcome measures under the Title V MCH Block Grant Program. This survey instrument is critical to collecting information on factors related to the well-being of all mothers, children, and their families in the jurisdictional Title V programs, which address their unique MCH needs.

    Likely Respondents: The respondent universe is women age 18 or older who live in one of the eight targeted U.S. jurisdictions (Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Palau, Marshall Islands, and Federated States of Micronesia) and who are mothers or guardians of at least one child aged 0-17 years living in the same household.

    Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information requested. Included is 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 Information Collection Request are summarized in the table below.

    Total Estimated Annualized Burden Hours:

    Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Burden hours
  • per form
  • Total
  • burden hours
  • Adult Parents—Puerto Rico Screener 1,250 1 0.03 37.50 217.50 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.07 14.00 Adult Parents—U.S. Virgin Islands Screener 1,428 1 0.03 42.84 222.84 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.07 14.00 Adult Parents—Guam Screener 908 1 0.03 27.24 207.24 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.07 14.00 Adult Parents—American Samoa Screener 461 1 0.03 13.83 189.83 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.05 10.00 Adult Parents—Federated States of Micronesia Screener 856 1 0.03 25.68 201.68 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.05 10.00 Adult Parents—Marshall Islands Screener 856 1 0.03 25.68 207.68 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.08 16.00 Adult Parents—Northern Mariana Islands Screener 666 1 0.03 19.98 201.98 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.08 16.00 Adult Parents—Palau Screener 499 1 0.03 14.97 184.97 Core 200 1 0.83 166.00 Jurisdiction Module 200 1 0.02 4.00 Total 6,924 1,633.72

    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. 2018-25070 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary Findings of Research Misconduct AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that on October 22, 2018, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Debarring Official, on behalf of the Secretary of HHS, issued a final notice of debarment based on an Administrative Law Judge's finding of research misconduct against Rakesh Srivastava, Ph.D., former Eminent Scholar and Professor, University of Kansas Medical Center (KUMC). Dr. Srivastava engaged in research misconduct in research proposed or reported in grant application 1 R01 CA175776-01, submitted to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), on June 5, 2012. The administrative actions, including two (2) years of debarment, were implemented beginning on October 22, 2018, and are detailed below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wanda K. Jones, Dr. P.H., Interim Director, Office of Research Integrity, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite 750, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 453-8200.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Rakesh Srivastava, Ph.D., University of Kansas Medical Center: Based on the evidence and findings of an investigation conducted by KUMC and additional information obtained by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) during its oversight review, ORI found by a preponderance of the evidence that Dr. Rakesh Srivastava (Respondent), former Eminent Scholar and Professor, KUMC, intentionally and knowingly submitted extensive plagiarized text in grant application 1 R01 CA175776-01, “Regulation of Mitochondrial Metabolism by SIRT4,” submitted to NCI, NIH, to obtain U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) funds. Specifically, ORI found that the Respondent intentionally and knowingly plagiarized scientifically significant text from the Specific Aims and Research Strategy sections of a grant application under review at NIH into his own grant application, 1 R01 CA175776-01, submitted to NIH eight months later. Significant text was included in Respondent's grant application, with plagiarized text accounting for 40% of the Specific Aims and 50% of the Research Strategy sections.

    ORI issued a charge letter making a finding of research misconduct and proposing HHS administrative actions. Dr. Srivastava subsequently requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the Departmental Appeals Board to dispute the finding. ORI moved for summary judgment. On September 5, 2018, the ALJ granted summary judgment in favor of ORI and issued his recommended decision, finding that Respondent intentionally committed research misconduct by submitting to NIH a grant application that included plagiarized words, which included significant text from another principal investigator's grant application that was contained in the Specific Aims and Research Strategy sections of the Respondent's grant application without attribution to the other principal investigator. The ALJ held that appropriate administrative actions included a two-year debarment from any contracting or subcontracting with any agency of the United States Government and from eligibility for or involvement in nonprocurement programs of the United States Government referred to as “covered transactions.” 2 CFR parts 180 and 376. The ALJ held that it was an appropriate administrative action to also impose a two-year prohibition from serving in any capacity to PHS including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, or peer review committee, or as a consultant. Under the regulation, the ALJ's recommended decision went to the Assistant Secretary for Health, who did not modify it and forwarded it to the HHS Debarring Official, who is the deciding official for the debarment. The ALJ decision constituted the findings of fact to the HHS Debarring Official in accordance with 2 CFR 180.845(c). On October 22, 2018, the HHS Debarring Official issued a final notice of debarment to begin on October 22, 2018, and end on October 21, 2020.

    Thus, the research misconduct finding set forth above became effective, and the following administrative actions have been implemented for a period of two (2) years, beginning on October 22, 2018:

    (1) Dr. Srivastava is debarred from any contracting or subcontracting with any agency of the United States Government and from eligibility or involvement in nonprocurement programs of the United States Government referred to as “covered transactions” pursuant to HHS' Implementation (2 CFR part 376) of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (2 CFR part 180); and

    (2) Dr. Srivastava is prohibited from serving in any advisory capacity to PHS including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee, or as a consultant.

    Wanda K. Jones, Interim Director, Office of Research Integrity.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25065 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-31-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group AGENCY:

    Office of HIV/AIDS and Infectious Disease Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice will serve to announce that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is seeking nominations of non-federal individuals who represent diverse scientific disciplines and views and are interested in being considered for appointment to the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group (Working Group). Resumes or curricula vitae from qualified individuals who wish to be considered for appointment as a member of the Working Group are currently being accepted.

    DATES:

    Nominations must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EST, on December 14, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    All nominations should be sent to the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group email address at [email protected] Alternately, nominations can be sent by mail to: James Berger, MS, MT (ASCP), SBB, Senior Advisor for Blood and Tissue Policy, Office of HIV/AIDS and Infectious Disease Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 330 C Street SW, Room L001 Switzer Building, Washington, DC 20201.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    James Berger, MS, MT (ASCP), SBB, Senior Advisor for Blood and Tissue Policy; Telephone: (202) 795-7608; Fax: (202) 691-2101; Email address: [email protected] Website information about activities of the Working Group, as well as the charter for the Working Group, which has been filed with the Library of Congress, can be found at https://www.hhs.gov/ash/advisory-committees/tickbornedisease/index.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 2062 of the 21st Century Cures Act requires establishment of the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group. The Working Group is governed by provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of federal advisory committees. The 21st Century Cures Act is intended to advance the research and development of new therapies and diagnostics and make substantial federal investments in a wide range of health priorities. The Working Group is a non-discretionary federal advisory committee.

    Objectives and Scope of Activities. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is responsible for ensuring the conduct of and support for epidemiological, basic, translational, and clinical research related to vector-borne diseases, including tick-borne diseases. The Working Group provides assistance for this effort. The Working Group membership provides expertise and reviews all efforts within the Department of Health and Human Services related to all tick-borne diseases, to help ensure interagency coordination and minimize overlap, and to examine research priorities.

    Membership and Designation. The Working Group consists of 14 voting members who represent diverse scientific disciplines and views. The composition includes seven federal members and seven public members. The federal members consist of one or more representatives of each of the following HHS agencies: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institutes of Health. The non-federal public members consist of representatives of the following categories: Physicians and other medical providers with experience in diagnosing and treating tick-borne diseases; scientists or researchers with expertise; patients and their family members; and nonprofit organizations that advocate for patients with respect to tick-borne disease. Individuals who are appointed to represent federal entities are classified as regular government employees. The public members are classified as special government employees. Invitations of membership is extended to other agencies and offices of the Department of Health and Human Services and other individuals as determined by the Secretary to be appropriate and beneficial for accomplishing the mission of the Working Group.

    The federal members are appointed to serve for the duration of time that the Working Group is authorized to operate. Participation of the appointed federal members is at the discretion of their respective agency head. The public members are invited to serve overlapping terms of up to four years. Any public member who is appointed to fill the vacancy of an unexpired term will be appointed to serve for the remainder of that term. A non-federal public member may serve after the expiration of their term until their successor has taken office, but no longer than 180 days. Terms of more than two years are contingent upon renewal of the charter of the Working Group. Pursuant to advance written agreement, public members of the Working Group will receive no stipend for the advisory service that they render as members of the Working Group. However, public members will receive per diem and reimbursement for travel expenses incurred in relation to performing duties for the Working Group, as authorized by law under 5 U.S.C. 5703 for persons who are employed intermittently to perform services for the federal government and in accordance with federal travel regulations.

    Estimated Number and Frequency of Meetings. The Working Group will meet not less than twice a year. The meetings will be open to the public, except as determined otherwise by the Secretary, or another official to whom authority has been delegated, in accordance with the guidelines under Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c).

    Nominations: Nominations, including self-nominations, of individuals who have the specified expertise and knowledge will be considered for appointment as public voting members of the Working Group. A nomination should include, at a minimum, the following for each nominee: (1) A letter of nomination that clearly states the name and affiliation of the nominee, the basis for the nomination, and a statement from the nominee that indicates that the individual is willing to serve as a member of the Working Group, if selected; (2) the nominator's name, address, and daytime telephone number, and the address, telephone number, and email address of the individual being nominated; and (3) a current copy of the nominee's curriculum vitae or resume, which must be limited to no more than 10 pages.

    Every effort will be made to ensure that the Working Group is a diverse group of individuals with representation from various geographic locations, racial and ethnic minorities, all genders, and persons living with disabilities.

    Individuals being considered for appointment as public voting members will be required to complete and submit a report of their financial holdings. An ethics review must be conducted to ensure that individuals appointed as public voting members of the Working Group are not involved in any activity that may pose a potential conflict of interest for the official duties that are to be performed. This is a federal ethics requirement that must be satisfied upon entering the position and annually throughout the established term of appointment on the Working Group.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. James J. Berger, Senior Advisor for Blood and Tissue Policy, Designated Federal Officer, Tick-Borne Disease Working Group.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25082 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-28-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: AIDS and AIDS Related Research.

    Date: December 4, 2018.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Barna Dey, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3184, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2796, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Structure/Function Relationships.

    Date: December 6, 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: Peter B. Guthrie, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1239, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Adult Cognition, Perception, and Psychopathology.

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 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: Wind Cowles, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3172, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-437-7872, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Cancer Immunopathology and Immunotherapy.

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 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: Nicholas J. Donato, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4040, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-4810, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Role of Maternal-Child Interactions in Brain Development Related Disorders.

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 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: Seetha Bhagavan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5194, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 237-9838, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-17-340: HIV Protease Evolution and Drug Resistance.

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Eduardo A. Montalvo, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5108, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1168, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Topics in Molecular Cellular Endocrinology.

    Date: December 10, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 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: Liliana N. Berti-Mattera, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, RM 4215, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-7609, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: AIDS and AIDS Related Research.

    Date: December 11, 2018.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Barna Dey, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3184, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-2796, [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 9, 2018. Ronald J. Livingston, Jr., Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24999 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID, 2018 Omnibus BAA (HHS-NIH-NIAID-BAA2018) Research Area 002: Advanced Development of Vaccine Candidates for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases.

    Date: December 6-7, 2018.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kelly Y. Poe, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3F40B, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5036, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID, SBIR Phase II Clinical Trial Implementation Cooperative Agreement (U44 Clinical Trial Required).

    Date: December 14, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: J. Bruce Sundstrom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G11A, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, 240-669-5045, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID, Clinical Trial Planning Grant (R34).

    Date: December 18, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: J. Bruce Sundstrom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G11A, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, 240-669-5045, [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 9, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24996 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; 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 Environmental Health Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; SBIR Examining Exposure Response to ENMs Applications.

    Date: December 4, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Keystone Building, 530 Davis Drive, Room 3001, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.

    Contact Person: Leroy Worth, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research and Training, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30/Room 3171, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 (919) 541-0670, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; R13 Conference Grant Applications.

    Date: December 4, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: NIEHS/National Institutes of Health, Keystone Building, 530 Davis Drive, Room 2164, Research Triangle Park, NC 27713.

    Contact Person: Janice B. Allen, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research and Training, Nat. Institute of Environmental Health Science, P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30/Room 3170 B, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 919/541-7556.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.115, Biometry and Risk Estimation—Health Risks from Environmental Exposures; 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker Health and Safety Training; 93.143, NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances—Basic Research and Education; 93.894, Resources and Manpower Development in the Environmental Health Sciences; 93.113, Biological Response to Environmental Health Hazards; 93.114, Applied Toxicological Research and Testing, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 9, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24991 Filed 11-15-18; 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: AIDS and Related Research.

    Date: November 29, 2018.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Robert Freund, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5216, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1050, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Neuroimmunology, Brain Tumors, Epilepsy, and Aging.

    Date: December 3, 2018.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Samuel C. Edwards, Ph.D., Chief, BDCN IRG, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5210, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1246, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Program Projects: Nociceptin Opioid Receptor P01 Review.

    Date: December 3, 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: Peter B. Guthrie, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1239, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PA18-484: Cancer Biology.

    Date: December 3, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Juraj Bies, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm. 4158, MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301 435 1256, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems-Basic Mechanisms of Health Effects.

    Date: December 4-5, 2018.

    Time: 9:00 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: Bradley Nuss, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, MSC7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-8754, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Perception and Cognition Research to Inform Cancer Image Interpretation.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 9:00 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: Biao Tian, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3089B, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-4411, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; AIDS and Related Research Member Conflict.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Robert Freund, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5216, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1050, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Business: HIV/AIDS Innovative Research Applications.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Mark P. Rubert, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5218, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1775, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Respiratory Diseases.

    Date: December 5, 2018.

    Time: 3:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Bradley Nuss, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, MSC7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-8754, [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 9, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24992 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Consortia for HIV/AIDS Vaccine Development (CHAVD) (UM1 Clinical Trial Not Allowed).

    Date: December 3-4, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Doubletree Hotel Bethesda (Formerly Holiday Inn Select), 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Roberta Binder, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G21A, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5050, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Autoimmunity Centers of Excellence, Clinical Research Program (UM1 Clinical Trial Required).

    Date: December 4-5, 2018.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: The William F. Bolger Center, 9600 Newbridge Drive, Potomac, MD 20854.

    Contact Person: Zhuqing (Charlie) Li, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room # 3G41B, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5068, [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 9, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24998 Filed 11-15-18; 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 Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR17-029: Dynamic Interactions between Systemic or Non-Neuronal Systems and the Brain in Aging and in Alzheimer's Disease (R01).

    Date: November 15, 2018.

    Time: 3:30 p.m. to 5:00 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: Inese Z. Beitins, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6152, MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1034, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (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 9, 2018. Ronald J. Livingston, Jr., Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24994 Filed 11-15-18; 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: Neuropharmacology.

    Date: December 6, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:30 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: Richard D. Crosland, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4190, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-694-7084, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-18-598: High-End Instrumentation (HEI) Grant Program.

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Ileana Hancu, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5116, Bethesda, MD 20817, 3014023911, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-18-598: High-End Instrumentation (HEI) Grant Program.

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Songtao Liu, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5118, Bethesda, MD 20817, 301-827-6828, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Genes, Genomes and Genetics.

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Elena Smirnova, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5187, MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-357-9112, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR-17-340: Collaborative Program Grant for Multidisciplinary Teams (RM1).

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 10:00 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.

    Contact Person: Thomas Beres, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5148, MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1175, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Receptors, Channels and Circuits.

    Date: December 7, 2018.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 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: Afia Sultana, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4189, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 827-7083, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Cellular and Molecular Immunology.

    Date: December 12, 2018.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 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: Tina McIntyre, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4202, MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-6375, [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 9, 2018. Melanie Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24993 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Cures Acceleration Network Review Board.

    The meeting will be open to the public, viewing virtually by WebEx. Individuals can register to view and access the meeting by the link below. https://nih.webex.com/nih/onstage/g.php?MTID=e797f0e8f84decbc371f075d2dcf33927.

    1. Click “Register”. On the registration form, enter your information and then click “Submit” to complete the required registration.

    2. You will receive a personalized email with the live event link.

    Name of Committee: Cures Acceleration Network Review Board.

    Date: December 14, 2018.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: The CAN Review Board will meet virtually to discuss updates regarding CAN programs and next steps.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Anna L. Ramsey-Ewing, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 1 Democracy Plaza, Room 1072, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0809, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, B—Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 9, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24990 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [Docket No. USCBP-2018-0041] Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

    ACTION:

    Committee Management; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) will hold its quarterly meeting on Wednesday, December 5, 2018, in Herndon, Virginia. The meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    The COAC will meet on Wednesday, December 5, 2018, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST. Please note that the meeting may close early if the committee has completed its business.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hilton Dulles Washington Airport, 13869 Park Center Road, Herndon,Virginia 20171. For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact Ms. Florence Constant-Gibson, Office of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs & Border Protection, at (202) 344-1440 as soon as possible.

    Pre-Registration: Meeting participants may attend either in person or via webinar after pre-registering using one of the methods indicated below:

    For members of the public who plan to attend the meeting in person, please register by 5:00 p.m. EST on December 4, 2018, either online at https://teregistration.cbp.gov/index.asp?w=143; by email to [email protected]; or by fax to (202) 325-4290. You must register prior to the meeting in order to attend the meeting in person.

    For members of the public who plan to participate via webinar, please register online at https://teregistration.cbp.gov/index.asp?w=142 by 5:00 p.m. EST on December 4, 2018.

    Please feel free to share this information with other interested members of your organization or association.

    Members of the public who are pre-registered to attend in person or via webinar and later need to cancel, please do so by December 4, 2018, utilizing the following links: https://teregistration.cbp.gov/cancel.asp?w=143 to cancel an in person registration or https://teregistration.cbp.gov/cancel.asp?w=142 to cancel a webinar registration.

    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment on the issues the committee will consider prior to the formulation of recommendations as listed in the Agenda section below.

    Comments must be submitted in writing and received no later than December 3, 2018, and must be identified by Docket No. USCBP-2018-0041, and may be submitted by one (1) of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 325-4290, Attention Florence Constant-Gibson.

    Mail: Ms. Florence Constant-Gibson, Office of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 3.5A, Washington, DC 20229.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words “Department of Homeland Security” and the docket number (USCBP-2018-0041) for this action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov. Please do not submit personal information to this docket.

    Docket: For access to the docket or to read background documents or comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket Number USCBP-2018-0041. To submit a comment, click the “Comment Now!” button located on the top-right hand side of the docket page.

    There will be multiple public comment periods held during the meeting on December 5, 2018. Speakers are requested to limit their comments to two (2) minutes or less to facilitate greater participation. Contact the individual listed below to register as a speaker. Please note that the public comment period for speakers may end before the time indicated on the schedule that is posted on the CBP web page, http://www.cbp.gov/trade/stakeholder-engagement/coac.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Florence Constant-Gibson, Office of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 3.5A, Washington, DC 20229; telephone (202) 344-1440; facsimile (202) 325-4290; or Mr. Bradley Hayes, Executive Director and Designated Federal Officer at (202) 344-1440.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix. The Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) provides advice to the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on matters pertaining to the commercial operations of CBP and related functions as prescribed by law or as directed by the Secretaries of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of the Treasury.

    Agenda

    The COAC will hear from the current subcommittees on the topics listed below and then will review, deliberate, provide observations, and formulate recommendations on how to proceed:

    1. The Secure Trade Lanes Subcommittee will present plans for the scope and activities of the Trusted Trader and CTPAT Minimum Security Criteria Working Groups. It is anticipated that recommendations will be presented regarding the proposed Forced Labor Trusted Trader Strategy. The subcommittee will also deliver recommendations from the Petroleum Pipeline Working Group regarding the results of a proof of concept test that used the Automated Commercial Environment to electronically report and manage petroleum moving in-bond via pipeline; as well as recommendations from the In-bond Working Group regarding potential automation, visibility, system and regulatory issues.

    2. The COAC Next Generation Facilitation Subcommittee will discuss the E-Commerce Working Group's progress on mapping the supply chains of various modes of transportation to identify the differences between e-commerce and traditional channels. The subcommittee will also provide an update on the status of the Emerging Technologies Working Group's NAFTA/CAFTA, Intellectual Property Rights, and Pipeline Blockchain Proof of Concept projects. Finally, the subcommittee will provide a progress report for the Regulatory Reform Working Group as it completes its review of Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CBP regulations) and begins its preparation of high-level recommendations.

    3. The Intelligent Enforcement Subcommittee will provide recommendations from the Intellectual Property Rights Working Group and updates from the Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty, Bond, and Forced Labor Working Groups.

    Meeting materials will be available by December 3, 2018 at: http://www.cbp.gov/trade/stakeholder-engagement/coac/coac-public-meetings.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Bradley F. Hayes, Executive Director, Office of Trade Relations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25072 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCAD01000 L12100000.MD0000 18XL1109AF; BLM_CA_MO_4500126802] Meeting of the California Desert District Advisory Council AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) California Desert District Advisory Council (DAC) will meet as indicated below.

    DATES:

    The BLM's California DAC will hold a public meeting on December 14-15, 2018. The DAC will participate in a field tour of BLM-administered public lands on Friday, December 14, 2018, from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. and will meet in formal session on Saturday, December 15, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The December 15 meeting will take place at the Clarion Inn Conference Room, 901 China Lake Blvd., Ridgecrest, CA 93555. Final agendas for the Friday field tour and the Saturday public meeting will be posted on the BLM web page at: https://www.blm.gov/site-page/get-involved-rac-near-you-california-california-desert-district. Written comments may be filed in advance of the meeting and sent to the California Desert District Advisory Council, c/o BLM, External Affairs, 22835 Calle San Juan de Los Lagos, Moreno Valley, CA 92553

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stephen Razo, BLM California Desert District External Affairs, telephone: 951-697-5217, 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 individuals. You will receive a reply during normal hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    All DAC meetings are open to the public. The 15-member DAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management on BLM-administered lands in the California Desert District. The agenda will include time for public comment at the beginning and end of the meeting, as well as during various presentations. While the Saturday meeting is tentatively scheduled from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., the meeting could conclude earlier if the DAC completes its presentations and discussions early. Members of the public interested in a particular agenda item or discussion should schedule their arrival accordingly. The agenda for the Saturday meeting will include information on mining projects, and updates from DAC members, the BLM California Desert District Manager, and DAC subgroups. Written comments will also be accepted at the time of the meeting and, if copies are provided to the recorder, will be incorporated into the minutes.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information in your comment, be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifiable information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask in your comment that the BLM withhold your personally identifiable information from public review, the BLM cannot guarantee that it will be able to do so.

    Beth Ransel, California Desert District Manager.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25084 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [19XL1109AF-LLUT922300-L13200000-EL0000, UTU-81895 24-1A] Notice of Federal Competitive Coal Lease Sale, Alton Coal Tract, Utah (Coal Lease Application UTU-81895) AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the coal resources, in the lands described below, in Kane County, Utah, will be offered for competitive sale, by sealed bid, in accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended.

    DATES:

    The lease sale will be held at 1:00 p.m. on November 28, 2018. Sealed bids must be received by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Utah State Office Public Room on or before 10 a.m. on November 28, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The lease sale will be held at the BLM Utah State Office, 440 West 200 South, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-1345.

    Sealed bids must be submitted to the Public Room, BLM Utah State Office, same address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Jeff McKenzie, 440 West 200 South, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-1345 or telephone 801-539-4038. 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 for the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This sale is being held in response to a Lease by Application (LBA) filed by Alton Coal Company LLC. These lands are located in Kane County, Utah, southwest of Alton, Utah. The Federal coal resources to be offered are located in the following described lands:

    T. 39 S., R. 5 W., SLM Sec. 7, SE1/4SW1/4, S1/2SE1/4; Sec. 18, lots 3 and 4, E1/2, E1/2NW1/4, E1/2SW1/4; Sec. 19, lots 1 to 4, NE1/4, E1/2NW1/4, E1/2SW1/4, N1/2SE1/2, SE1/4SE1/4; Sec. 20, lots 4 and 5, N1/2SW1/4. T. 39 S., R. 6 W., SLM Sec. 13, SE1/4; Sec. 24, NE1/4, N1/2NW1/4, SE1/4NW1/4, E1/2SW1/4, N1/2SE1/4, SE1/4SE1/4; Sec. 25, NE1/4NE1/4.

    The area described contains 2,108.71 acres.

    The coal in the Alton Tract has one minable coal bed, which is designated as the Smirl seam. This seam is approximately 17 feet thick. The coal bed contains approximately 30.8 million tons of recoverable subbituminous B/High-volatile C bituminous coal. The coal quality in the Smirl coal bed is: 10,120 Btu/lb., 14.79 percent moisture, 7.59 percent ash, 33.68 percent volatile matter, 41.95 percent fixed carbon, and 1.11 percent sulfur.

    The tract will be leased to the qualified bidder, of the highest cash amount provided,that the high bid meets or exceeds the BLM's estimate of the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the tract. The minimum bid for the tract is $100 per acre or fraction thereof. The minimum bid is not intended to represent FMV. The authorized officer will determine if the bids meet FMV after the sale.

    The sealed bids should be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, or be hand delivered to the Public Room, BLM Utah State Office, at the address provided in the ADDRESSES section and clearly marked “Sealed Bid for UTU-81895 Coal Sale—Not to be opened before 1:00 p.m. November 28, 2018.” The Public Room will issue a receipt for each hand-delivered bid. Bids received after 10 a.m. will not be considered. If identical high bids are received, the tying high bidders will be requested to submit follow-up sealed bids until a high bid is received. All tie-breaking sealed bids must be submitted within 15 minutes following the sale official's announcement, at the sale, that identical high bids have been received. A lease issued as a result of this offering will require payment of an annual rental of $3 per acre, or fraction thereof, and a royalty payable to the United States of 12.5 percent of the value of coal mined by surface methods and eight percent by underground methods. Bidding instructions for the tract offered and the terms and conditions of the proposed coal lease are included in the Detailed Statement of Lease Sale. Copies of the statement and the proposed coal lease are available at the Utah State Office. Casefile UTU-81895 is also available for public inspection at the Utah State Office.

    (Authority: 43 CFR 3422.3-2) Edwin L. Roberson, State Director.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25083 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLWY-957000-18-L13100000-PP0000] Filing of Plats of Survey, Nebraska and Wyoming AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of official filing.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is scheduled to file plats of survey 30 calendar days from the date of this publication in the BLM Wyoming State Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming. The surveys, which were executed at the request of the BLM, are necessary for the management of these lands.

    DATES:

    Protests must be received by the BLM by December 17, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit written protests to the Wyoming State Director at WY957, Bureau of Land Management, 5353 Yellowstone Road, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82003.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sonja Sparks, BLM Wyoming Chief Cadastral Surveyor at 307-775-6225 or [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf may call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 to contact this office during normal business hours. The Service is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with this office. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The lands surveyed are: The plat representing the dependent resurvey of portions of the west boundary and subdivisional lines, designed to restore the corners in their true locations according to the best available evidence, the survey of a portion of the District Court of Howard County rendered thread of avulsed abandoned river bed through section 18, and the survey of Lot 8 of section 18, Township 15 North, Range 9 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Nebraska, Group No. 187, was accepted November 8, 2018.

    The plat and field notes representing the dependent resurvey of portions of certain tracts and the subdivisional lines, designed to restore the corners in their true original locations according to the best available evidence, and the survey of the subdivision of section 17, Township 57 North, Range 74 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 963, was accepted November 8, 2018.

    The plat and field notes representing the dependent resurvey of the Eighth Standard Parallel North, through Range 70 West, a portion of the west boundary, and a portion of the subdivisional lines, designed to restore the corners in their true original locations according to the best available evidence, Township 32 North, Range 70 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 978, was accepted November 8, 2018.

    The plat and field notes representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the east and west boundaries, and portions of the subdivisional lines, designed to restore the corners in their true original locations according to the best available evidence, Township 33 North, Range 70 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 979, was accepted November 8, 2018.

    The plat and field notes representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the south boundary and a portion of the subdivisional lines, designed to restore the corners in their true original locations according to the best available evidence, and the survey of the subdivision of section 34, and the metes-and-bounds survey of Parcel A, section 34, Township 27 North, Range 90 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 999, was accepted November 8, 2018.

    A person or party who wishes to protest one or more plats of survey identified above must file a written notice of protest within 30 calendar days from the date of this publication with the Wyoming State Director at the above address. Any notice of protest received after the scheduled date of official filing will be untimely and will not be considered. A written statement of reasons in support of a protest, if not filed with the notice of protest, must be filed with the State Director within 30 calendar days after the notice of protest is filed. If a notice of protest against a plat of survey is received prior to the scheduled date of official filing, the official filing of the plat of survey identified in the notice of protest will be stayed pending consideration of the protest. A plat of survey will not be officially filed until the next business day following dismissal or resolution of all protests of the plat.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your protest, you should be aware that your entire protest—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Copies of the preceding described plats and field notes are available to the public at a cost of $4.20 per plat and $.13 per page of field notes.

    Dated: November 8, 2018. Sonja S. Sparks, Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of Support Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25004 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NRNHL-DTS#-26889; PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service is soliciting comments on the significance of properties nominated before October 27, 2018, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.

    DATES:

    Comments should be submitted by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service and all other carriers to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, MS 7228, Washington, DC 20240.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before October 27, 2018. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

    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.

    Nominations submitted by State Historic Preservation Officers:

    ALASKA Anchorage Borough Block 13 Army Housing Association Historic District, E 10th & 11th Aves., Barrow & Cordova Sts., Anchorage, SG100003171 CONNECTICUT Middlesex County Higganum Landing Historic District, 40-68 Landing Rd., 2-14 Landing Rd. S, Haddam, SG100003206 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District of Columbia MacFarland Junior High School, (Public School Buildings of Washington, DC MPS), 4400 Iowa Ave. NW, Washington, MP100003212 Roosevelt, Theodore, Senior High School, (Public School Buildings of Washington, DC MPS), 4301 13th St. NW, Washington, MP100003213 GEORGIA Fulton County B. Mifflin Hood Brick Company Building, 686 Greenwood Ave. NE, Atlanta, SG100003173 House at 690 South Boulevard, 690 S Boulevard, Atlanta, SG100003174 IDAHO Latah County Campbell, Harry and Fern, House, 101 E 4th St., Troy, SG100003175 INDIANA Carroll County Carroll County Infirmary, (County Homes of Indiana MPS), 6409 W 100 North, Delphi vicinity, MP100003177 Clark County Pleasant Ridge Historic District, (Residential Planning and Development in Indiana, 1940-1973 MPS), Roughly between Hampton Ct., Marcy, Audubon & Thompson Sts., Winthrop, & Kenwood Aves., Halcyon & Ridge Rds., Charlestown, MP100003178 Clinton County Parkview Home of Clinton County, (County Homes of Indiana MPS), 1501 Burlington Ave., Frankfort vicinity, MP100003179 Grant County First Presbyterian Church, 216 W 6th St., Marion, SG100003184 Hamilton County Westfield Historic District, Roughly bounded by Camilla Ct., Penn, Walnut & Park Sts., Westfield, SG100003180 Hendricks County Hendricks County Poor Asylum, (County Homes of Indiana MPS), 865 E Main St., Danville vicinity, MP100003181 Howard County Howard Masonic Temple, 316 N Washington St., Kokomo, SG100003182 Knox County Knox County Poor Asylum, (County Homes of Indiana MPS), 2008 S Hart Street Rd., Vincennes vicinity, MP100003183 Monroe County Breezy Point Farm Historic District, 8000 W Sand College Rd., Gosport vicinity, SG100003185 Carter—Randall—Parker House, 3636 S Rogers St., Bloomington vicinity, SG100003186 Putnam County Roachdale Historic District, Roughly bounded by Washington, Main, Grove & Indiana Sts., Roachdale, SG100003187 Randolph County Randolph County Infirmary, (County Homes of Indiana MPS), 1882 S US 27, Winchester vicinity, MP100003188 St. Joseph County South Bend City Cemetery, 214 N Elm St., South Bend, SG100003189 Tippecanoe County Peirce, Oliver Webster Jr., and Catherine House, 538 S 7th St., Lafayette, SG100003190 LOUISIANA Jefferson Parish Kirby—Adam House, (Louisiana Coastal Vernacular: Grand Isle 1780-1968 MPS), 142B Community Ln., Grand Isle, MP100003192 Poche House, (Louisiana Coastal Vernacular: Grand Isle 1780-1968 MPS), 102 Community Ln., Grand Isle, MP100003193 Robin House, (Louisiana Coastal Vernacular: Grand Isle 1780-1968 MPS), 176 Coulon Riguard Rd., Grand Isle, MP100003194 United States Coast Guard Station No. 79, (Louisiana Coastal Vernacular: Grand Isle 1780-1968 MPS), 170 Ludwig Ln., Grand Isle, MP100003195 MICHIGAN Presque Isle County CHOCTAW (shipwreck), Address Restricted, Presque Isle Township vicinity, SG100003214 Sanilac County Cadillac House, 5502 Main St., Lexington, SG100003216 MONTANA Silver Bow County Shaffer's Chapel African Methodist Episcopal Church, 602 S Idaho, Butte, SG100003199 NEVADA White Pine County Lund Grade School, (School Buildings in Nevada MPS), 30 W Center St., Lund, MP100003200 NEW JERSEY Camden County Newton Union Burial Ground, Lynne & Collings Aves., Haddon Township, SG100003201 St. Bartholomew Roman Catholic Church, 751 Kaighn Ave., Camden, SG100003202 Monmouth County McLeod—Rice House, 900 Leonardville Rd., Middletown Township, SG100003203 NORTH DAKOTA Billings County De Mores Memorial Park, (Federal Relief Construction in North Dakota, 1931-1943, MPS), SE corner of Main St. & 3rd Ave., Medora, MP100003204 OHIO Greene County Wickersham House, 23 E Washington St., Jamestown, SG100003208 Lucas County Ontario Building, 713-717 Jefferson Ave., Toledo, SG100003209 Muskingum County Glenn, John, Boyhood Home, 72 Main St., New Concord, SG100003210 Stark County Timken Vocational High School, 521 Tuscarawas St. W, Canton, SG100003211

    Additional documentation has been received for the following resource:

    GEORGIA Glynn County Brunswick Old Town Historic District, Roughly bounded by 1st, Bay, New Bay, H and Cochran Sts., Brunswick, AD79000727

    Nomination submitted by Federal Preservation Officers:

    The State Historic Preservation Officer reviewed the following nomination and responded to the Federal Preservation Officer within 45 days of receipt of the nomination and supports listing the property in the National Register of Historic Places.

    GEORGIA Laurens County Dublin Veterans Administration Hospital, (United States Third Generation Veterans Hospitals, 1946-1958 MPS), 1826 Veterans Blvd., Dublin, MP100003205 Authority:

    Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60

    Dated: October 26, 2018. Christopher Hetzel, Acting Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25035 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NRNHL-DTS#-26929; PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service is soliciting comments on the significance of properties nominated before November 3, 2018, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.

    DATES:

    Comments should be submitted by December 3, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service and all other carriers to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, MS 7228, Washington, DC 20240.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before November 3, 2018. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.

    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.

    Nominations submitted by State Historic Preservation Officers:

    COLORADO Boulder County Holmes, David Hull, House, 720 11th St., Boulder, SG100003225 MASSACHUSETTS Bristol County Dodgeville Mill, 453 S Main St., Attleboro, SG100003220 Worcester County Tobin's Beach Site, Address Restricted, Brookfield vicinity, 86003808 Tobin's Beach Site (Boundary Increase), Address Restricted, Brookfield vicinity, BC100003227 MICHIGAN Wayne County Grande Ballroom, 8952-8970 Grand River Ave., Detroit, SG100003226 NEW MEXICO Bernalillo County Main Library, 501 Copper Ave. NW, Albuquerque, SG100003217 Roosevelt County Davis Mercantile, 4610 NM 206, Milnesand, SG100003218 Torrance County Willard Mercantile Company, 101 E Broadway, Mountainair, SG100003219 VERMONT Addison County Camp Marbury Historic District, (Organized Summer Camping in Vermont MPS), 243, 245 & 293 Mile Point Rd., Ferrisburgh, MP100003222 Franklin County Bridge Number VT105-10, (Metal Truss, Masonry, and Concrete Bridges in Vermont MPS), VT 105, Sheldon vicinity, MP100003224 WASHINGTON Spokane County Coeur d'Alene Park, 2111 W 2nd Ave., Spokane, SG100003228 Mount Spokane Vista House, N 26107 Mt. Spokane Park Dr., Mead, SG100003229

    Additional documentation has been received for the following resource:

    AMERICAN SAMOA Eastern District U.S. Naval Station Tutuila Historic District, Between Togotogo Ridge and W side of Pago Pago Harbor, on waterfronts of Fagatogo and Utulei villages, Fagatogo and Utulei, AD90000854 Authority:

    Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.

    Dated: November 5, 2018. Christopher Hetzel, Acting Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks Program.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25034 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Ocean Energy Management [Docket No. BOEM-2018-0054] Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), Alaska Region (AK), Beaufort Sea Program Area, Proposed 2019 Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Lease Sale AGENCY:

    Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Interior

    ACTION:

    Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, announce the area identified for leasing, and hold public scoping meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Consistent with the regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is announcing its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale in the Beaufort Sea Planning Area. The EIS will focus on the potential effects of leasing, exploration, development, and production of oil and natural gas in the proposed lease sale area. In addition to the no action alternative (i.e., not holding the lease sale), other alternatives will be considered. Consistent with the regulations implementing the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), BOEM is also announcing the area recommended for leasing.

    DATES:

    Comments: All interested parties, including Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments, and the general public, may submit written comments by December 17, 2018 on the scope of the 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale EIS, significant issues, reasonable alternatives, potential mitigation measures, and the types of oil and gas activities of interest in the proposed lease sale area.

    Comments may be made on-line. Navigate to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket BOEM-2018-0054, or “Oil and Gas Lease Sales: Alaska Outer Continental Shelf; 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale”, and click on the “Comment Now!” button. Enter your information and comment, and then click “Submit.” 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.

    ADDRESSES:

    Scoping Meetings: Pursuant to the regulations implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, BOEM will hold public scoping meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to solicit comments on the scope of the 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale EIS. All meetings will start at 7:00 p.m. and conclude at 9:00 p.m., and are scheduled as follows:

    • December 3, 2018, Barrow High School, Utqiaġvik, Alaska;

    • December 4, 2018, Kisik Community Center, Nuiqsut, Alaska;

    • December 5, 2018, Community Center, Kaktovik, Alaska; and

    • December 6, 2018, Dena'ina Civic and Convention Center, Anchorage, Alaska.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on the 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale EIS, the submission of comments, or BOEM's policies associated with this notice, please contact Sharon Randall, Chief of Environmental Analysis Section, BOEM, Alaska OCS Region, 3801 Centerpoint Drive, Suite 500, Anchorage, AK 99503, (907) 334-5200.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 4, 2018, the Secretary of the Interior released the 2019-2024 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Draft Proposed Program. The Draft Proposed Program includes the proposed 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale.

    The proposed lease sale area includes all available OCS blocks in the Beaufort Sea Planning Area. The Beaufort Sea Planning Area is located offshore of the State of Alaska and consists of 11,876 whole and partial lease blocks covering roughly 26.2 million hectares (approximately 65 million acres) of the Beaufort Sea. To view the specifics of the area recommended for leasing, go to: https://www.boem.gov/beaufort2019.

    This Notice of Intent is not an announcement to hold a lease sale, but is a continuation of the information gathering process and is published early in the environmental review process in furtherance of the goals of NEPA. The comments received during scoping will help inform the content of the 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale EIS. If, after completion of the EIS, the Department of the Interior's Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management chooses to hold the proposed lease sale, that decision and the details related to the lease sale (including the lease sale area and any mitigation) will be announced in a Record of Decision and Final Notice of Sale.

    Scoping Process: This Notice of Intent also serves to announce the scoping process for identifying key issues to be addressed in the 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale EIS. Throughout the scoping process, Federal, State, Tribal and local governments, and the general public have the opportunity to provide input to BOEM in determining significant resources, issues, impacting factors, reasonable alternatives, and potential mitigation measures to be analyzed in the EIS.

    BOEM has developed and also seeks public input on the following draft alternatives:

    • Offshore Whaling Areas Alternative: This alternative is proposed to minimize conflicts between subsistence whaling practices and oil and gas activities.

    • Environmentally Important Areas Alternative: This alternative is proposed to reduce impacts to several known environmentally important areas (Barrow Canyon, Harrison Bay/Colville River Delta, the Bolder Patch, and Kaktovik).

    • Deepwater Exclusion Alternative: This alternative is proposed to focus the environmental analyses while offering leases in areas with the highest known resource potential.

    Maps and more details on each of these draft alternatives can be found at: https://www.boem.gov/beaufort2019.

    These draft alternatives are based on previous OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program and response to stakeholder comments made during the development of the 2019-2024 Draft Proposed Program (published January 8, 2018 (83 FR 829)). BOEM is proceeding in a manner that allows for maximum flexibility in adapting these preliminary alternatives to future Program decisions.

    BOEM will consider additional alternatives, exclusion and/or mitigation suggestions identified during scoping meetings and the comment period initiated by this notice of intent in the preparation of the EIS.

    BOEM will use the NEPA commenting process to satisfy the public comment requirements of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f), as provided for in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3).

    Cooperating Agencies: BOEM invites qualified government entities such as other Federal agencies, State, Tribal, and local governments, to consider becoming cooperating agencies for the preparation of the 2019 Beaufort Sea Lease Sale EIS. Following the guidelines at 40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5 from the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), qualified agencies and governments are those with “jurisdiction by law or special expertise.” Potential cooperating agencies should consider their authority and capacity to assume the responsibilities of a cooperating agency and remember that an agency's role in the environmental analysis neither enlarges nor diminishes the final decision-making authority of any other agency involved in the NEPA process. Upon request, BOEM will provide potential cooperating agencies with a written summary of guidelines for cooperating agencies, including time schedules and critical action dates, milestones, responsibilities, scope and detail of cooperating agencies' contributions, and availability of predecisional information. BOEM anticipates this summary will form the basis for a Memorandum of Understanding between BOEM and any cooperating agency. BOEM, as the lead agency, will not provide financial assistance to cooperating agencies. In addition to becoming a cooperating agency, other opportunities will exist to provide information and comments to BOEM during the public comment period for the EIS. For additional information about cooperating agencies, please contact Sharon Randall, Chief of Environmental Analysis Section, BOEM (907-334-5200).

    Authority:

    This notice of intent is published pursuant to the regulations at 40 CFR 1501.7 implementing the provisions of NEPA.

    Dated: November 7, 2018. Walter D. Cruickshank, Acting Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24739 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P
    OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Draft Federal Grants Management Data Standards for Feedback AGENCY:

    Office of Management and Budget.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In March 2018, the Office of Management and Budget launched the President's Management Agenda (PMA). The PMA established a Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) goal titled: “Results-Oriented Accountability for Grants”. This notice is meant to notify the public of the opportunity to provide input on proposed grants management common data standards that have been created in support of the Results-Oriented Accountability for Grants CAP goal.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before January 15, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties should provide comments at the following link: www.grantsfeedback.cfo.gov. All comments received may be posted without change, including any personal information provided. Do not submit confidential business information, trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information that you do not want to be available to the public.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeannette M. Mandycz, Office of Federal Financial Management, OMB, [email protected], or 202-395-5009.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In March 2018, OMB launched the President's Management Agenda (PMA). The PMA lays out a long-term vision for modernizing the Federal Government in key areas that will improve the ability of agencies to deliver mission outcomes, provide excellent service, and effectively steward taxpayer dollars on behalf of the American people. The PMA established a Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) goal titled “Results-Oriented Accountability for Grants” with the intent to rebalance grants compliance efforts with a focus on results for the American taxpayer; standardizing grant reporting data, and improving data collection in ways that will increase efficiency, promote evaluation, reduce reporting burden, and benefit the American taxpayer. Additional details regarding the CAP goal can be found at: https://www.performance.gov/CAP/CAP_goal_8.html.

    In order to bring grants management into the digital age and allow recipients to focus more time on performing work that delivers results, there is a need to develop and implement core grants management data standards and modernize grants management information technology solutions. In support of this goal, a draft of core grants management data standards have been developed and are now available for your review. Once finalized, the core grants management data standards will contribute to a future state where grants data are interoperable, there are fewer internal and public-facing grants management systems, and Federal awarding agencies and recipients can leverage data to successfully implement a risk-based, data-driven approach to managing Federal grants. A draft of the proposed grants management common data standards are available for your review and input at www.grantsfeedback.cfo.gov. The comment period will be open until January 15, 2019.

    Timothy F. Soltis, Deputy Controller.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24927 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0176] Proposed Revisions to SRPs 2.3.3, Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program; 2.4.6, Tsunami Hazards; and 2.4.9, Channel Migration or Diversion AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Standard review plan—draft section revision; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 28, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a request for public comment on draft NUREG-0800, “Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition,” Standard Review Plans (SPRs) 2.3.3, “Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program”; 2.4.6, “Tsunami Hazards”; and 2.4.9, “Channel Migration or Diversion.” The public comment period was originally scheduled to close on October 29, 2018. The NRC has decided to reopen the public comment period on these documents for 30 days to allow more time for members of the public to develop and submit comments.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the document published on September 28, 2018 (83 FR 49132) has been reopened. Comments must be filed no later than December 17, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0176. Address any questions about NRC 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.

    Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN 7 A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark D. Notich, Office of New Reactors, telephone: 301-415-3053; email: [email protected]; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0176 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0176.

    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] NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0176 in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Further Information

    On September 28, 2018 (83 FR 49132), the NRC published a request for public comment on draft NUREG-0800, “Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition,” Standard Review Plans (SRPs) 2.3.3, “Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program”; 2.4.6, “Tsunami Hazards”; and 2.4.9, “Channel Migration or Diversion” (ADAMS Accession No. ML18207A487). These sections have been developed to assist NRC staff in reviewing applications submitted per the requirements under parts 50 and 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).

    III. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available to interested persons through the ADAMS Public Documents collection, as indicated.

    Document ADAMS Accession Number Slide Presentation from October 22, 2018 public meeting on SRPs 2.3.3, 2.4.6, 2.4.9, and 2.5.3 ML18292A592. Draft NUREG-0800, Section 2.4.6, “Tsunami Hazards” ML18190A200. Current Revision of NUREG-0800, Section 2.4.6, “Tsunami Hazards” ML070160659. Draft revision to NUREG-0800, Section 2.4.9, “Channel Migration or Diversion” ML18190A201. Current revision to NUREG-0800, Section 2.4.9, “Channel Migration or Diversion” ML070730434. The redline-strikeout version comparing the Revision 4 of Draft NUREG-0800, Section 2.4.6, “Tsunami Hazards” and the current version of Revision 3 ML18267A055. The redline-strikeout version comparing the draft Revision 4 of Draft revision to NUREG-0800, Section 2.4.9, “Channel Migration or Diversion” and the current version of Revision 3 ML18264A035. Draft NUREG-0800, Section 2.3.3, “Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program” ML18183A446. Current Revision NUREG-0800, Section 2.3.3, “Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program” ML063600394. The redline-strikeout version comparing the draft Revision 4 of Draft revision to NUREG-0800, Section 2.3.3, “Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program” and the current version of Revision 3 ML18267A076.

    The public comment period for SRPs 2.3.3, 2.4.6, and 2.4.9 originally closed on October 29, 2018. The NRC held a public meeting on October 22, 2018 during which technical issues precluded public participation via webinar. Accordingly, the NRC has decided to reopen the public comment period on these documents to allow more time for members of the public to read the meeting transcript and assemble and submit their comments. The public meeting was transcribed, and the transcription is available on ADAMS at ML18303A102. In addition, the slides presented during the meeting are available on ADAMS at ML18292A592.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on November 13, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Jennivine K. Rankin, Acting Branch Chief, Licensing Branch 3, Division of Licensing, Siting, and Environmental Analysis, Office of New Reactors.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25052 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0001] Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    Weeks of November 19, 26, December 3, 10, 17, 24, 2018.

    PLACE:

    Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

    STATUS:

    Public and Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Week of November 19, 2018

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of November 19, 2018.

    Week of November 26, 2018—Tentative Thursday, November 29, 2018 9:45 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative); Motion to Quash Office of Investigations Subpoena Filed by Reed College (Tentative) Thursday, November 29, 2018 10:00 a.m. Briefing on Security Issues (Closed Ex. 1) Week of December 3, 2018—Tentative Monday, December 3, 2018 10:00 a.m. Briefing on Equal Employment Opportunity, Affirmative Employment, and Small Business (Public); (Contact: Larniece McKoy Moore: 301-415-1942)

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov/.

    Thursday, December 6, 2018 10:00 a.m. Meeting with Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (Public); (Contact: Mark Banks: 301-415-3718)

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov/.

    Week of December 10, 2018—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of December 10, 2018.

    Week of December 17, 2018—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of December 17, 2018.

    Week of December 24, 2018—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of December 24, 2018.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    For more information or to verify the status of meetings, contact Denise McGovern at 301-415-0681 or via email at [email protected]. The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice.

    The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/schedule.html.

    The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify Kimberly Meyer-Chambers, NRC Disability Program Manager, at 301-287-0739, by videophone at 240-428-3217, or by email at [email protected]. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Members of the public may request to receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969), or by email at [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of November 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Denise L. McGovern, Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25209 Filed 11-14-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0178] Proposed Revisions to SRP 2.5.3, Surface Deformation AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Standard review plan—draft section revision; reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 28, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a request for public comment on draft NUREG-0800, “Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition,” Standard Review Plans (SRP) 2.5.3, “Surface Deformation.” The public comment period was originally scheduled to close on October 29, 2018. The NRC has decided to reopen the public comment period for this document for 30 days to allow more time for members of the public to develop and submit comments.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the document published on September 28, 2018 (83 FR 49139) has been reopened. Comments must be filed no later than December 17, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0178. Address any questions about NRC 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.

    Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN 7 A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark D. Notich, Office of New Reactors, telephone: 301-415-3053; email: [email protected]; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0178 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0178.

    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]

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0178 in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    II. Further Information

    On September 28, 2018 (83 FR 49139), the NRC published a request for public comment on draft NUREG-0800, “Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition,” SRP2.5.3, “Surface Deformation” (ADAMS Accession No. ML18186A623). This section has been developed to assist NRC staff in reviewing applications submitted per the requirements under parts 50 and 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR).

    The public comment period for SRP 2.5.3 was originally closed on October 29, 2018. The NRC held a public meeting on October 22, 2018 during which technical issues precluded public participation via webinar. Accordingly, the NRC has decided to reopen the public comment period on this document to allow more time for members of the public to read the meeting transcript and assemble and submit their comments. The public meeting was transcribed, and the transcription is available on ADAMS at ML18303A102. In addition, the slides presented during the meeting are available on ADAMS at ML18292A592.

    The draft revision and current revision to NUREG-0800, Section 2.5.3, “Surface Deformation” are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18183A044 and ML13316C064, respectively. The redline-strikeout version comparing the draft Revision 6 and the current version of Revision 5 is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18267A203.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of November 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Jennivine K. Rankin, Acting Branch Chief, Licensing Branch 3, Division of Licensing, Siting, and Environmental Analysis, Office of New Reactors.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25064 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    Thursday, December 13, 2018 2 p.m. (OPEN Portion); 2:15 p.m. (CLOSED Portion).

    PLACE:

    Offices of the Corporation, Twelfth Floor Board Room, 1100 New York Avenue NW, Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    Meeting OPEN to the Public from 2 p.m. to 2:15 p.m.; Closed portion will commence at 2:15 p.m. (approx.).

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. President's Report 2. Minutes of the Open Session of the September 13, 2018, Board of Directors Meeting FURTHER MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED

    (Closed to the Public 2:15 p.m.): 1. Finance Project—Lebanon 2. Insurance Project—Egypt 3. Insurance Project—Egypt 4. Finance Project—Paraguay 5. Finance Project—Honduras 6. Finance Project—Ecuador 7. Finance Project—India 8. Minutes of the Closed Session of the September 13, 2018, Board of Directors Meeting 9. Reports 10. Pending Projects CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Information on the meeting may be obtained from Catherine F.I. Andrade at (202) 336-8768, or via email at [email protected]

    Dated: November 14, 2018. Catherine Andrade, Corporate Secretary, Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25217 Filed 11-14-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3210-01-P
    OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee; Open Committee Meetings AGENCY:

    Office of Personnel Management.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee Meeting Dates in 2019.

    SUMMARY:

    According to the provisions of section 10 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), notice is hereby given that meetings of the Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee will be held on—

    Thursday, January 17, 2019 Thursday, February 21, 2019 Thursday, March 21, 2019 Thursday, April 18, 2019 Thursday, May 16, 2019 Thursday, June 20, 2019 Thursday, July 18, 2019 Thursday, August 15, 2019 Thursday, September 19, 2019 Thursday, October 17, 2019 Thursday, November 21, 2019 Thursday, December 19, 2019

    The meetings will start at 10 a.m. and will be held in Room 5A06A, Office of Personnel Management Building, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC.

    The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee is composed of a Chair, five representatives from labor unions holding exclusive bargaining rights for Federal prevailing rate employees, and five representatives from Federal agencies. Entitlement to membership on the Committee is provided for in 5 U.S.C. 5347.

    The Committee's primary responsibility is to review the Prevailing Rate System and other matters pertinent to establishing prevailing rates under subchapter IV, chapter 53, 5 U.S.C., as amended, and from time to time advise the Office of Personnel Management.

    These scheduled meetings are open to the public with both labor and management representatives attending. During the meetings either the labor members or the management members may caucus separately to devise strategy and formulate positions. Premature disclosure of the matters discussed in these caucuses would unacceptably impair the ability of the Committee to reach a consensus on the matters being considered and would disrupt substantially the disposition of its business. Therefore, these caucuses will be closed to the public because of a determination made by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management under the provisions of section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B). These caucuses may, depending on the issues involved, constitute a substantial portion of a meeting.

    Annually, the Chair compiles a report of pay issues discussed and concluded recommendations. These reports are available to the public. Reports for calendar years 2008 to 2016 are posted at www.opm.gov/FPRAC. Previous reports are also available, upon written request to the Committee.

    The public is invited to submit material in writing to the Chair on Federal Wage System pay matters felt to be deserving of the Committee's attention. Additional information on these meetings may be obtained by contacting the Committee at Office of Personnel Management, Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, Room 5H27, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20415, (202) 606-2858.

    Alexys Stanley, Regulatory Affairs Analyst, Office of Personnel Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25007 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-49-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Express and Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Date of required notice: November 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 9, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 75 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2019-16, CP2019-16.

    Elizabeth Reed, Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25018 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Date of required notice: November 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 9, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 474 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2019-14, CP2019-14.

    Elizabeth Reed, Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25016 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Date of required notice: November 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 9, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 473 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2019-12, CP2019-12.

    Elizabeth Reed, Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25014 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Date of required notice: November 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 9, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS Request to Add First-Class Package Service Contract 95 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2019-13, CP2019-13.

    Elizabeth Reed, Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25015 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    POSTAL SERVICE Product Change—Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

    DATES:

    Date of required notice: November 16, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 9, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Package Service Contract 90 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2019-15, CP2019-15.

    Elizabeth Reed, Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25017 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84567; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-054] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Modify its Fee Schedule November 9, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on November 6, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “EDGX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “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

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “EDGX”) is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change to modify its fee schedule.

    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, 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 proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to correct an inadvertent oversight to update an amended transaction fee in a footnote. Specifically, on August 8, 2018, the Exchange filed a rule filing, SR-CboeEDGX-2018-032, which proposed, among other things, to increase the standard rate for Bats Auction Mechanism (“BAM”) Contra orders (i.e., yields fee code BB) from $0.04 per contract to $0.05 per contract, effective August 1, 2018.3 The Exchange notes that although it reflected the rate increase in the Fee Codes and Associated Fees table, it mistakenly failed to update the rate referenced under Footnote 6 of the Fees Schedule, which includes a table setting forth BAM Pricing. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to update the listed BAM Contra Rate under Footnote 6 from $0.04 per contract to $0.05 per contract. No substantive changes are being made by the proposed rule change.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83846 (August 14, 2018), 83 FR 42175 (August 20, 2018) (SR-CboeEDGX-2018-032).

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.4 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 5 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to update an inaccurate rate under a footnote of the Fees Schedule, will alleviate potential confusion, thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and protecting investors and the public interest. As noted above, the proposed filing does not substantively change any transaction fees, but merely corrects an inadvertent oversight from a previous rule filing to update the rate under a footnote.

    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 does not address competitive issues, but rather, as discussed above, is merely intended to correct an inadvertent marking omission relating to a rate change made in a previous rule filing, which will alleviate potential confusion.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any written comments from members or other interested parties.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 6 and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 7 thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

    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-CboeEDGX-2018-054 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-CboeEDGX-2018-054. 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-CboeEDGX-2018-054 and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.8

    8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24985 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84560; File No. SR-CFE-2018-002] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Correction of Reporting Errors November 9, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 notice is hereby given that on October 31, 2018 Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC (“CFE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by CFE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. CFE also has filed this proposed rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”). CFE filed a written certification with the CFTC under Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) 2 on October 31, 2018.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).

    2 7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c).

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to extend the time frame for the correction of Block Trade and Exchange of Contract for Related Position (“ECRP”) transaction reporting errors. The scope of this filing is limited solely to the application of the proposed rule amendments to security futures that may be traded on CFE. Although no security futures are currently listed for trading on CFE, CFE may list security futures for trading in the future. The text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 4 to the filing but is not attached to the publication of this notice.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, CFE 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. CFE 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

    Policy and Procedure III (Resolution of Error Trades) of the Policies and Procedures section of the CFE Rulebook includes a section which allows for the busting or adjusting of a Block Trade or the CFE contract leg of an ECRP transaction that is reported to CFE with a mistake, inaccuracy, or error. Specifically, Section G of Policy and Procedure III provides that CFE's Trade Desk is authorized to bust or adjust a Block Trade or the CFE contract leg of an ECRP transaction if both (i) there was a mistake, inaccuracy, or error in the information that was inputted into CFE's system for the Block Trade or the contract leg of the ECRP transaction and (ii) an Authorized Reporter for or party to the transaction notifies the Trade Desk of the mistake, inaccuracy, or error in a form and manner prescribed by the Exchange within thirty minutes from the time the transaction is reported in CFE market data. The proposed rule change extends the time period for the notification to the Trade Desk of such an error to 4:00 p.m. Chicago time of the business day of the transaction. The proposed rule change also makes clear that in order for the Trade Desk to bust or adjust a Block Trade or the CFE contract leg of an ECRP transaction under this provision, an Authorized Reporter or party on each side of the transaction must agree upon the mistake, inaccuracy, or error that occurred.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will benefit CFE's market and CFE market participants by reducing risk to market participants and by clarifying when the Trade Desk is authorized to bust or adjust a Block Trade or the CFE contract leg of an ECRP transaction that is reported to CFE with a mistake, inaccuracy, or error. If a Block Trade or ECRP transaction is reported with a mistake, inaccuracy, or error that is not corrected, the parties to the transaction will receive a position or price other than what they intended to receive. Holding a position that a market participant did not intend to assume causes that market participant to assume risk in holding that position and can impact the market if the market participant needs to liquidate the position. Allowing parties to a Block Trade or ECRP transaction that is reported with a mistake, inaccuracy, or error additional time to realize that an error has occurred in the reporting of the transaction and to have the Trade Desk correct that error reduces the possibility of these scenarios. Additionally, the clarification that an Authorized Reporter or party on each side of the transaction must agree upon the mistake, inaccuracy, or error that occurred adds clarity that one side is not able to unilaterally get out of a transaction when the other side does not agree that that a mistake, inaccuracy, or error occurred. To the extent that parties have a dispute in this regard, they may seek to resolve it in an appropriate manner between themselves, including through the arbitration provisions of Chapter 8 of CFE's rules.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,3 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) 4 in particular, in that it is designed:

    3 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    • To foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, and

    • 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.

    When a Block Trade or ECRP transaction is reported in error and cannot be busted or adjusted, the parties to the transaction can incur risk by becoming party to a transaction that is different than what the parties intended and because they then need to determine how to remediate the issue. CFE believes that the proposed rule change reduces this risk by extending the time period during which these errors may be identified and corrected while also balancing the need for CFE to timely receive information required to report transactions for clearing. CFE believes that the proposed rule change provides guidance to market participants regarding the parameters under which CFE's Trade Desk is able to address reporting errors involving Block Trade and ECRP transactions and improves the functioning and efficiency of CFE's reporting mechanism for these transactions by broadening the ability of the Trade Desk to address these types of reporting errors. The proposed rule change also makes clear to market participants that an Authorized Reporter or party on each side of a Block Trade or ECRP transaction must agree upon the mistake, inaccuracy or error that occurred in order for the Trade Desk to bust or adjust the transaction under Section G of Policy and Procedure III. Additionally, the proposed rule change will not interfere with CFE's ability to capture and retain required audit trail information relating to these transactions.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    CFE 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, in that the proposed rule change will contribute to reducing market risk by enhancing the ability of the Exchange to correct transaction reporting errors. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory in that the rule amendments included in the proposed rule change would apply equally to all CFE market participants.

    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 proposed rule change will become operative on November 15, 2018. At any time within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the proposed rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC, may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.5

    5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    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-CFE-2018-002 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-CFE-2018-002. 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-CFE-2018-002, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.6

    6 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(73).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24982 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84571; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2018-086] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's Rules November 9, 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 29, 2018, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” 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 General 8 of the Exchange's Rules, as described below.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaq.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 proposes to amend General 8 of its Rules, which govern the provision by the Exchange of colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products, and which set forth the fees that the Exchange charges for those products and services, to: (1) Clarify that all of the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq Inc. affiliated exchanges—The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (collectively, the “Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges”)—meaning that a firm need only purchase these products and services once to be able to use them to connect to all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which the firm is otherwise entitled to connect, and to receive the third party services and market data feeds that it is otherwise entitled to receive; and (2) make other non-substantive changes that will further the objective of harmonizing General 8 with parallel rules that exist among the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.3

    3 The other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to file similar proposals in the near future.

    The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges offer colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products to their customers on a shared basis, meaning that a customer may utilize these products and services to gain access to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which they are otherwise entitled to receive access under the Rules. The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges only charge customers once for these shared products and services, even to the extent that customers use the products and services to connect to more than one of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. For example, a firm that is a member or member organization, as applicable, of all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and which co-locates its servers in the Nasdaq Data Center by purchasing a 10 GB fiber connection, cabinet space, cooling fans, and patch cables, only needs to purchase these products and services once to use them to connect to all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Likewise, the Rules were intended to provide for connectivity to third-party services and market data feeds on a shared basis, meaning that a firm need only purchase a subscription to these services once, regardless of whether the firm is a member or member organization, as applicable, of multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Historically, the Exchange has billed customers on a shared basis for all of the products and services currently set forth in General 8. Presently, however, only certain provisions of General 8 state this fact expressly. That is, provisions in General 8 pertaining to connectivity to the Exchange, direct circuit connectivity to the Exchange, and point-of-presence connectivity to the Exchange, each state that they include connectivity to the other markets of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. However, other provisions in General 8—such as cabinets, cabinet power, fiber and wireless connectivity to market data feeds, and fiber and wireless connectivity to third party services—do not contain such language.

    Notwithstanding the absence of express language in these provisions of General 8, the Exchange believes that it is or should be apparent that a firm need only pay once to purchase products and services—like server cabinets, power supplies, and cables—that the firm will use to connect to multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges or to connect to third party services or market data feeds. Indeed, the Exchange is aware of no actual customer confusion on this issue. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that the existing Rules would benefit from clarification so as to avoid the potential for any confusion in the future.

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend General 8 by doing the following: (1) Deleting the existing selective references therein to shared connectivity services; and (2) replacing selective references with the following language, which will serve as a general preface to General 8:

    The connectivity products and services that this Rule describes are shared among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges (The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC). Fees for these products and services are also the same among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges. As such, a firm need only purchase the products and services listed below from any Nasdaq, Inc. exchange once to connect to any and all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect, or to connect to third party market data feeds or services. For example, if a firm purchases connectivity to one Nasdaq, Inc. exchange and then subsequently qualifies to connect to a second Nasdaq, Inc. exchange, then the firm may utilize its existing services for connecting to the first exchange to also connect to the second exchange, without incurring an additional charge.

    This preface will clarify that all products and services set forth in General 8 are offered on a shared basis and that a firm need only purchase them once from any of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    In addition to adding this preface, the Exchange also proposes several other non-substantive amendments to General 8 to correct technical errors and to harmonize it with parallel provisions set forth in the rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. These changes will reconcile minor, non-substantive differences in the phrasing and placement of text between the Exchange's General 8 and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' Sections 8. The amendments will also remove certain references to the name “Nasdaq” or replace it with general references to “the Exchange.” Finally, the amendments will replace a specific reference in General 8, Section 1(b) to millimeter or microwave wireless subscriptions under Section 7015(g)(1) with a general reference to “any other provision of these Rules that provides for such subscriptions, as may exist, from time to time.” The intended result of the proposed changes—along with similar changes that the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to propose—will be to generalize General 8 and render it completely identical across all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and that it furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Likewise, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable for the Exchange and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a firm only once for the products and services set forth in General 8 because the same instance of such products and services may be used by the firm to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect. Said otherwise, the Exchange does not believe that it would be fair for the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to each charge separate fees to a firm to, say, rent the same cabinet space in the same data center or to purchase the same wires to connect its servers to the market data feed. Moreover, the practice of charging a firm once for products and services with shared applicability among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges is not unfairly discriminatory because each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges makes the products and services that are set forth in General 8 of their respective rulebooks available to all similarly situated members at the same prices.

    Meanwhile, the Exchange believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, for the Exchange to amend General 8 to clarify the existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to charge firms once to purchase shared products and services, and to codify that practice where it is not stated expressly in the Rule. Although the Exchange believes that such codification and clarification of General 8 are not necessary in this instance—given that it should be (and in the Exchange's experience, it is) apparent to firms that each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges will not charge them more than once to, say, rent the same cabinet space or to purchase the same wires or power supplies—the Exchange believes, nevertheless, that the public and investors will benefit from increased clarity to General 8. Even if the proposal is not needed to dispel any actual confusion about the Rules, it will help to limit any potential confusion in the future.

    The Exchange also believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, to harmonize the language of General 8 among all six of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. Given that General 8 in each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' rulebooks sets forth the same products, services, and associated fees that are assessed on a shared basis, the language of General 8 should be uniform across these Exchanges to avoid any confusion about unintended disparities. The proposal makes minor, non-substantive changes to accomplish this harmonization, which include removing cross-references and names that are idiosyncratic to this Exchange and are not common among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that its proposals to amend General 8 are non-controversial because they merely codify and clarify the Exchange's existing interpretation of General 8, serve the interests of the public and investors in promoting a more clear and transparent Rulebook that is harmonized with the shared rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and because the proposals will not impact competition or limit access to or availability of the Exchange or its systems.

    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 proposals merely codify and clarify existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a customer only once to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges of which it is a member and to connect to third party services. The proposals also harmonize Section 8 with corresponding provisions of the rulebooks of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    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) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.8

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    8 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 9 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately amend its rules to specify that the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges and to harmonize General 8 with parallel rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.11

    9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-NASDAQ-2018-086 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-NASDAQ-2018-086. 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-NASDAQ-2018-086, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25031 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-2736 Extension: Regulation S-P SEC File No. 270-480, OMB Control No. 3235-0537

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for approval of extension of the previously approved collection of information provided for in the privacy notice and opt out notice provisions of Regulation S-P—Privacy of Consumer Financial Information (17 CFR part 248, subpart A) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).

    The privacy notice and opt out notice provisions of Regulation S-P (the “Rule”) implement the privacy notice and opt out notice requirements of Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), which include the requirement that, at the time of establishing a customer relationship with a consumer and not less than annually during the continuation of such relationship, a financial institution shall provide a clear and conspicuous disclosure to such consumer of such financial institution's policies and practices with respect to disclosing nonpublic personal information to affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties (“privacy notice”). Title V of the GLBA also provides that, unless an exception applies, a financial institution may not disclose nonpublic personal information of a consumer to a nonaffiliated third party unless the financial institution clearly and conspicuously discloses to the consumer that such information may be disclosed to such third party; the consumer is given the opportunity, before the time that such information is initially disclosed, to direct that such information not be disclosed to such third party; and the consumer is given an explanation of how the consumer can exercise that nondisclosure option (“opt out notice”). The Rule applies to broker-dealers, investment advisers registered with the Commission, and investment companies (“covered entities”).

    Commission staff estimates that, as of March 31, 2018, the Rule's information collection burden applies to approximately 20,465 covered entities (approximately 3,857 broker-dealers, 12,643 investment advisers registered with the Commission, and 3,965 investment companies). In view of (a) the minimal recordkeeping burden imposed by the Rule (since the Rule has no recordkeeping requirement and records relating to customer communications already must be made and retained pursuant to other SEC rules); (b) the summary fashion in which information must be provided to customers in the privacy and opt out notices required by the Rule (the model privacy form adopted by the SEC and the other agencies in 2009, designed to serve as both a privacy notice and an opt out notice, is only two pages); (c) the availability to covered entities of the model privacy form and online model privacy form builder; and (d) the experience of covered entities' staff with the notices, SEC staff estimates that covered entities will each spend an average of approximately 12 hours per year complying with the Rule, for a total of approximately 245,580 annual burden-hours (12 × 20,465 = 245,580). SEC staff understands that the vast majority of covered entities deliver their privacy and opt out notices with other communications such as account opening documents and account statements. Because the other communications are already delivered to consumers, adding a brief privacy and opt out notice should not result in added costs for processing or for postage and materials. Also, privacy and opt out notices may be delivered electronically to consumers who have agreed to electronic communications, which further reduces the costs of delivery. Because SEC staff assumes that most paper copies of privacy and opt out notices are combined with other required mailings, the burden-hour estimates above are based on resources required to integrate the privacy and opt notices into another mailing, rather than on the resources required to create and send a separate mailing. SEC staff estimates that, of the estimated 12 annual burden-hours incurred, approximately 8 hours would be spent by administrative assistants at an hourly rate of $82, and approximately 4 hours would be spent by internal counsel at an hourly rate of $422, for a total annualized internal cost of compliance of $2,344 for each of the covered entities (8 × $82 = $656; 4 × $422 = $1,688; $656 + $1,688 = $2,344). Hourly cost of compliance estimates for administrative assistant time are derived from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association's Office Salaries in the Securities Industry 2013, modified by SEC staff to account for an 1,800-hour work-year and multiplied by 2.93 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits and overhead. Hourly cost of compliance estimates for internal counsel time are derived from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association's Management & Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry 2013, modified by SEC staff to account for an 1,800-hour work-year and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits, and overhead. Accordingly, SEC staff estimates that the total annualized internal cost of compliance for the estimated total hour burden for the approximately 19,876 covered entities subject to the Rule is approximately $47,969,960 ($2,344 × 20,465 = $47,969,960).

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The public may view background documentation for this information collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to: [email protected]; and (ii) Charles Riddle, Acting Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to: [email protected] Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25049 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-2736 Extension: Rule 17Ad-13 SEC File No. 270-263; OMB Control No. 3235-0275

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (“PRA”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for approval of extension of the previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule 17Ad-13 (17 CFR 240.17Ad-13), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).

    Rule 17Ad-13 requires an annual study and evaluation of internal accounting controls under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). It requires approximately 100 registered transfer agents to obtain an annual report on the adequacy of their internal accounting controls from an independent accountant. In addition, transfer agents must maintain copies of any reports prepared pursuant to Rule 17Ad-13 plus any documents prepared to notify the Commission and appropriate regulatory agencies in the event that the transfer agent is required to take any corrective action. These recordkeeping requirements assist the Commission and other regulatory agencies with monitoring transfer agents and ensuring compliance with the rule. Small transfer agents are exempt from Rule 17Ad-13 as are transfer agents that service only their own companies' securities.

    Approximately 100 independent, professional transfer agents must file the independent accountant's report annually. We estimate that the annual internal time burden for each transfer agent to comply with Rule 17Ad-13 by submitting the report prepared by the independent accountant to the Commission is minimal. The time required for the independent accountant to prepare the accountant's report varies with each transfer agent depending on the size and nature of the transfer agent's operations. The Commission estimates that, on average, each report can be completed by the independent accountant in 120 hours, resulting in a total of 12,000 external hours annually (120 hours × 100 reports). The burden was estimated using Commission review of filed Rule 17Ad-13 reports. The Commission estimates that, on average, 120 hours are needed to perform the study, prepare the report, and retain the required records on an annual basis. Assuming an average hourly rate of an independent accountant of $60, the average total annual cost of the report is $7,200. The total annual cost for the approximate 100 respondents is approximately $720,000.

    The retention period for the recordkeeping requirement under Rule 17Ad-13 is three years following the date of a report prepared pursuant to the rule. The recordkeeping requirement under Rule 17Ad-13 is mandatory to assist the Commission and other regulatory agencies with monitoring transfer agents and ensuring compliance with the rule. This rule does not involve the collection of confidential information.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The public may view background documentation for this information collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an email to: [email protected]; and (ii) Charles Riddle, Acting Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to [email protected] Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25048 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84572; File No. SR-BX-2018-052] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's Rules November 9, 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 29, 2018, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (“BX” 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 General 8 of the Exchange's Rules, as described below.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaqbx.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 proposes to amend General 8 of its Rules, which govern the provision by the Exchange of colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products, and which set forth the fees that the Exchange charges for those products and services, to: (1) Clarify that all of the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq Inc. affiliated exchanges—The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (collectively, the “Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges”)—meaning that a firm need only purchase these products and services once to be able to use them to connect to all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which the firm is otherwise entitled to connect, and to receive the third party services and market data feeds that it is otherwise entitled to receive; and (2) make other non-substantive changes that will further the objective of harmonizing General 8 with parallel rules that exist among the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.3

    3 The other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to file similar proposals in the near future.

    The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges offer colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products to their customers on a shared basis, meaning that a customer may utilize these products and services to gain access to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which they are otherwise entitled to receive access under the Rules. The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges only charge customers once for these shared products and services, even to the extent that customers use the products and services to connect to more than one of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. For example, a firm that is a member or member organization, as applicable, of all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and which co-locates its servers in the Nasdaq Data Center by purchasing a 10 GB fiber connection, cabinet space, cooling fans, and patch cables, only needs to purchase these products and services once to use them to connect to all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Likewise, the Rules were intended to provide for connectivity to third-party services and market data feeds on a shared basis, meaning that a firm need only purchase a subscription to these services once, regardless of whether the firm is a member or member organization, as applicable, of multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Historically, the Exchange has billed customers on a shared basis for all of the products and services currently set forth in General 8. Presently, however, only certain provisions of General 8 state this fact expressly. That is, provisions in General 8 pertaining to connectivity to the Exchange, direct circuit connectivity to the Exchange, and point-of-presence connectivity to the Exchange, each state that they include connectivity to the other markets of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. However, other provisions in General 8—such as cabinets, cabinet power, fiber and wireless connectivity to market data feeds, and fiber and wireless connectivity to third party services—do not contain such language.

    Notwithstanding the absence of express language in these provisions of General 8, the Exchange believes that it is or should be apparent that a firm need only pay once to purchase products and services—like server cabinets, power supplies, and cables—that the firm will use to connect to multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges or to connect to third party services or market data feeds. Indeed, the Exchange is aware of no actual customer confusion on this issue. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that the existing Rules would benefit from clarification so as to avoid the potential for any confusion in the future.

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend General 8 by doing the following: (1) Deleting the existing selective references therein to shared connectivity services; and (2) replacing selective references with the following language, which will serve as a general preface to General 8:

    The connectivity products and services that this Rule describes are shared among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges (The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC). Fees for these products and services are also the same among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges. As such, a firm need only purchase the products and services listed below from any Nasdaq, Inc. exchange once to connect to any and all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect, or to connect to third party market data feeds or services. For example, if a firm purchases connectivity to one Nasdaq, Inc. exchange and then subsequently qualifies to connect to a second Nasdaq, Inc. exchange, then the firm may utilize its existing services for connecting to the first exchange to also connect to the second exchange, without incurring an additional charge.

    This preface will clarify that all products and services set forth in General 8 are offered on a shared basis and that a firm need only purchase them once from any of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    In addition to adding this preface, the Exchange also proposes several other non-substantive amendments to General 8 to correct technical errors and to harmonize it with parallel provisions set forth in the rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. These changes will reconcile minor, non-substantive differences in the phrasing and placement of text between the Exchange's General 8 and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' Sections 8. The amendments will also remove certain references to the name “Nasdaq BX” or replace it with general references to “the Exchange.” Finally, the amendments will replace a specific reference in General 8, Section 1(b) to millimeter or microwave wireless subscriptions under Equity 7, Section 115 with a general reference to “any other provision of these Rules that provides for such subscriptions, as may exist, from time to time.” The intended result of the proposed changes—along with similar changes that the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to propose—will be to generalize General 8 and render it completely identical across all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and that it furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Likewise, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable for the Exchange and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a firm only once for the products and services set forth in General 8 because the same instance of such products and services may be used by the firm to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect. Said otherwise, the Exchange does not believe that it would be fair for the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to each charge separate fees to a firm to, say, rent the same cabinet space in the same data center or to purchase the same wires to connect its servers to the market data feed. Moreover, the practice of charging a firm once for products and services with shared applicability among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges is not unfairly discriminatory because each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges makes the products and services that are set forth in General 8 of their respective rulebooks available to all similarly situated members at the same prices.

    Meanwhile, the Exchange believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, for the Exchange to amend General 8 to clarify the existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to charge firms once to purchase shared products and services, and to codify that practice where it is not stated expressly in the Rule. Although the Exchange believes that such codification and clarification of General 8 are not necessary in this instance—given that it should be (and in the Exchange's experience, it is) apparent to firms that each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges will not charge them more than once to, say, rent the same cabinet space or to purchase the same wires or power supplies—the Exchange believes, nevertheless, that the public and investors will benefit from increased clarity to General 8. Even if the proposal is not needed to dispel any actual confusion about the Rules, it will help to limit any potential confusion in the future.

    The Exchange also believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, to completely harmonize the language of General 8 among all six of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. Given that General 8 in each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' rulebooks sets forth the same products, services, and associated fees that are assessed on a shared basis, the language of General 8 should be uniform across these Exchanges avoid any confusion about unintended disparities. The proposal makes minor, non-substantive changes to accomplish this harmonization, which include removing cross-references and names that are idiosyncratic to this Exchange and are not common among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that its proposals to amend General 8 are non-controversial because they merely codify and clarify the Exchange's existing interpretation of General 8, serve the interests of the public and investors in promoting a more clear and transparent Rulebook that is harmonized with the shared rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and because the proposals will not impact competition or limit access to or availability of the Exchange or its systems.

    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 proposals merely codify and clarify existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a customer only once to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges of which it is a member and to connect to third party services. The proposals also harmonize Section 8 with corresponding provisions of the rulebooks of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    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) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.8

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    8 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 9 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately amend its rules to specify that the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges and to harmonize General 8 with parallel rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.11

    9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-BX-2018-052 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-BX-2018-052. 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-BX-2018-052, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25032 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84569; File No. SR-MRX-2018-33] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's Rules November 9, 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 29, 2018, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (“MRX” 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 General 8 of the Exchange's Rules, as described below.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaqmrx.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 proposes to amend General 8 of its Rules, which govern the provision by the Exchange of colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products, and which set forth the fees that the Exchange charges for those products and services, to: (1) Clarify that all of the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq Inc. affiliated exchanges—The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (collectively, the “Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges”)—meaning that a firm need only purchase these products and services once to be able to use them to connect to all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which the firm is otherwise entitled to connect, and to receive the third party services and market data feeds that it is otherwise entitled to receive; and (2) make other non-substantive changes that will further the objective of harmonizing General 8 with parallel rules that exist among the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.3

    3 The other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to file similar proposals in the near future.

    The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges offer colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products to their customers on a shared basis, meaning that a customer may utilize these products and services to gain access to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which they are otherwise entitled to receive access under the Rules. The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges only charge customers once for these shared products and services, even to the extent that customers use the products and services to connect to more than one of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. For example, a firm that is a member or member organization, as applicable, of all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and which co-locates its servers in the Nasdaq Data Center by purchasing a 10 GB fiber connection, cabinet space, cooling fans, and patch cables, only needs to purchase these products and services once to use them to connect to all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Likewise, the Rules were intended to provide for connectivity to third-party services and market data feeds on a shared basis, meaning that a firm need only purchase a subscription to these services once, regardless of whether the firm is a member or member organization, as applicable, of multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Historically, the Exchange has billed customers on a shared basis for all of the products and services currently set forth in General 8. Presently, however, only certain provisions of General 8 state this fact expressly. That is, provisions in General 8 pertaining to connectivity to the Exchange, direct circuit connectivity to the Exchange, and point-of-presence connectivity to the Exchange, each state that they include connectivity to the other markets of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. However, other provisions in General 8—such as cabinets, cabinet power, fiber and wireless connectivity to market data feeds, and fiber and wireless connectivity to third party services—do not contain such language.

    Notwithstanding the absence of express language in these provisions of General 8, the Exchange believes that it is or should be apparent that a firm need only pay once to purchase products and services—like server cabinets, power supplies, and cables—that the firm will use to connect to multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges or to connect to third party services or market data feeds. Indeed, the Exchange is aware of no actual customer confusion on this issue. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that the existing Rules would benefit from clarification so as to avoid the potential for any confusion in the future.

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend General 8 by doing the following: (1) Deleting the existing selective references therein to shared connectivity services; and (2) replacing selective references with the following language, which will serve as a general preface to General 8:

    The connectivity products and services that this Rule describes are shared among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges (The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC). Fees for these products and services are also the same among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges. As such, a firm need only purchase the products and services listed below from any Nasdaq, Inc. exchange once to connect to any and all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect, or to connect to third party market data feeds or services. For example, if a firm purchases connectivity to one Nasdaq, Inc. exchange and then subsequently qualifies to connect to a second Nasdaq, Inc. exchange, then the firm may utilize its existing services for connecting to the first exchange to also connect to the second exchange, without incurring an additional charge.

    This preface will clarify that all products and services set forth in General 8 are offered on a shared basis and that a firm need only purchase them once from any of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    In addition to adding this preface, the Exchange also proposes several other non-substantive amendments to General 8 to correct technical errors and to harmonize it with parallel provisions set forth in the rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. These changes will reconcile minor, non-substantive differences in the phrasing and placement of text between the Exchange's General 8 and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' Sections 8. The amendments will also remove certain references to the name “Nasdaq” or replace it with general references to “the Exchange.” Finally, the amendments will amend General 8, Section 1(b), which provides for discounted pricing for having multiple millimeter or microwave wireless subscriptions, to state that such pricing applies to subscriptions under General 8, Section 1(b) “and/or any other provision of these Rules that provides for such subscriptions, as may exist, from time to time.” The intended result of the proposed changes—along with similar changes that the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to propose—will be to generalize General 8 and render it completely identical across all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. (The Exchange notes that The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC and Nasdaq BX, Inc. offer wireless subscriptions under both General 8, Section 1(b) and Rule 7015/Equity 7, Section 115 of their respective rulebooks.)

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and that it furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Likewise, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable for the Exchange and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a firm only once for the products and services set forth in General 8 because the same instance of such products and services may be used by the firm to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect. Said otherwise, the Exchange does not believe that it would be fair for the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to each charge separate fees to a firm to, say, rent the same cabinet space in the same data center or to purchase the same wires to connect its servers to the market data feed. Moreover, the practice of charging a firm once for products and services with shared applicability among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges is not unfairly discriminatory because each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges makes the products and services that are set forth in General 8 of their respective rulebooks available to all similarly situated members at the same prices.

    Meanwhile, the Exchange believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, for the Exchange to amend General 8 to clarify the existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to charge firms once to purchase shared products and services, and to codify that practice where it is not stated expressly in the Rule. Although the Exchange believes that such codification and clarification of General 8 are not necessary in this instance—given that it should be (and in the Exchange's experience, it is) apparent to firms that each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges will not charge them more than once to, say, rent the same cabinet space or to purchase the same wires or power supplies—the Exchange believes, nevertheless, that the public and investors will benefit from increased clarity to General 8. Even if the proposal is not needed to dispel any actual confusion about the Rules, it will help to limit any potential confusion in the future.

    The Exchange also believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, to harmonize the language of General 8 among all six of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. Given that General 8 in each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' rulebooks sets forth the same products, services, and associated fees that are assessed on a shared basis, the language of General 8 should be uniform across these Exchanges to avoid any confusion about unintended disparities. The proposal makes minor, non-substantive changes to accomplish this harmonization, which include removing references that are idiosyncratic to this Exchange and are not common among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that its proposals to amend General 8 are non-controversial because they merely codify and clarify the Exchange's existing interpretation of General 8, serve the interests of the public and investors in promoting a more clear and transparent Rulebook that is harmonized with the shared rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and because the proposals will not impact competition or limit access to or availability of the Exchange or its systems.

    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 proposals merely codify and clarify existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a customer only once to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges of which it is a member and to connect to third party services. The proposals also harmonize Section 8 with corresponding provisions of the rulebooks of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    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) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.8

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    8 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 9 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately amend its rules to specify that the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges and to harmonize General 8 with parallel rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.11

    9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-MRX-2018-33 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-MRX-2018-33. 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-MRX-2018-33, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25029 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84573; File No. SR-Phlx-2018-70] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's Rules November 9, 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 29, 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 General 8 of the Exchange's Rules, as described below.

    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 proposes to amend General 8 of its Rules, which govern the provision by the Exchange of colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products, and which set forth the fees that the Exchange charges for those products and services, to: (1) Clarify that all of the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq Inc. affiliated exchanges—The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (collectively, the “Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges”)—meaning that a firm need only purchase these products and services once to be able to use them to connect to all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which the firm is otherwise entitled to connect, and to receive the third party services and market data feeds that it is otherwise entitled to receive; and (2) make other non-substantive changes that will further the objective of harmonizing General 8 with parallel rules that exist among the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.3

    3 The other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to file similar proposals in the near future.

    The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges offer colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products to their customers on a shared basis, meaning that a customer may utilize these products and services to gain access to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which they are otherwise entitled to receive access under the Rules. The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges only charge customers once for these shared products and services, even to the extent that customers use the products and services to connect to more than one of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. For example, a firm that is a member or member organization, as applicable, of all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and which co-locates its servers in the Nasdaq Data Center by purchasing a 10 GB fiber connection, cabinet space, cooling fans, and patch cables, only needs to purchase these products and services once to use them to connect to all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Likewise, the Rules were intended to provide for connectivity to third-party services and market data feeds on a shared basis, meaning that a firm need only purchase a subscription to these services once, regardless of whether the firm is a member or member organization, as applicable, of multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Historically, the Exchange has billed customers on a shared basis for all of the products and services currently set forth in General 8. Presently, however, only certain provisions of General 8 state this fact expressly. That is, provisions in General 8 pertaining to connectivity to the Exchange, direct circuit connectivity to the Exchange, and point-of-presence connectivity to the Exchange, each state that they include connectivity to the other markets of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. However, other provisions in General 8—such as cabinets, cabinet power, fiber and wireless connectivity to market data feeds, and fiber and wireless connectivity to third party services—do not contain such language.

    Notwithstanding the absence of express language in these provisions of General 8, the Exchange believes that it is or should be apparent that a firm need only pay once to purchase products and services—like server cabinets, power supplies, and cables—that the firm will use to connect to multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges or to connect to third party services or market data feeds. Indeed, the Exchange is aware of no actual customer confusion on this issue. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that the existing Rules would benefit from clarification so as to avoid the potential for any confusion in the future.

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend General 8 by doing the following: (1) Deleting the existing selective references therein to shared connectivity services; and (2) replacing selective references with the following language, which will serve as a general preface to General 8:

    The connectivity products and services that this Rule describes are shared among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges (The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC). Fees for these products and services are also the same among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges. As such, a firm need only purchase the products and services listed below from any Nasdaq, Inc. exchange once to connect to any and all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect, or to connect to third party market data feeds or services. For example, if a firm purchases connectivity to one Nasdaq, Inc. exchange and then subsequently qualifies to connect to a second Nasdaq, Inc. exchange, then the firm may utilize its existing services for connecting to the first exchange to also connect to the second exchange, without incurring an additional charge.

    This preface will clarify that all products and services set forth in General 8 are offered on a shared basis and that a firm need only purchase them once from any of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    In addition to adding this preface, the Exchange also proposes several other non-substantive amendments to General 8 to correct technical errors and to harmonize it with parallel provisions set forth in the rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. These changes will reconcile minor, non-substantive differences in the phrasing and placement of text between the Exchange's General 8 and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' Sections 8. The amendments will also remove certain references to the names “Phlx” or “Nasdaq PHLX” or replace them with general references to “the Exchange.” Finally, the amendments will amend General 8, Section 1(b), which provides for discounted pricing for having multiple millimeter or microwave wireless subscriptions, to state that such pricing applies to subscriptions under General 8, Section 1(b) “and/or any other provision of these Rules that provides for such subscriptions, as may exist, from time to time.” The intended result of the proposed changes—along with similar changes that the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to propose—will be to generalize General 8 and render it completely identical across all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. (The Exchange notes that The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC and Nasdaq BX, Inc. offer wireless subscriptions under both General 8, Section 1(b) and Rule 7015/Equity 7, Section 115 of their respective rulebooks.)

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and that it furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Likewise, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable for the Exchange and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a firm only once for the products and services set forth in General 8 because the same instance of such products and services may be used by the firm to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect. Said otherwise, the Exchange does not believe that it would be fair for the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to each charge separate fees to a firm to, say, rent the same cabinet space in the same data center or to purchase the same wires to connect its servers to the market data feed. Moreover, the practice of charging a firm once for products and services with shared applicability among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges is not unfairly discriminatory because each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges makes the products and services that are set forth in General 8 of their respective rulebooks available to all similarly situated members at the same prices.

    Meanwhile, the Exchange believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, for the Exchange to amend General 8 to clarify the existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to charge firms once to purchase shared products and services, and to codify that practice where it is not stated expressly in the Rule. Although the Exchange believes that such codification and clarification of General 8 are not necessary in this instance—given that it should be (and in the Exchange's experience, it is) apparent to firms that each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges will not charge them more than once to, say, rent the same cabinet space or to purchase the same wires or power supplies—the Exchange believes, nevertheless, that the public and investors will benefit from increased clarity to General 8. Even if the proposal is not needed to dispel any actual confusion about the Rules, it will help to limit any potential confusion in the future.

    The Exchange also believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, to harmonize the language of General 8 among all six of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. Given that General 8 in each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' rulebooks sets forth the same products, services, and associated fees that are assessed on a shared basis, the language of General 8 should be uniform across these Exchanges avoid any confusion about unintended disparities. The proposal makes minor, non-substantive changes to accomplish this harmonization, which include removing references that are idiosyncratic to this Exchange and are not common among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that its proposals to amend General 8 are non-controversial because they merely codify and clarify the Exchange's existing interpretation of General 8, serve the interests of the public and investors in promoting a more clear and transparent Rulebook that is harmonized with the shared rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and because the proposals will not impact competition or limit access to or availability of the Exchange or its systems.

    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 proposals merely codify and clarify existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a customer only once to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges of which it is a member and to connect to third party services. The proposals also harmonize Section 8 with corresponding provisions of the rulebooks of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    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) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.8

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    8 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 9 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately amend its rules to specify that the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges and to harmonize General 8 with parallel rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.11

    9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-2018-70 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-2018-70. 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-2018-70, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary.

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    [FR Doc. 2018-25033 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-2736 Extension: Rule 154 SEC File No. 270-438, OMB Control No. 3235-0495

    Notice is hereby given that, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved collection of information discussed below.

    The federal securities laws generally prohibit an issuer, underwriter, or dealer from delivering a security for sale unless a prospectus meeting certain requirements accompanies or precedes the security. Rule 154 (17 CFR 230.154) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a) (the “Securities Act”) permits, under certain circumstances, delivery of a single prospectus to investors who purchase securities from the same issuer and share the same address (“householding”) to satisfy the applicable prospectus delivery requirements.1 The purpose of rule 154 is to reduce the amount of duplicative prospectuses delivered to investors sharing the same address.

    1 The Securities Act requires the delivery of prospectuses to investors who buy securities from an issuer or from underwriters or dealers who participate in a registered distribution of securities. See Securities Act sections 2(a)(10), 4(1), 4(3), 5(b) (15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(10), 77d(1), 77d(3), 77e(b)); see also rule 174 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.174) (regarding the prospectus delivery obligation of dealers); rule 15c2-8 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 CFR 240.15c2-8) (prospectus delivery obligations of brokers and dealers).

    Under rule 154, a prospectus is considered delivered to all investors at a shared address, for purposes of the federal securities laws, if the person relying on the rule delivers the prospectus to the shared address, addresses the prospectus to the investors as a group or to each of the investors individually, and the investors consent to the delivery of a single prospectus. The rule applies to prospectuses and prospectus supplements. Currently, the rule permits householding of all prospectuses by an issuer, underwriter, or dealer relying on the rule if, in addition to the other conditions set forth in the rule, the issuer, underwriter, or dealer has obtained from each investor written or implied consent to householding.2 The rule requires issuers, underwriters, or dealers that wish to household prospectuses with implied consent to send a notice to each investor stating that the investors in the household will receive one prospectus in the future unless the investors provide contrary instructions. In addition, at least once a year, issuers, underwriters, or dealers, relying on rule 154 for the householding of prospectuses relating to open-end management investment companies that are registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“mutual funds”) must explain to investors who have provided written or implied consent how they can revoke their consent.3 Preparing and sending the notice and the annual explanation of the right to revoke are collections of information.

    2 Rule 154 permits the householding of prospectuses that are delivered electronically to investors only if delivery is made to a shared electronic address and the investors give written consent to householding. Implied consent is not permitted in such a situation. See rule 154(b)(4).

    3 See Rule 154(c).

    The rule allows issuers, underwriters, or dealers to household prospectuses if certain conditions are met. Among the conditions with which a person relying on the rule must comply are providing notice to each investor that only one prospectus will be sent to the household and, in the case of issuers that are mutual funds, providing to each investor who consents to householding an annual explanation of the right to revoke consent to the delivery of a single prospectus to multiple investors sharing an address. The purpose of the notice and annual explanation requirements of the rule is to ensure that investors who wish to receive individual copies of prospectuses are able to do so.

    Although rule 154 is not limited to mutual funds, the Commission believes that it is used mainly by mutual funds and by broker-dealers that deliver mutual fund prospectuses. The Commission is unable to estimate the number of issuers other than mutual funds that rely on the rule.

    The Commission estimates that, as of August 2018, there are approximately 1,590 mutual funds, approximately 400 of which engage in direct marketing and therefore deliver their own prospectuses. Of the approximately 400 mutual funds that engage in direct marketing, the Commission estimates that approximately half of these mutual funds (200)(i) do not send the implied consent notice requirement because they obtain affirmative written consent to household prospectuses in the fund's account opening documentation; or (ii) do not take advantage of the householding provision because of electronic delivery options which lessen the economic and operational benefits of rule 154 when compared with the costs of compliance.

    The Commission estimates that there are approximately 175 broker-dealers that carry customer accounts for the remaining mutual funds and therefore may be required to deliver mutual fund prospectuses. The Commission estimates that each affected broker-dealer will spend, on average, 20 hours complying with the notice requirement of the rule, for a total of 3,500 hours. Therefore, the total number of respondents for rule 154 is 475 (300 4 mutual funds plus 175 broker-dealers), and the estimated total hour burden is approximately 7,975 hours (4,300 hours for mutual funds plus 3,675 hours for broker-dealers).

    4 The Commission estimates that 200 mutual funds prepare both the implied consent notice and the annual explanation of the right to revoke consent + 100 mutual funds that prepare only the annual explanation of the right to revoke.

    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of Commission rules and forms.

    Compliance with the collection of information requirements of the rule is necessary to obtain the benefit of relying on the rule. Responses to the collections of information will not be kept confidential. The rule does not require these records be retained for any specific period of time. 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 control number.

    The public may view the background documentation for this information collection at the following website, www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to: [email protected]; and (ii) Charles Riddle, Acting Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to: [email protected]. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25047 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-2736 Extension: Rule 17f-1(c) and Form X-17F-1A, SEC File No. 270-29, OMB Control No. 3235-0037.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) a request for approval of extension of the previously approved collection of information provided for in Rule 17f-1(c) (17 CFR 240.17f-1(c) and Form X-17F-1A (17 CFR 249.100) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).

    Rule 17f-1(c) requires approximately 15,500 entities in the securities industry to report lost, stolen, missing, or counterfeit securities certificates to the Commission or its designee, to a registered transfer agent for the issue, and, when criminal activity is suspected, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Such entities are required to use Form X-17F-1A to make such reports. Filing these reports fulfills a statutory requirement that reporting institutions report and inquire about missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities. Since these reports are compiled in a central database, the rule facilitates reporting institutions to access the database that stores information for the Lost and Stolen Securities Program.

    We estimate that 10,100 reporting institutions will report that securities certificates are either missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen annually and that each reporting institution will submit this report 30 times each year. The staff estimates that the average amount of time necessary to comply with Rule 17f-1(c) and Form X17F-1A is five minutes per submission. The total burden is 25,250 hours annually for the entire industry (10,100 times 30 times 5 divided by 60).

    Rule 17f-1(c) is a reporting rule and does not specify a retention period. The rule requires an incident-based reporting requirement by the reporting institutions when securities certificates are discovered to be missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen. Registering under Rule 17f-1(c) is mandatory to obtain the benefit of a central database that stores information about missing, lost, counterfeit, or stolen securities for the Lost and Stolen Securities Program. Reporting institutions required to register under Rule 17f-1(c) will not be kept confidential; however, the Lost and Stolen Securities Program database will be kept confidential.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The public may view background documentation for this information collection at the following website: www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an email to: [email protected] and (ii) Charles Riddle, Acting Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to [email protected]. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25051 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84570; File No. SR-GEMX-2018-36] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's Rules November 9, 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 29, 2018, Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (“GEMX” 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 General 8 of the Exchange's Rules, as described below.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaqgemx.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 proposes to amend General 8 of its Rules, which govern the provision by the Exchange of colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products, and which set forth the fees that the Exchange charges for those products and services, to: (1) Clarify that all of the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq Inc. affiliated exchanges—The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (collectively, the “Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges”)—meaning that a firm need only purchase these products and services once to be able to use them to connect to all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which the firm is otherwise entitled to connect, and to receive the third party services and market data feeds that it is otherwise entitled to receive; and (2) make other non-substantive changes that will further the objective of harmonizing General 8 with parallel rules that exist among the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.3

    3 The other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to file similar proposals in the near future.

    The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges offer colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products to their customers on a shared basis, meaning that a customer may utilize these products and services to gain access to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which they are otherwise entitled to receive access under the Rules. The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges only charge customers once for these shared products and services, even to the extent that customers use the products and services to connect to more than one of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. For example, a firm that is a member or member organization, as applicable, of all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and which co-locates its servers in the Nasdaq Data Center by purchasing a 10 GB fiber connection, cabinet space, cooling fans, and patch cables, only needs to purchase these products and services once to use them to connect to all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Likewise, the Rules were intended to provide for connectivity to third-party services and market data feeds on a shared basis, meaning that a firm need only purchase a subscription to these services once, regardless of whether the firm is a member or member organization, as applicable, of multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Historically, the Exchange has billed customers on a shared basis for all of the products and services currently set forth in General 8. Presently, however, only certain provisions of General 8 state this fact expressly. That is, provisions in General 8 pertaining to connectivity to the Exchange, direct circuit connectivity to the Exchange, and point-of-presence connectivity to the Exchange, each state that they include connectivity to the other markets of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. However, other provisions in General 8—such as cabinets, cabinet power, fiber and wireless connectivity to market data feeds, and fiber and wireless connectivity to third party services—do not contain such language.

    Notwithstanding the absence of express language in these provisions of General 8, the Exchange believes that it is or should be apparent that a firm need only pay once to purchase products and services—like server cabinets, power supplies, and cables—that the firm will use to connect to multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges or to connect to third party services or market data feeds. Indeed, the Exchange is aware of no actual customer confusion on this issue. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that the existing Rules would benefit from clarification so as to avoid the potential for any confusion in the future.

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend General 8 by doing the following: (1) Deleting the existing selective references therein to shared connectivity services; and (2) replacing selective references with the following language, which will serve as a general preface to General 8:

    The connectivity products and services that this Rule describes are shared among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges (The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC). Fees for these products and services are also the same among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges. As such, a firm need only purchase the products and services listed below from any Nasdaq, Inc. exchange once to connect to any and all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect, or to connect to third party market data feeds or services. For example, if a firm purchases connectivity to one Nasdaq, Inc. exchange and then subsequently qualifies to connect to a second Nasdaq, Inc. exchange, then the firm may utilize its existing services for connecting to the first exchange to also connect to the second exchange, without incurring an additional charge.

    This preface will clarify that all products and services set forth in General 8 are offered on a shared basis and that a firm need only purchase them once from any of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    In addition to adding this preface, the Exchange also proposes several other non-substantive amendments to General 8 to correct technical errors and to harmonize it with parallel provisions set forth in the rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. These changes will reconcile minor, non-substantive differences in the phrasing and placement of text between the Exchange's General 8 and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' Sections 8. The amendments will also remove certain references to the name “Nasdaq GEMX” or replace it with general references to “the Exchange.” Finally, the amendments will amend General 8, Section 1(b), which provides for discounted pricing for having multiple millimeter or microwave wireless subscriptions, to state that such pricing applies to subscriptions under General 8, Section 1(b) “and/or any other provision of these Rules that provides for such subscriptions, as may exist, from time to time.” The intended result of the proposed changes—along with similar changes that the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to propose—will be to generalize General 8 and render it completely identical across all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. (The Exchange notes that The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC and Nasdaq BX, Inc. offer wireless subscriptions under both General 8, Section 1(b) and Rule 7015/Equity 7, Section 115 of their respective rulebooks.)

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and that it furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Likewise, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable for the Exchange and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a firm only once for the products and services set forth in General 8 because the same instance of such products and services may be used by the firm to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect. Said otherwise, the Exchange does not believe that it would be fair for the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to each charge separate fees to a firm to, say, rent the same cabinet space in the same data center or to purchase the same wires to connect its servers to the market data feed. Moreover, the practice of charging a firm once for products and services with shared applicability among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges is not unfairly discriminatory because each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges makes the products and services that are set forth in General 8 of their respective rulebooks available to all similarly situated members at the same prices.

    Meanwhile, the Exchange believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, for the Exchange to amend General 8 to clarify the existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to charge firms once to purchase shared products and services, and to codify that practice where it is not stated expressly in the Rule. Although the Exchange believes that such codification and clarification of General 8 are not necessary in this instance—given that it should be (and in the Exchange's experience, it is) apparent to firms that each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges will not charge them more than once to, say, rent the same cabinet space or to purchase the same wires or power supplies—the Exchange believes, nevertheless, that the public and investors will benefit from increased clarity to General 8. Even if the proposal is not needed to dispel any actual confusion about the Rules, it will help to limit any potential confusion in the future.

    The Exchange also believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, to harmonize the language of General 8 among all six of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. Given that General 8 in each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' rulebooks sets forth the same products, services, and associated fees that are assessed on a shared basis, the language of General 8 should be uniform across these Exchanges to avoid any confusion about unintended disparities. The proposal makes minor, non-substantive changes to accomplish this harmonization, which include removing references that are idiosyncratic to this Exchange and are not common among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that its proposals to amend General 8 are non-controversial because they merely codify and clarify the Exchange's existing interpretation of General 8, serve the interests of the public and investors in promoting a more clear and transparent Rulebook that is harmonized with the shared rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and because the proposals will not impact competition or limit access to or availability of the Exchange or its systems.

    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 proposals merely codify and clarify existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a customer only once to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges of which it is a member and to connect to third party services. The proposals also harmonize Section 8 with corresponding provisions of the rulebooks of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    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) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.8

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    8 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 9 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately amend its rules to specify that the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges and to harmonize General 8 with parallel rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.11

    9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-GEMX-2018-36 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-GEMX-2018-36. 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-GEMX-2018-36, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25030 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84559; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2018-085] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Various Rules To Reflect Changes to The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (“NOM”) Protocols November 9, 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 29, 2018, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” 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 various rules to reflect changes to The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (“NOM”) protocols.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://nasdaq.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

    Nasdaq recently filed a rule change 3 which adopted a new protocol “Ouch to Trade Options” or “OTTO” 4 and renamed the current OTTO protocol as “Quote Using Orders” or “QUO”.5 The Exchange proposes to reflect the changes made in the Prior Rule Change within various NOM Rules which refer to protocols.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83888 (August 20, 2018), 83 FR 42954 (August 24, 2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2018-069) (“Prior Rule Change”). This rule change is immediately effective but will not be operative until such time as the Exchange issues an Options Trader Alert announcing the implementation date. This notification will be issued in Q4 2018. The Exchange notes that this filing renamed the current OTTO protocol as “QUO” and also proposed the adoption of a new OTTO protocol.

    4 OTTO is an interface that allows Participants and their Sponsored Customers to connect, send, and receive messages related to orders to and from the Exchange. Features include the following: (1) Options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying); (2) system event messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5) order messages; and (6) risk protection triggers and cancel notifications. See NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 21(a)(i)(C).

    5 QUO is an interface that allows NOM Market Makers to connect, send, and receive messages related to single-sided orders to and from the Exchange. Order Features include the following: (1) Options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying); (2) system event messages (e.g., start of trading hours messages and start of opening); (3) trading action messages (e.g., halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5) order messages; and (6) risk protection triggers and cancel notifications. Orders submitted by NOM Market Makers over this interface are treated as quotes. See NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 21(a)(i)(D).

    The Prior Rule Change, which is effective but not yet operative, renamed the current OTTO to “QUO.” The proposed changes herein seek to rename that protocol accordingly within the rules where OTTO is specified in the Rulebook. The Prior Rule Change also adopted a new OTTO protocol, which is the same OTTO protocol currently utilized by market participants on Nasdaq ISE, LLC (“ISE”) today.6 The proposal introduces the new OTTO protocol within NOM rules.

    6See Supplementary Material .03(b) to Rule 715.

    Detection of Loss of Communication

    Chapter VI, Section 6(e), “Detection of Loss of Communication” describes the impact to NOM protocols in the event of a loss of a communication. The Exchange identifies the various protocols available on NOM within this rule. The Exchange proposes several amendments.

    First, the Exchange proposes to replace references to the term “Participant” with “NOM Market Maker” within the current rule text where the protocol is only available to NOM Market Makers.7 This new text will add greater specificity to the rule.

    7 The Exchange is proposing these changes within Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i), Section 6(e)(i)(B), current Section 6(e)(iv), Section 6(e)(iv)(A) and Section 6(e)(iv)(B).

    Second, the Exchange proposes to add the term “QUO” to Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i)(A) which defines a “Heartbeat” to account for the renamed current OTTO protocol within the list. The existing reference to current OTTO would remain and such reference would now refer to the new OTTO protocol. No changes are necessary to the text because the operation of the two protocols are the same for purposes of this specific rule text.

    Third, the Exchange notes that current OTTO is accounted for within NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 6(e). Specifically, Section 6(e)(iii) and current Section 6(e)(vi), which is proposed to be renumbered as Section 6(e)(viii), currently describe the current OTTO protocol. The Exchange is not amending this language because this language would be the same for the new OTTO protocol. To avoid confusion in marking the text, the Exchange proposes to allow this text to remain and simply replicate the text for the renamed QUO protocol. No changes are necessary to the existing OTTO text because the operation of the two protocols, as it relates to this specific text, is the same. The standards for disconnecting current OTTO, renamed “QUO” and new OTTO are identical. The Exchange therefore proposes a new Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i)(D) to define QUO as the Exchange's System component through which NOM Market Makers communicate orders from the Client Application. Because the renamed QUO interface accepts orders submitted by NOM Market Makers, which are treated as quotes for purposes of quoting obligations, this interface is identified as an order entry interface. Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(i)(D), defining Client Application, is being re-lettered to Section 6(e)(i)(E). Also, the Exchange proposes a new Section 6(e)(iv) which provides,

    When the QUO Port detects the loss of communication with a NOM Market Maker's Client Application because the Exchange's server does not receive a Heartbeat message for a certain time period (“nn” seconds), the Exchange will automatically logoff the NOM Market Maker's affected Client Application and if the NOM Market Maker has elected to have its orders cancelled pursuant to Chapter VI, Section 6(e)(viii) automatically cancel all open orders posted.

    The Exchange also proposes to renumber subsequent sections and add a corresponding new section for QUO within Section 6(e)(viii) which provides,

    The default time period (“nn” seconds) for QUO Ports shall be fifteen (15) seconds for the disconnect and, if elected, the removal of orders. If the NOM Market Maker elects to have its orders removed, in addition to the disconnect, the NOM Market Maker may determine another time period of “nn” seconds of no technical connectivity, as required in paragraph (iii) above, to trigger the disconnect and removal of orders and communicate that time to the Exchange. The period of “nn” seconds may be modified to a number between one hundred (100) milliseconds and 99,999 milliseconds for QUO Ports prior to each session of connectivity to the Exchange. This feature may be disabled for the removal of orders, however the NOM Market Maker will be disconnected.

    (A) If the NOM Market Maker systemically changes the default number of “nn” seconds, that new setting shall be in effect throughout the current session of connectivity and will then default back to fifteen seconds. The NOM Market Maker may change the default setting systemically prior to each session of connectivity.

    (B) If a time period is communicated to the Exchange by calling Exchange operations, the number of “nn” seconds selected by the NOM Market Maker shall persist for each subsequent session of connectivity until the NOM Market Maker either contacts Exchange operations and changes the setting or the NOM Market Maker systemically selects another time period prior to the next session of connectivity.

    These sections will refer to the renamed QUO protocol separately from the new OTTO protocol. As noted above, the existing OTTO rule text would refer to the new OTTO and would have the same 15 second default time period as current OTTO, renamed “QUO.” The new section for QUO will represent that protocol going forward so that all NOM protocols are represented within the rule.

    Fifth, the Exchange proposes to renumber Section 6(e)(vii) to Section 6(e)(ix) and add references to the renamed QUO protocol in this paragraph. The trigger for all protocols is described in this section. The current OTTO reference shall now refer to the new OTTO and renamed QUO is being added so all protocols are accounted for within the text.

    Opening and Halt Cross

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 8, “Nasdaq Opening and Halt Cross,” at Section 8(a)(4), “Eligible Interest,” to reflect the addition of an order entry protocol. As explained above, the current OTTO was renamed “QUO” and a new “OTTO” protocol will be added to NOM. The Exchange proposes to add “OTTO” to the list of protocols that may submit orders, prior to the Nasdaq Opening Cross designated with a time-in-force of IOC will be rejected and shall not be considered eligible interest. The Exchange proposes to add “QUO” to the list of protocols that may submit orders that may be submitted as quotes prior to the Nasdaq Opening Cross, designated with a time-in-force of IOC that will remain in-force through the opening and would be cancelled immediately after the opening. The Exchange also proposes to add the words “quotes received via” before SQF to make clear that quotes are submitted into the SQF protocol.

    Further, the Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 8(a)(6), “Valid Width National Best Bid or Offer” or “Valid Width NBBO” to add QUO and remove OTTO to the list of protocols that may submit orders or quotes to account for the renaming of the current protocol. Today, the SQF protocol is a quoting protocol used by NOM Market Makers. QUO will permit orders to be entered, which would be treated as quotes for purposes of quoting obligations, which orders would be eligible for the Opening Process provided they are within a specified bid/ask differential as established and published by the Exchange. The new OTTO would be an order entry protocol only and therefore not eligible to be utilized to submit a Valid Width National Best Bid or Offer during the Opening Process.

    Data Feeds

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 19, “Data Feeds and Trade Information” to amend “OTTO DROP” to “QUO DROP.” The same description would apply as this data feed is simply being renamed. The Exchange notes that the Exchange is not offering a similar data feed for the new OTTO.

    Definitions

    The Exchange proposes to add three new definitions to Chapter I, Section 1. These definitions are utilized in technical documents issued by the Exchange and will provide an ease of reference for understanding these terms. The Exchange proposes to define account number at Chapter I, Section 1(a)(69) as a number assigned to a Participant. Participants may have more than one account number. The Exchange proposes to define “badge” at Chapter I, Section 1(a)(70) as an account number, which may contain letters and/or numbers, assigned to NOM Market Makers. A NOM Market Maker account may be associated with multiple badges. Finally, the Exchange proposes to defined “mnemonic” at Chapter I, Section 1(a)(71) as an acronym comprised of letters and/or numbers assigned to Participants. A Participant account may be associated with multiple mnemonics.

    Risk Protections

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 18 to make various amendments as detailed below.

    Order Price Protection

    The Exchange proposes to amend the current rule text at Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(1) related to the Order Price Protection rule or “OPP.” First the Exchange proposes to add punctuation and OPP at the beginning of that sentence to conform the text to the remainder of the rule.

    Second, the Exchange proposes to remove the example within Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(1)(B)(i) which states, “For example, if the Reference BBO on the offer side is $1.10, an order to buy options for more than $1.65 would be rejected. Similarly, if the Reference BBO on the bid side is $1.10, an order to sell options for less than $0.55 will be rejected.” The Exchange also proposes to remove the example within Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(1)(B)(ii) which states, “For example, if the Reference BBO on the offer side is $1.00, an order to buy options for more than $2.00 would be rejected. However, if the Reference BBO of the bid side of an incoming order to sell is less than or equal to $1.00, the OPP limits set forth above will result in all incoming sell orders being accepted regardless of their limit.” The Exchange notes that while the examples remain accurate, the Exchange proposes to remove the text to conform the rule text to other risk protections. The Exchange does not believe it is necessary to have these examples within the rule text.

    Third, the Exchange proposes to state, with the introduction of “QUO” that OPP shall not apply to orders entered through QUO. Today, the Exchange does not offer OPP via current OTTO, which is being renamed “QUO.” 8 The Exchange proposes to memorialize its current practice within the rule. The Exchange does not offer OPP on current OTTO, renamed “QUO” because unlike other market participants, Market Makers have sophisticated infrastructures as compared to other market participants and are able to manage their risk, particularly with respect to quoting, using tools that are not available to other market participants.9 This would not be a change from the current practice.

    8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64312 (April 20, 2011), 76 FR 23351 (April 26, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-053). The Exchange noted in the filing that, “Like the PHLX's OPP, NOM's will be available for Participants' orders, but not for market making.”

    9 QUO, similar to SQF, is subject to the quote protections listed in Chapter VI, Section 18(c).

    Market Order Spread Protection

    The Exchange proposes two changes to the Market Order Spread Protection rule at Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(2). First, NOM proposes to add the word “trading” before the word “halt” Section 18(a)(2) for consistency. In the OPP rule text halts are referred to as “trading halts.” This will avoid confusion as to the use of this term.

    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend the Market Order Spread Protection Rule in Chapter VI, Section 18(a)(2) to permit NOM to establish different thresholds for one or more series or classes of options, which is the same as Phlx.10 The Exchange desires, the same as Phlx, to be permitted the flexibility to allow it to determine a threshold suitable for each series or class of option. The Exchange's current rule provides no discretion to permit different thresholds for one or more series or classes of options. By adding this rule text, the Exchange proposes to permit one or more series or classes of options to set a different threshold, which the Exchange would announce via an Options Trader Alert, similar to Phlx. The Exchange desires to conform this protection to Phlx so that it could set the same threshold across affiliated markets. The Phlx Rule Change provided that the $5 threshold is appropriate because it seeks to ensure that the displayed bid and offer are within reasonable ranges and do not represent erroneous prices. Further the Exchange noted that this protection will bolster the normal resilience and market behavior that persistently produces robust reference prices. This feature should create a level of protection that prevents Market Orders from entering the Order Book outside of an acceptable range for the Market Order to execute. The Exchange notes that those goals remain consistent with the Exchange's goals today for this risk feature. The Exchange would establish different thresholds for one or more series or classes of options if it believed that the threshold should differ to retain these goals.

    10 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83141 (May 1, 2018), 83 FR 20123 (May 7, 2018) (SR-Phlx-2018-32) (“Phlx Rule Change”). Footnote 11 of this filing provides that Exchange may establish differences other than the referenced threshold for one or more series or classes of options.

    Anti-Internalization

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 18(c)(1) to make minor changes to capitalize the term “market maker” and remove the word “participant,” make plural the word “identifier,” and change the word “member” to “Participant.” These changes are intended to conform the language to the remainder of the risk protection rules. Further, the Exchange proposes to replace the phrase “Exchange account identifier or member firm identifier” with “account number or Participant identifier.” The Exchange defined “account number” herein and proposes that definition in place of “Exchange account identifier.” Also, for consistency, “member” is being replaced with “Participant” in this sentence as well.

    Automated Removal of Quotes

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend the title of Chapter VI, Section 18(c)(2) from “Automated Removal of Quotes” to “Quotation Adjustments” to conform the title across Nasdaq markets.

    Implementation

    The Exchange proposes to implement the rule changes for QUO and OTTO at the same time that the Exchange announces SR-NASDAQ-2018-069 will be operative.11 The Exchange proposes to implement the changes for OPP in Q4 of 2018. The Exchange will announce the date of implementation via an Options Traders Alert.

    11See note 3 above.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,12 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,13 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 adopting new definitions and amending the rule text for Anti-Internalization to conform the rule text to other risk protection rules and utilize a proposed new definition. The Exchange believes that these proposed amendments will add greater transparency to the Exchange's rules.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    Detection of Loss of Communication

    With respect to the new OTTO protocol which was introduced with the Prior Rule Change, all NOM Participants will be able to utilize this protocol. The Exchange believes that applying the removal functionality specified within NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 6(e) for the new OTTO protocol is consistent with the Act because it prevents disruption in the marketplace by protecting market participants. Market participants utilizing new OTTO will have the option to either enable or disable the cancellation feature, thereby offering the same risk protections throughout the market to participants utilizing other protocols. Further, it is appropriate to offer this removal feature as optional to all market participants utilizing new OTTO, because unlike NOM Market Makers who are required to provide quotes in all products in which they are registered, market participants utilizing new OTTO do not bear the same magnitude of risk of potential erroneous or unintended executions. In addition, market participants utilizing new OTTO may desire their orders to remain on the order book despite a technical disconnect, so as not to miss any opportunities for execution of such orders while the OTTO port is disconnected. The Exchange believes that it is consistent with the Act to require other market participants to be disconnected because the Participant is otherwise not connected to the Exchange's System and the Participant simply needs to reconnect to commence submitting and cancelling orders.

    Opening and Halt Cross

    The Exchange's proposal to reflect QUO, the renamed current OTTO protocol, within Chapter VI at Sections 6(e), 8 and 19 and permit the references to the current OTTO protocol to reflect the new OTTO protocol will account for all the protocols available on NOM within these Rules. Specifically, the Exchange's proposal will make clear that QUO will be available to NOM Market Makers and would be considered eligible interest during the Opening Process and which types of orders are eligible as Valid Width Quotes. Finally, the features available for disconnects and the availability of QUO DROP are being specified in this proposal. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because current OTTO is simply being renamed “QUO.” Renaming this protocol with its rules will make clear how QUO orders may be entered and cancelled by the System and avoid confusion for investors. With respect to the Opening Process described in NOM Rules at Chapter VI, Section 8, the Exchange's proposal to replace “OTTO” with “QUO” reflects the name change. Only quotes and in this case orders, which are treated as quotes for quoting obligations, may qualify for a Valid Width National Best Bid or Offer during the Opening Process. Also, adding QUO to the list of Eligible Interest brings greater clarity to market participants regarding the changes to the NOM protocols. The current OTTO references will reflect the new OTTO protocol with these changes. Finally, the change to Chapter VI, Section 19(b) simply accounts for the name change. The Exchange is not amending the proposed “QUO DROP” functionality.

    Risk Protections

    With respect to not offering OPP for QUO, the Exchange believes it is consistent with the Act because unlike other market participants, Market Makers have sophisticated infrastructures as compared to other market participants and are able to manage their risk, particularly with respect to quoting, using tools that are not available to other market participants. Also, QUO is subject to the quote protections listed in Chapter VI, Section 18(c). Market Makers handle a large amount of risk when quoting and in addition to the risk protections required by the Exchange and utilize their own risk management parameters when entering orders, minimizing the likelihood of error. The Exchange believes that Market Makers, unlike other market participants, have the ability to manage their risk and are being offered two protocols to quote.

    The Exchange's proposal to expand the Market Order Spread Protection permits the Exchange to establish different thresholds for one or more series or classes of options which is the same as Phlx. The Exchange desires this flexibility to allow it, the same as Phlx,14 to determine a threshold suitable for each series or class of option. The Exchange believes that expanding this capability is consistent with the Act because it would allow the Exchange to consider thresholds for Market Order Spread Protection at a more granular level, per series or class, to ensure that the displayed bid and offer are within reasonable ranges and do not represent erroneous prices. The Exchange intends that this risk protection would bolster the normal resilience and market behavior that persistently produces robust reference prices, while creating a level of protection that prevents Market Orders from entering the Order Book outside of an acceptable range for the Market Order to execute.

    14See note 10 above.

    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 Exchange's proposal to adopt new definitions and amend the rule text for Anti-Internalization to conform the rule text to other risk protection rules and utilize a proposed new definition does not impose an undue burden on competition because the proposal brings transparency to the Exchange's rules.

    The Exchange's proposal to add references to renamed QUO to Chapter VI, Sections 6(e), 8 and 19 will clarify the name change of the current OTTO protocol to renamed “QUO” and will also make clear that QUO is available only to NOM Market Makers. The Exchange's proposal to introduce the new OTTO protocol for purposes of the detection of loss of communication functionality does not impose an undue burden on competition because all market participants will be permitted to utilize OTTO to submit orders during the opening and will also be able to avail themselves of the protections offered by a loss of communication, similar to other protocols.

    Finally, no Market Maker would receive OPP protection, however all Market Makers would receive the quote protections listed in Chapter VI, Section 18(c). The Exchange believes that unlike other market participants, Market Makers have sophisticated infrastructures as compared to other market participants and are able to manage their risk, particularly with respect to quoting, using tools that are not available to other market participants.

    The Exchange's proposal to expand the Market Order Spread Protection to permit the Exchange to establish different thresholds for one or more series or classes of options, the same as Phlx, would apply uniformly to all market participants.

    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) of the Act 15 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.16

    15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    16 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 17 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 18 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. The Exchange believes that waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to update its rules without delay to reflect the proposed amendments with respect to QUO and OTTO at the same time as it proposes to implement the new OTTO functionality, and bring greater transparency to the Exchange's risk protections. Additionally, the Commission notes that the changes relating to the OTTO protocol and risk protections are based on the operation of similar functionality on Nasdaq ISE and Phlx, respectively. Therefore, the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.19

    17 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    18 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    19 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-NASDAQ-2018-085 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-NASDAQ-2018-085. 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-NASDAQ-2018-085, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.20

    20 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24981 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84565; File No. SR-ODD-2018-01] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Granting Approval of Accelerated Delivery of Supplement to the Options Disclosure Document Reflecting the Inclusion of Disclosure Regarding Foreign Currency Index Options and Implied Volatility Index Options, Certain Contract Adjustment Disclosures, and T+2 Settlement November 9, 2018.

    On October 24, 2018, the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Rule 9b-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 five preliminary copies of a supplement to amend the options disclosure document (“ODD”) to include disclosure regarding foreign currency index options and implied volatility index options, certain contract adjustment disclosures, and T+2 settlement (“October 2018 Supplement”).2 On October 25, 2018, the Commission received from the OCC five definitive copies of the October 2018 Supplement.3

    1 17 CFR 240.9b-1.

    2See email from Marcie Pomper, Corporate Assistant, OCC, to Sharon Lawson and David Michehl, Division of Trading and Markets (“Division”), Commission, dated October 24, 2018.

    3See letter from Karen Bilek, Vice President and Counsel, OCC, to Sharon Lawson, Senior Special Counsel, Division, Commission, dated October 24, 2018. The October 2018 Supplement also makes certain technical non-substantive amendments to the ODD.

    The October 2018 Supplement consists of three parts. Part I addresses foreign currency index options and implied volatility index options. It amends and restates the April 2015 Supplement 4 in its entirety and includes additional changes to take into account a recently approved proposed rule change allowing the listing of a new implied volatility index option.5 The April 2015 Supplement was never distributed to options customers. The OCC issued an information memo on May 22, 2015 6 to inform its clearing members and investors that the April 2015 Supplement would be amended and replaced in its entirety in order to accommodate other implied volatility index options proposed for trading by a different participant options exchange. Part I of the October 2018 Supplement serves as that replacement. Part II of the October 2018 Supplement addresses additional contract adjustment disclosures. Part III of the October 2018 Supplement provides for the change in settlement from T+3 to T+2.

    4https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/occ/occarchive/occarchive2015.shtml#odd.

    5See infra note 10.

    6See OCC Information Memo No. 36788 available at https://www.theocc.com.

    The October 2018 Supplement accommodates the introduction of options on foreign currency indexes and implied volatility options whose exercise settlement value is calculated differently than that of existing implied volatility options.

    Currently, the ODD states that indexes that may underlie options include stock indexes, variability indexes, strategy-based indexes, dividend indexes, and relative performance indexes. In April 2013, the Commission approved a proposed rule change by the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE”) to list options on the Dow Jones FXCM Dollar Index.7 The October 2018 Supplement amends disclosures in the ODD to add foreign currency indexes as a type of index that can underlie an option, in order to accommodate the trading of options on the Dow Jones FXCM Dollar Index and similarly structured foreign currency indexes.8 Specifically, the October 2018 Supplement adds new disclosure regarding the characteristics of foreign currency index options and their special risks. In addition, the supplement adds an example of the calculation of a foreign currency index. The supplement also amends disclosures in the ODD to accommodate the fact that components of foreign currency indexes are foreign currencies rather than securities (e.g., by referring to “components” of an index rather than “constituent securities” of an index).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69365 (April 11, 2013), 78 FR 23321 (April 18, 2013) (SR-ISE-2013-14).

    8 The October 2018 Supplement is intended to accommodate the trading of options on foreign currency indexes that reflect the value of one currency, often the U.S. dollar, against a basket of foreign currencies. Foreign currency indexes are calculated using exchange rates.

    The ODD currently contains general disclosures on the characteristics and risks of trading standardized options on variability indexes. The ODD states that variability indexes are indexes intended to measure the implied volatility, or the realized variance or volatility, of specified stock indexes or specified securities. In January 2014, the Commission approved a proposed rule change by the ISE to list options on the Nations VolDex Index.9 In October 2018, the Commission approved a proposed rule change by the Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC to list options on the SPIKES Index.10

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71365 (January 22, 2014), 79 FR 4512 (January 28, 2014) (SR-ISE-2013-42).

    10See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84417 (October 12, 2018), 83 FR 52865 (October 18, 2018) (SR-MIAX-2018-14).

    The October 2018 Supplement amends disclosures in the ODD regarding implied volatility index options to accommodate the listing of options on the Nations VolDex Index, the SPIKES Index and other similarly structured implied volatility indexes.11 Specifically, the October 2018 Supplement amends the discussion of implied volatility index options by including disclosure regarding exercise settlement value calculations that use the mid-point of the bid and offer of the index components or actual trade prices and the risks of the different calculation methodologies. The supplement also provides disclosure regarding the types of options that can be used to calculate implied volatility indexes (i.e., out-of-the-money option series and hypothetical at-the-money option series; options with certain expiration months or weeks; number of days the options have until expiration).

    11 The exercise settlement value for the Nations VolDex Index is calculated using the mid-point of the NBBO for the component options of the index while the SPIKES Index uses a “price dragging” technique when determining the ongoing price for each individual option used in the calculation of the index. Most other index settlement values are calculated using transaction prices of the index components.

    The October 2018 Supplement also amends the ODD to reflect that adjustments to some of the terms of options contracts, to account for certain events, such as certain dividend distributions or other corporate actions that affect the underlying security or other underlying interest, will be made by the OCC rather than an adjustment panel of the Securities Committee.12 Adjustment determinations were previously made by adjustment panels that consisted of two representatives of each U.S. options market on which a series is traded and one representative of the OCC, who voted only to break a tie. Determinations as to whether to adjust outstanding options in response to a particular event, and, if so, in what manner, are now made solely by the OCC taking into consideration policies established by representatives of each of the U.S. options markets on which the effected option trades and a representative of OCC. Panels, however, consisting of representatives of each of the U.S. options markets on which the affected series of options is traded and one representative of the OCC retain their function and authority under other provisions of the OCC's rules to fix exercise settlement amounts and cash settlement amounts in certain circumstances. The Supplement amends references to these panels, eliminating potential confusion with the Securities Committee, which will continue to determine the appropriateness of adopting prospective policy changes or clarifications. The October 2018 Supplement includes additional clarification and examples regarding how certain adjustments may affect an option's value and deletes certain obsolete language.

    12See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69977 (July 11, 2013), 78 FR 42815 (July 17, 2013) (SR-OCC-2013-05).

    Finally, the October 2018 Supplement makes changes necessary to reflect that the regular exercise settlement date for physical delivery stock options has moved from the third business date following exercise (T+3) to the second business date following exercise (T+2).

    The October 2018 Supplement is intended to be read in conjunction with the more general ODD, which discusses the characteristics and risks of options generally.13

    13 The Commission notes that the options markets must continue to ensure that the ODD is in compliance with the requirements of Rule 9b-1(b)(2)(i) under the Act, 17 CFR 240.9b-1(b)(2)(i), including when changes regarding foreign currency index options and implied volatility index options are made in the future. Any future changes to the rules of the options markets concerning foreign currency index options and implied volatility index options would need to be submitted to the Commission under Section 19(b) of the Act. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).

    Rule 9b-1(b)(2)(i) under the Act 14 provides that an options market must file five copies of an amendment or supplement to the ODD with the Commission at least 30 days prior to the date definitive copies are furnished to customers, unless the Commission determines otherwise, having due regard to the adequacy of the information disclosed and the public interest and protection of investors.15 In addition, five copies of the definitive ODD, as amended or supplemented, must be filed with the Commission not later than the date the amendment or supplement, or the amended ODD, is furnished to customers. The Commission has reviewed the October 2018 Supplement, and the amendments to the ODD contained therein, and finds that, having due regard to the adequacy of the information disclosed and the public interest and protection of investors, the supplement may be furnished to customers as of the date of this order.

    14 17 CFR 240.9b-1(b)(2)(i).

    15 This provision permits the Commission to shorten or lengthen the period of time which must elapse before definitive copies may be furnished to customers.

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Rule 9b-1 under the Act,16 that definitive copies of the October 2018 Supplement to the ODD (SR-ODD-2018-01), reflecting the inclusion of disclosure regarding foreign currency index options and implied volatility index options, certain contract adjustment disclosures, and T+2 settlement, may be furnished to customers as of the date of this order.

    16 17 CFR 240.9b-1.

    17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(39).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.17

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24988 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84561; File No. SR-CFE-2018-003] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice of a Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Block Trade and Exchange of Contract for Related Position Reporting Provisions November 9, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 notice is hereby given that on November 2, 2018 Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC (“CFE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by CFE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. CFE also has filed this proposed rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”). CFE filed a written certification with the CFTC under Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) 2 on November 2, 2018.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).

    2 7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c).

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend reporting provisions under CFE Rules 414, 415, and 714 relating to Block Trades and Exchange of Contract for Related Position (“ECRP”) transactions. The scope of this filing is limited solely to the application of the proposed rule amendments to security futures that may be traded on CFE. Although no security futures are currently listed for trading on CFE, CFE may list security futures for trading in the future. The text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 4 to the filing but is not attached to the publication of this notice.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, CFE 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. CFE 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 proposed rule change revises the criteria for who can act as an Authorized Reporter for Exchange of Contract for Related Position (“ECRP”) transactions and Block Trades and to allow for the assessment of summary fines for violations of two comparable ECRP and Block Trade reporting provisions.

    The first two changes provided for in the proposed rule change relate to who can act as an Authorized Reporter for ECRP transactions and Block Trades. CFE Rule 414 (Exchange of Contract for Related Position) governs ECRP transactions and CFE Rule 415 (Block Trades) governs Block Trades. Rule 414(i) and Rule 415(f) provide that each CFE Trading Privilege Holder (“TPH”) executing an ECRP transaction or Block Trade, as applicable, must have at least one designated individual that is either a TPH or a Related Party 3 of a TPH and that is pre-authorized by a Clearing Member to report ECRP transactions and Block Trades on behalf of the TPH. An individual designated for this purpose is referred to as an Authorized Reporter. CFE is proposing to amend Rule 414(i) and Rule 415(f) to remove the requirement that an Authorized Reporter must be a TPH or a Related Party of a TPH. CFE is also proposing to amend Rule 414(i) and Rule 415(f) to make clear that, to the extent required by applicable law, an Authorized Reporter must be registered or otherwise permitted by the appropriate regulatory body or bodies to act in the capacity of an Authorized Reporter and to conduct related activities.

    3 Chapter 1 of CFE's Rulebook provides that: The term “Related Party” means, with respect to any TPH: Any partner, director, officer, branch manager, employee or agent of such TPH (or any Person occupying a similar status or performing similar functions); any Person directly or indirectly Controlling, Controlled by, or under common Control with, such TPH; or any Authorized Trader of such TPH.

    CFE understands from TPHs that there are service providers that perform reporting functions that are similar to ECRP transaction and Block Trade reporting and that there are TPHs that would like to utilize individuals from these service providers (who are not either a TPH or a Related Party of a TPH) to act as an Authorized Reporter for ECRP transactions and Block Trades involving CFE products. CFE also understands that these TPHs would find it easier to utilize individuals from these service providers to report ECRP transactions and Block Trades, such as because these TPHs already utilize these service providers to perform similar functions in other markets. Additionally, CFE understands that some TPHs that are active market participants find the requirement that an Authorized Reporter must be a TPH or a Related Party of a TPH to be cumbersome because the practical effect of this requirement is that those TPHs are doing their own ECRP transaction and Block Trade reporting. As a result, these TPHs need to take time away from their trading activities in order to go through the administrative steps to complete the reporting process. The proposed rule change will allow these TPHs to outsource this reporting to service providers and to focus on providing liquidity into the market which inures to the benefit of all market participants.

    Accordingly, CFE believes that the elimination of the requirement that an Authorized Reporter be a TPH or Related Party of a TPH will improve the efficiency of CFE's reporting mechanism for ECRP transactions and Block Trades and of CFE's market while still maintaining the key elements of the current ECRP transaction and Block Trade reporting provisions under Rule 414 and Rule 415. Among these elements are that an Authorized Reporter for a TPH will still need to be designated to act in that capacity by the TPH and will still need to be pre-authorized by a Clearing Member for the TPH to act in that capacity. In providing a pre-authorization for an Authorized Reporter, a Clearing Member will also still need to accept responsibility for all ECRP transactions and Block Trades reported to the Exchange by that Authorized Reporter on behalf of the applicable TPH. Additionally, Rule 414(i) and Rule 415(f) will continue to provide that both the parties to and Authorized Reporters for an ECRP transaction or Block Trade, as applicable, are obligated to comply with the requirements of Rule 414 and Rule 415, as applicable. Similarly, Rule 414(i) and Rule 415(f) will continue to provide that any of these parties or Authorized Reporters may be held responsible by the Exchange for noncompliance with those requirements.

    Additionally, the proposed rule change makes clear that, to the extent required by applicable law, an Authorized Reporter must be registered or otherwise permitted by the appropriate regulatory body or bodies to act in the capacity of an Authorized Reporter and to conduct related activities. For example, an Authorized Reporter may be required to be registered with the CFTC through the National Futures Association as an Introducing Broker in order to act as an Authorized Reporter and to conduct related activities.

    In implementing the proposed rule change, CFE will require an Authorized Reporter that is not a TPH or Related Party of a TPH to execute the form used to designate that party as an Authorized Reporter. CFE will also require the Authorized Reporter to agree in the form to abide by CFE rules applicable to Block Trades and ECRPs, to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Exchange with respect to compliance with those provisions, and to acknowledge in the form that the Authorized Reporter must be registered or otherwise permitted by the appropriate regulatory body or bodies to act in the capacity of an Authorized Reporter and to conduct related activities if and to the extent required by applicable law.

    The second two changes provided for in the proposed rule change revise CFE Rule 714 (Imposition of Fines for Minor Rule Violations) to include violations of Rule 414(j) and Rule 415(g) within the list of minor rule violations for which the Exchange may impose summary fines. Rule 414(j) and Rule 415(g) provide that each party to an ECRP transaction or Block Trade, as applicable, is obligated to have an Authorized Reporter notify the Exchange of the terms of the transaction after the transaction is agreed upon and that this notification must be made within a Permissible Reporting Period by no later than the Reporting Deadline (as further defined by Rule 414 and Rule 415, as applicable). Rule 714(f)(x) already provides for a summary fine schedule for violations of two other provisions of Rule 414 with reporting requirements applicable to ECRP transactions, and the proposed rule change makes this summary fine schedule also applicable to violations of Rule 414(j). Similarly, Rule 714(f)(xiv) already provides for a summary fine schedule for violations of two other provisions of Rule 415 with reporting requirements applicable to Block Trades, and the proposed rule change makes this summary fine schedule also applicable to violations of Rule 415(g).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will benefit CFE market participants by allowing TPHs to focus on trading and providing liquidity to CFE's market by allowing them to utilize third party service providers to perform the administrative functions of reporting Block Trades and ECRPs. This reporting process involves logging into a portal to CFE's systems, inputting information, and providing to or receiving from the other party a reference ID. Allowing TPHs to focus on trading and providing liquidity in turn inures to the benefit of CFE's market. Additionally, including violations of additional Block Trade and ECRP reporting requirements under CFE's minor rule violation rule is consistent with the current inclusion of similar Block Trade and ECRP reporting requirements under the rule and improves the efficiency of CFE's disciplinary process.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and furthers the objectives of Sections 6(b)(1),5 6(b)(5),6 and 6(b)(7) 7 in particular, in that it is designed:

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).

    • To enable the Exchange to enforce compliance by its TPHs and persons associated with its TPHs with the provisions of the rules of the Exchange,

    • 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, and

    • to provide a fair procedure for the disciplining of TPHs and persons associated with TPHs.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will improve the efficiency and functioning of the reporting mechanism for ECRP transactions and Block Trades and thus CFE's market by providing TPHs with greater flexibility as to who can act as an Authorized Reporter for these transactions. Also, CFE believes that the application of summary fine schedules for violations of Rule 414(j) and Rule 415(g) will provide motivation and incentive for TPHs and Authorized Reporters to comply with the ECRP transaction and Block Trade reporting requirements under those provisions in order to avoid summary fines and provides an effective and efficient means of disciplining for reporting infractions that do not warrant a regular disciplinary proceeding.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    CFE 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, in that the proposed rule change will improve the efficiency and functioning of the reporting mechanism for ECRP transactions and Block Trades and thus CFE's market. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory in that the rule amendments included in the proposed rule change would apply equally to all CFE market participants.

    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 proposed rule change will become operative on November 19, 2018. At any time within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the proposed rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC, may summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.8

    8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    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-CFE-2018-003 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-CFE-2018-003. 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-CFE-2018-003, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.9

    9 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(73).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24983 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84558; File No. SR-CBOE-2018-072] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Modify Its Fee Schedule November 9, 2018.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on November 6, 2018, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “Cboe Options”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “Cboe Options”) is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change to modify its fee schedule.

    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, 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 proposes to amend its Fees Schedule to correct an inadvertent oversight to update a reference to a transaction fee in the Clearing Trading Permit Holder Fee Cap table (“Fee Cap Table”). Specifically, on January 2, 2018, the Exchange filed a rule filing, SR-CBOE-2018-001, which proposed, among other things, to increase the rate for AIM Facilitation and Solicitation Contra Orders from $0.05 per contract to $0.07 per contract, effective January 2, 2018.3 The Exchange notes that although it reflected the rate increase in the rate tables, it mistakenly failed to update the rate referenced under the Fee Cap Table, which table includes line items for, among other things, AIM Facilitation and Solicitation Contra Orders. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to update the AIM Contra Order rates in the Fee Cap Table from $0.05 per contract to $0.07 per contract. No substantive changes are being made by the proposed rule change.

    3 On January 19, 2018, the Exchange withdrew SR-CBOE-2018-001 and submitted SR-CBOE-2018-007, which filing also proposed to increase the contra rates from $0.05 per contract to $0.07 per contract, effective January 2, 2018. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82553 (January 19, 2018), 83 FR 3834 (January 26, 2018) (SR-CBOE-2018-007).

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.4 Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) 5 requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to update an inaccurate rate under the Fee Cap Table will alleviate potential confusion, thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and protecting investors and the public interest. As noted above, the proposed filing does not substantively change any transaction fees, but merely corrects an inadvertent oversight from a previous rule filing.

    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 does not address competitive issues, but rather, as discussed above, is merely intended to correct an inadvertent marking omission relating to a rate change made in a previous rule filing, which will alleviate potential confusion.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any written comments from members or other interested parties.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 6 and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 7 thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

    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-CBOE-2018-072 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-CBOE-2018-072. 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-CBOE-2018-072 and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.8

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24980 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84566; File No. SR-NYSE-2018-55] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Listed Company Manual To Clarify the Application of the Initial Listing Requirements to Common Equity Securities Issued in Exchange for a Listed Equity Investment Tracking Stock November 9, 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 November 2, 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 the Listed Company Manual (the “Manual”) to clarify the application of the initial listing requirements to common equity securities issued in exchange for a listed Equity Investment Tracking Stock. 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

    Section 102.07 of the Manual sets forth initial listing requirements applicable to the listing of Equity Investment Tracking Stocks. An Equity Investment Tracking Stock is defined as a class of common equity securities that tracks on an unleveraged basis the performance of an investment by the issuer in the common equity securities of a single other company listed on the Exchange. An Equity Investment Tracking Stock may track multiple classes of common equity securities of a single issuer, so long as all of those classes have identical economic rights and at least one of those classes is listed on the Exchange.4

    4 In order for an Equity Investment Tracking Stock to qualify for initial listing, it must meet the requirements of Sections 102.01A and 102.01B of the Manual and the issuer of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock must meet the Global Market Capitalization Test set forth in Section 102.01C. The Exchange will not list an Equity Investment Tracking Stock if, at the time of the proposed listing, the issuer of the equity tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock has been deemed below compliance with the Exchange's listing standards. The issuer of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock must own (directly or indirectly) at least 50% of both the economic interest and voting power of all of the outstanding classes of common equity securities of the issuer whose equity is tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock.

    The issuer of an Equity Investment Tracking Stock may seek (by a shareholder vote, exchange offer or other legally permissible means) to exchange outstanding shares of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock for newly issued shares of a non-tracking stock class of common equity securities pursuant to a specified exchange ratio. The common stock issued in this exchange may be of an already listed class or it may consist of shares of a class that is not currently listed on the Exchange. However, the initial listing standards for common stock set forth in Section 102.01 of the Manual do not currently specify the listing standards applicable to a newly listed class of common stock issued in exchange for an Equity Investment Tracking Stock. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to amend Section 102.01 to clarify how the new class of common stock will be listed in such circumstances.

    In light of the fact that there is a predecessor security listed on the NYSE, the Exchange believes that the listing of a common stock in exchange for shares of a listed Equity Investment Tracking Stock is more similar to a listing upon transfer from another exchange than it is to an initial public offering. Specifically, such an exchange is comparable to a transfer in that in both cases the Exchange is able to rely on the existence of both historical trading information and a liquid public trading market in making its listing determination. As such the Exchange proposes to apply to such listings the initial listing standards applicable to transfers. The Exchange notes that the initial listing standards for transfers and quotations are at least as high as those for IPOs and are more stringent in certain respects.

    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 102.01A of the Manual to specify that such common equity securities listed upon consummation of an exchange for a listed Equity Investment Tracking Stock will be subject to the distribution requirements set forth in that rule for transfer and quotation listings. Section 102.01A provides that a company listing in connection with a transfer or quotation listing must have at least 1.1 million publicly held shares 5 and meet one of the following additional distribution requirements:

    5 Shares held by directors, officers, or their immediate families and other concentrated holding of 10 percent or more are excluded in calculating the number of publicly-held shares wherever that term is used throughout this proposal.

    • 400 shareholders of round lots (i.e., at least 100 shares); or

    • 2,200 total stockholders together with an average monthly trading volume of at least 100,000 shares over the most recent six months; or

    • 500 total shareholders together with an average monthly trading volume of at least 1,000,000 shares over the most recent 12 months.

    Section 102.01B of the Manual requires companies listing upon transfer from another exchange to demonstrate that they have $100 million in market value of publicly held shares and a closing share price of $4.00 per share.6 In applying these requirements to the listing of a new class of common stock in exchange for an Equity Investment Tracking Stock, the Exchange proposes to permit issuers to demonstrate their compliance by reference to the trading price and publicly-held shares outstanding of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock immediately prior to the consummation of the exchange, basing those calculations on the exchange ratio between the two securities.7 The Exchange believes this approach is justified, as the market price for the Equity Investment Tracking Stocking immediately prior to the consummation of the exchange will reflect the market's anticipation of the value of the common stock into which it will be exchanged.

    6 Companies listing in connection with an IPO are required to have $40 million in market value of publicly held shares.

    7 In making listing qualification determinations, the Exchange will rely generally on information with respect to a company's shares outstanding, publicly-held shares and the exchange ratio as most recently disclosed in an SEC filing, but reserves the right to adjust those numbers if there have been significant changes in those numbers since the most recent SEC disclosure.

    Any company listing its primary class of common stock on the Exchange must meet one of the two financial tests in Section 102.01C of the Manual, the Earnings Test or the Global Market Capitalization Test. As the Earnings Test is based solely on the issuer's historical financial statements, there are no issues specific to issuers engaged in these sorts of exchanges of Equity Investment Tracking Stocks for common stock. However, the Global Market Capitalization Test requires the issuer to demonstrate that it has $200 million in global market capitalization. In meeting this test, the Exchange proposes to permit issuers to demonstrate their compliance by reference to the trading price and shares outstanding of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock prior to the consummation of the exchange, basing those calculations on the exchange ratio between the two securities.8 The Exchange believes this approach is justified for the same reasons set forth above with respect to the stock price and publicly-held shares requirements.

    8 Section 102.01C provides, that, in considering the listing under the Global Market Capitalization Test of current publicly-traded companies, the Exchange will require such companies to meet the minimum $200 million global market capitalization requirement and maintain a closing price of at least $4 per share in each case for a period of at least 90 consecutive trading days prior to receipt of clearance to make application to list on the Exchange and will also consider whether the company's business prospects and operating results indicate that the company's market capitalization value is likely to be sustained or increase over time. The proposed rule text clarifies that these requirements will be applicable to the listing of a common stock issued in exchange for an Equity Investment Tracking Stock.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act,9 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,10 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. The proposal to apply the same initial listing standards to the listing of a new common stock issued in exchange for an Equity Investment Tracking Stock as are applied to transfers and quotation listings is designed to protect investors and the public interest because the applicable standards are the most stringent standards applied to the listing of common equities on the Exchange. The proposal to use the trading price and shares outstanding of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock immediately prior to the exchange, as adjusted by the exchange ratio, in conducting its initial listing analysis will provide the Exchange with relevant information about the characteristics of the trading market for the issuer's securities which will be predictive of the market for the common stock into which the Equity Investment Tracking Stock will be exchanged. As such, this information will be helpful to the Exchange in making its initial listing determination.

    9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    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 sole purpose of the proposal is to clarify the application of the initial listing requirements to common equity securities issued in exchange for a listed Equity Investment Tracking Stock. As such, the Exchange does not believe the proposal imposes any burden on competition.

    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 11 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.12 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.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    12 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) 13 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    13 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-2018-55 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-2018-55. 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-2018-55, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.14

    14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24984 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release Nos. 33-10573; 34-84574; File No. 265-28] Investor Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Securities and Exchange Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting of Securities and Exchange Commission Dodd-Frank Investor Advisory Committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Securities and Exchange Commission Investor Advisory Committee, established pursuant to Section 911 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, is providing notice that it will hold a public meeting. The public is invited to submit written statements to the Committee.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Thursday, December 13, 2018 from 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. (ET). Written statements should be received on or before December 13, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held in Multi-Purpose Room LL-006 at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549. The meeting will be webcast on the Commission's website at www.sec.gov. Written statements may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Statements

    Use the Commission's internet submission form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or

    Send an email message to [email protected] Please include File No. 265-28 on the subject line; or

    Paper Statements

    Send paper statements to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File No. 265-28. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help us process and review your statement more efficiently, please use only one method.

    Statements also will be available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Room 1503, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. All statements 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.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marc Oorloff Sharma, Chief Counsel, Office of the Investor Advocate, at (202) 551-3302, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The meeting will be open to the public, except during that portion of the meeting reserved for an administrative work session during lunch. Persons needing special accommodations to take part because of a disability should notify the contact person listed in the section above entitled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    The agenda for the meeting includes: Welcome remarks; a discussion regarding disclosures on human capital (which may include a recommendation from the Investor as Owner subcommittee); a discussion regarding disclosures on sustainability and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) topics; a discussion regarding unpaid arbitration awards; subcommittee reports; and a nonpublic administrative work session during lunch.

    Dated: November 9, 2018. Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25019 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-84568; File No. SR-ISE-2018-92] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend General 8 of the Exchange's Rules November 9, 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 29, 2018, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (“ISE” 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 General 8 of the Exchange's Rules, as described below.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at http://ise.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 proposes to amend General 8 of its Rules, which govern the provision by the Exchange of colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products, and which set forth the fees that the Exchange charges for those products and services, to: (1) Clarify that all of the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq Inc. affiliated exchanges—The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (collectively, the “Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges”)—meaning that a firm need only purchase these products and services once to be able to use them to connect to all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which the firm is otherwise entitled to connect, and to receive the third party services and market data feeds that it is otherwise entitled to receive; and (2) make other non-substantive changes that will further the objective of harmonizing General 8 with parallel rules that exist among the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.3

    3 The other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to file similar proposals in the near future.

    The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges offer colocation, connectivity, and direct connectivity services and related products to their customers on a shared basis, meaning that a customer may utilize these products and services to gain access to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which they are otherwise entitled to receive access under the Rules. The Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges only charge customers once for these shared products and services, even to the extent that customers use the products and services to connect to more than one of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. For example, a firm that is a member or member organization, as applicable, of all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and which co-locates its servers in the Nasdaq Data Center by purchasing a 10 GB fiber connection, cabinet space, cooling fans, and patch cables, only needs to purchase these products and services once to use them to connect to all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Likewise, the Rules were intended to provide for connectivity to third-party services and market data feeds on a shared basis, meaning that a firm need only purchase a subscription to these services once, regardless of whether the firm is a member or member organization, as applicable, of multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Historically, the Exchange has billed customers on a shared basis for all of the products and services currently set forth in General 8. Presently, however, only certain provisions of General 8 state this fact expressly. That is, provisions in General 8 pertaining to connectivity to the Exchange, direct circuit connectivity to the Exchange, and point-of-presence connectivity to the Exchange, each state that they include connectivity to the other markets of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. However, other provisions in General 8—such as cabinets, cabinet power, fiber and wireless connectivity to market data feeds, and fiber and wireless connectivity to third party services—do not contain such language.

    Notwithstanding the absence of express language in these provisions of General 8, the Exchange believes that it is or should be apparent that a firm need only pay once to purchase products and services—like server cabinets, power supplies, and cables—that the firm will use to connect to multiple Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges or to connect to third party services or market data feeds. Indeed, the Exchange is aware of no actual customer confusion on this issue. Nevertheless, the Exchange believes that the existing Rules would benefit from clarification so as to avoid the potential for any confusion in the future.

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend General 8 by doing the following: (1) Deleting the existing selective references therein to shared connectivity services; and (2) replacing selective references with the following language, which will serve as a general preface to General 8:

    The connectivity products and services that this Rule describes are shared among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges (The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, Nasdaq BX, Inc., Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq MRX, LLC, and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC). Fees for these products and services are also the same among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges. As such, a firm need only purchase the products and services listed below from any Nasdaq, Inc. exchange once to connect to any and all of the Nasdaq, Inc. exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect, or to connect to third party market data feeds or services. For example, if a firm purchases connectivity to one Nasdaq, Inc. exchange and then subsequently qualifies to connect to a second Nasdaq, Inc. exchange, then the firm may utilize its existing services for connecting to the first exchange to also connect to the second exchange, without incurring an additional charge.

    This preface will clarify that all products and services set forth in General 8 are offered on a shared basis and that a firm need only purchase them once from any of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    In addition to adding this preface, the Exchange also proposes several other non-substantive amendments to General 8 to correct technical errors and to harmonize it with parallel provisions set forth in the rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. These changes will reconcile minor, non-substantive differences in the phrasing and placement of text between the Exchange's General 8 and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' Sections 8. The amendments will also remove certain references to the name “Nasdaq” or replace it with general references to “the Exchange.” Finally, the amendments will amend General 8, Section 1(b), which provides for discounted pricing for having multiple millimeter or microwave wireless subscriptions, to state that such pricing applies to subscriptions under General 8, Section 1(b) “and/or any other provision of these Rules that provides for such subscriptions, as may exist, from time to time.” The intended result of the proposed changes—along with similar changes that the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges plan to propose—will be to generalize General 8 and render it completely identical across all six Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. (The Exchange notes that The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC and Nasdaq BX, Inc. offer wireless subscriptions under both General 8, Section 1(b) and Rule 7015/Equity 7, Section 115 of their respective rulebooks.)

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and that it furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,5 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Likewise, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 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.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable for the Exchange and the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a firm only once for the products and services set forth in General 8 because the same instance of such products and services may be used by the firm to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to which it is otherwise entitled to connect. Said otherwise, the Exchange does not believe that it would be fair for the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to each charge separate fees to a firm to, say, rent the same cabinet space in the same data center or to purchase the same wires to connect its servers to the market data feed. Moreover, the practice of charging a firm once for products and services with shared applicability among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges is not unfairly discriminatory because each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges makes the products and services that are set forth in General 8 of their respective rulebooks available to all similarly situated members at the same prices.

    Meanwhile, the Exchange believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, for the Exchange to amend General 8 to clarify the existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to charge firms once to purchase shared products and services, and to codify that practice where it is not stated expressly in the Rule. Although the Exchange believes that such codification and clarification of General 8 are not necessary in this instance—given that it should be (and in the Exchange's experience, it is) apparent to firms that each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges will not charge them more than once to, say, rent the same cabinet space or to purchase the same wires or power supplies—the Exchange believes, nevertheless, that the public and investors will benefit from increased clarity to General 8. Even if the proposal is not needed to dispel any actual confusion about the Rules, it will help to limit any potential confusion in the future.

    The Exchange also believes that it is just and equitable, and in the interests of the public and investors, to harmonize the language of General 8 among all six of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. Given that General 8 in each of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges' rulebooks sets forth the same products, services, and associated fees that are assessed on a shared basis, the language of General 8 should be uniform across these Exchanges to avoid any confusion about unintended disparities. The proposal makes minor, non-substantive changes to accomplish this harmonization, which include removing references that are idiosyncratic to this Exchange and are not common among all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    Lastly, the Exchange believes that its proposals to amend General 8 are non-controversial because they merely codify and clarify the Exchange's existing interpretation of General 8, serve the interests of the public and investors in promoting a more clear and transparent Rulebook that is harmonized with the shared rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges, and because the proposals will not impact competition or limit access to or availability of the Exchange or its systems.

    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 proposals merely codify and clarify existing practice of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges to collectively charge a customer only once to connect to any or all of the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges of which it is a member and to connect to third party services. The proposals also harmonize Section 8 with corresponding provisions of the rulebooks of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges.

    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) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.8

    7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    8 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.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 9 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 10 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately amend its rules to specify that the products and services set forth in General 8 are shared among the Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges and to harmonize General 8 with parallel rules of the other Nasdaq, Inc. Exchanges. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.11

    9 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission also has 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. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change 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-ISE-2018-92 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-ISE-2018-92. 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-ISE-2018-92, and should be submitted on or before December 7, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Brent J. Fields, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25028 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #15776 and #15777; NEW JERSEY Disaster Number NJ-00049] Administrative Declaration of a Disaster for the State of New Jersey AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of New Jersey dated 10/24/2018.

    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.

    Incident Period: 08/11/2018 through 08/13/2018.

    DATES:

    Issued on 10/24/2018.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/24/2018.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/24/2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

    Primary Counties: Ocean, Passaic. Contiguous Counties: New Jersey: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Essex, Monmouth, Morris, Sussex. New York: Orange, Rockland.

    The Interest Rates are:

    Percent For Physical Damage: Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere 4.000 Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.000 Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere 7.350 Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere 3.675 Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500 Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500 For Economic Injury: Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere 3.675 Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 15776 6 and for economic injury is 15777 0.

    The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are New Jersey, New York.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Dated: October 24, 2018. Linda E. McMahon, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25038 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #15760 and #15761; PENNSYLVANIA Disaster Number PA-00086] Administrative Declaration of a Disaster for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania dated 10/23/2018.

    Incident: Flooding.

    Incident Period: 07/21/2018 through 07/27/2018.

    DATES:

    Issued on 10/23/2018.

    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/24/2018.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/23/2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

    Primary Counties: Schuylkill Contiguous Counties: Pennsylvania: Berks, Carbon, Columbia, Dauphin, Lebanon, Lehigh, Luzerne, Northumberland.

    The Interest Rates are:

    Percent For Physical Damage: Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere 3.875 Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere 1.938 Businesses with Credit Available Elsewhere 7.220 Businesses without Credit Available Elsewhere 3.610 Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500 Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500 For Economic Injury: Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere 3.610 Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 15760 6 and for economic injury is 15761 0.

    The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Pennsylvania.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Dated: October 23, 2018. Linda E. McMahon, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25039 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [Disaster Declaration #15775; Massachusetts Disaster Number MA-00076] Declaration of Economic Injury; Administrative Declaration of an Economic Injury Disaster for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, dated 10/23/2018.

    Incident: Natural Gas Line Explosions.

    Incident Period: 09/13/2018.

    DATES:

    Issued on 10/23/2018.

    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/23/2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

    Primary Counties: Essex Contiguous Counties: Massachusetts: Middlesex, Suffolk. New Hampshire: Hillsborough, Rockingham.

    The Interest Rates are:

    Percent Businesses and Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit Available Elsewhere 3.675 Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere 2.500

    The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 157750.

    The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are Massachusetts, New Hampshire.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Dated: October 23, 2018. Linda E. McMahon, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25041 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Docket Number USTR-2018-0036] Request for Comments on Negotiating Objectives for a U.S.-United Kingdom Trade Agreement AGENCY:

    Office of the United States Trade Representative.

    ACTION:

    Request for comments and notice of public hearing.

    SUMMARY:

    On October 16, 2018, the United States Trade Representative notified Congress of the Administration's intention to enter into negotiations with the United Kingdom (UK) for a U.S.-UK Trade Agreement after the UK has exited the European Union on March 29, 2019. The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is seeking public comments on a proposed U.S.-UK Trade Agreement, including U.S. interests and priorities, in order to develop U.S. negotiating positions. You can provide comments in writing and orally at a public hearing. The Administration's aim in negotiations with the UK is to address both tariff and non-tariff barriers and to achieve free, fair, and reciprocal trade.

    DATES:

    January 15, 2019: Deadline for the submission of written comments and for written notification of your intent to testify, as well as a summary of your testimony at the public hearing. January 29, 2019: The Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC) will hold a public hearing beginning at 9:30 a.m., at the main hearing room of the United States International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.

    ADDRESSES:

    You should submit notifications of intent to testify and written comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments in parts 2 and 3 below. For alternatives to on-line submissions, please contact Yvonne Jamison at (202) 395-3475.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For procedural questions concerning written comments, please contact Yvonne Jamison at (202) 395-3475. Direct all other questions to Timothy Wedding, Deputy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Europe, at (202) 395-6072.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. Background

    The decision to launch negotiations for a U.S.-UK Trade Agreement is an important step toward achieving free, fair, and reciprocal trade with the UK and was preceded by the establishment of the U.S.-UK Trade and Investment Working Group in July 2017. The Working Group was launched to provide commercial continuity for UK and U.S. businesses, workers, and consumers as the UK leaves the European Union, explore ways to strengthen trade and investment ties, and lay the groundwork for a potential future trade agreement with the UK.

    On October 16, 2018, following consultations with relevant Congressional committees, the United States Trade Representative informed Congress that the President intends to commence negotiations with the UK for a U.S.-UK Trade Agreement.

    2. Public Comment and Hearing

    The TPSC invites interested parties to submit comments and/or oral testimony to assist USTR as it develops negotiating objectives and positions for the agreement, including with regard to objectives identified in section 102 of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (19 U.S.C. 4201). In particular, the TPSC invites interested parties to comment on issues including, but not limited to, the following:

    a. General and product-specific negotiating objectives for the proposed agreement.

    b. Relevant barriers to trade in goods and services between the U.S. and the UK that should be addressed in the negotiations.

    c. Economic costs and benefits to U.S. producers and consumers of removal or reduction of tariffs and removal or reduction of non-tariff barriers on articles traded with the UK.

    d. Treatment of specific goods (described by HTSUS numbers) under the proposed agreement, including comments on:

    i. Product-specific import or export interests or barriers.

    ii. Experience with particular measures that should be addressed in the negotiations.

    iii. Ways to address export priorities and import sensitivities in the context of the proposed agreement.

    e. Customs and trade facilitation issues that should be addressed in the negotiations.

    f. Sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical barriers to trade that should be addressed in the negotiations.

    g. Other measures or practices that undermine fair market opportunities for U.S. businesses, workers, farmers, and ranchers that should be addressed in the negotiations.

    USTR must receive written comments no later than Thursday, January 15, 2019. USTR requests that small businesses, generally defined by the Small Business Administration as firms with fewer than 500 employees, or organizations representing small business members, which submit comments to self-identify as such, so that we may be aware of issues of particular interest to small businesses.

    The TPSC will hold a hearing on Thursday, January 29, 2019, in the Main Hearing Room at the U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. If necessary, the hearing will continue on the next business day. Persons wishing to testify at the hearing must provide written notification of their intention by January 15, 2019. The intent to testify notification must be made in the ‘type comment' field under docket number USTR-2018-0036 on the www.regulations.gov website and should include the name, address, and telephone number of the person presenting the testimony. You should attach a summary of the testimony by using the ‘upload file' field. The file name also should include who will be presenting the testimony. The TPSC will limit remarks at the hearing to no more than five minutes to allow for possible questions.

    3. Requirements for Submissions

    In order to ensure the timely receipt and consideration of comments, USTR strongly encourages commenters to make on-line submissions, using the www.regulations.gov website. Persons submitting a notification of intent to testify and/or written comments must do so in English and must identify (on the first page of the submission) the “U.S.-UK Trade Agreement.”

    To submit comments via www.regulations.gov, enter docket number USTR-2018-0036 on the home page and click ‘search.' The site will provide a search-results page listing all documents associated with this docket. Find a reference to this notice and click on the link entitled ‘comment now!' For further information on using the www.regulations.gov website, please consult the resources provided on the website by clicking on ‘How to Use This Site' on the left side of the home page.

    The www.regulations.gov website allows users to provide comments by filling in a ‘type comment' field, or by attaching a document using an ‘upload file' field. USTR prefers that you provide comments in an attached document. If a document is attached, it is sufficient to type ‘see attached' in the ‘type comment' field. USTR prefers submissions in Microsoft Word (.doc) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf). If the submission is in an application other than those two, please indicate the name of the application in the ‘type comment' field.

    For any comments submitted electronically containing business confidential information, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters ‘BC.' Any page containing business confidential information must be clearly marked BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL on the top of that page. Filers of submissions containing business confidential information also must submit a public version of their comments. The file name of the public version should begin with the character ‘P.' The ‘BC' and ‘P' should be followed by the name of the person or entity submitting the comments or reply comments. Filers submitting comments containing no business confidential information should name their file using the name of the person or entity submitting the comments.

    Please do not attach separate cover letters to electronic submissions; rather, include any information that might appear in a cover letter in the comments themselves. Similarly, to the extent possible, please include any exhibits, annexes, or other attachments in the same file as the submission itself, not as separate files.

    As noted, USTR strongly urges submitters to file comments through www.regulations.gov. You must make any alternative arrangements before transmitting a comment and in advance of the applicable deadline with Yvonne Jamison at (202) 395-3475.

    USTR will place comments in the docket for public inspection, except business confidential information. General information concerning USTR is available at www.ustr.gov.

    Edward Gresser, Chair of the Trade Policy Staff Committee, Office of the United States Trade Representative.
    [FR Doc. 2018-24987 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3290-F9-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Recording of Aircraft Conveyances and Security Documents AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of information was published on October 9, 2018. The collection involves return to the Civil Aviation Aircraft Registry of information relating to the release of a lien that has been recorded with the Registry. Regulations provide for establishing and maintaining a system for the recording of security conveyances affecting title to, or interest in U.S. civil aircraft, as well as certain specifically identified engines, propellers, or spare parts locations, and for recording of releases relating to those conveyances. Federal Aviation Regulations establish procedures for implementation. Regulations describe what information must be contained in a security conveyance in order for it to be recorded with FAA. The convention on the International Recognition signatory, prevents, by treaty, the export of an aircraft and cancellation of its nationality marks if there is an outstanding lien recorded. The Civil Aviation Registry must have consent or release of lien from the lienholder prior to confirmation/cancellation for export.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted by December 17, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected], or faxed to (202) 395-6974, or mailed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara Hall at (940) 594-5913, or by email at: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 2120-0043.

    Title: Recording of Aircraft Conveyances and Security Documents.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.

    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of information was published on October 9, 2018 (83 FR 50740). Since the single form (AC Form 8050-41, Notice of Recordation) of the collection is sent to the lienholder when the Registry records the lien on aircraft, propeller(s), engine(s) and/or spare parts location(s) as a part of another collection this form is now removed. When the lien is satisfied, the lienholder completes Part II of the form AC Form 8050-41 and returns it to the Registry as official notification of the release of the lien. The lienholder may send the same information in any format without the form if desired. The collection involves return to the Civil Aviation Aircraft Registry of information relating to the release of a lien that has been recorded with the Registry. Title 49, U. S. C. Section 44108 provides for establishing and maintaining a system for the recording of security conveyances affecting title to, or interest in U.S. civil aircraft, as well as certain specifically identified engines, propellers, or spare parts locations, and for recording of releases relating to those conveyances. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 49 (14 CFR 49) establishes procedures for implementation of 49 U. S. C. 44108. Part 49 describes what information must be contained in a security conveyance in order for it to be recorded with FAA.

    Respondents: Any aircraft, propeller or engine lienholder, who has received the Notice of Recordation from the Registry, who is releasing the subject lien.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 1 hour.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: For FY 2017, records indicate a return of 23,681 release notifications for a total time burden of approximately 23,681 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 9, 2018. Barbara Hall, FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy, and Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25009 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag and Supplemental Operations AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information collection. The information collected is used to determine air operators' compliance with the minimum safety standards and the applicants' eligibility for air operations certification.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be submitted by December 17, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected], or faxed to (202) 395-6974, or mailed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara Hall at (940) 594-5913, or by email at: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 2120-0008.

    Title: Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag and Supplemental Operations.

    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this collection of information.

    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.

    Background: Under the authority of Title 49 CFR, Section 44701, Title 14 CFR prescribes the terms, conditions, and limitations as are necessary to ensure safety in air transportation. Title 14 CFR part 121 prescribes the requirements governing air carrier operations. The information collected is used to determine air operators' compliance with the minimum safety standards and the applicants' eligibility for air operations certification. Each operator which seeks to obtain, or is in possession of an air carrier operating certificate, must comply with the requirements of part 121 which include maintaining data which is used to determine if the air carrier is operating in accordance with minimum safety standards.

    Respondents: There are approximately 70 air carriers/applicants.

    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 1 hour and 16 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 1,555,534.5 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 13, 2018. Barbara Hall, FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy & Records Management Branch (ASP-110).
    [FR Doc. 2018-25036 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration [Docket Number FRA-2018-0098] Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this document provides the public notice that on November 2, 2018, the Regional Transportation District (RTD) and the City of Aurora, Colorado, petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 222. FRA assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-2018-0098.

    Specifically, petitioners seek a waiver from the provisions of 49 CFR 222.35(b)(1) to establish a new quiet zone consisting of two public highway-rail grade crossings with active grade crossing warning devices comprising both flashing lights and gates that are not equipped with constant warning time devices. The crossing warning devices on the proposed “East Rail Line-Aurora Quiet Zone” on the RTD A-Line are primarily activated by a wireless crossing activation system (WCAS) using “GPS-determined train speed and location to predict how many seconds a train is from the crossing.” Petitioners assert that this information is communicated wirelessly to the crossing warning devices and seeks to provide constant warning times. Additionally, this system is supplemented by a conventional track warning system in case the WCAS is unavailable.

    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications concerning the petition, is available for review online at www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested parties desire an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for their request.

    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

    Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.

    Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

    Communications received by December 31, 2018 will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be considered if practicable.

    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Robert C. Lauby, Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25043 Filed 11-15-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration Notice of Funding Opportunity for the Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Program AGENCY:

    Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO or notice).

    SUMMARY:

    This notice details the application requirements and procedures to obtain grant 1 funding for eligible projects under the Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Program (Partnership Program) made available by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, Public Law 115-31, Div. K, Tit. I (2017 Appropriations Act) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, Div. L, Tit. I, Public Law 115-141 (2018 Appropriations Act; collectively the Appropriations Acts). The opportunity described in this notice is made available under Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 20.326, “Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair.”

    1 The term “grant” is used throughout this document and is intended to reference funding awarded through a grant agreement, as well as funding awarded to recipients through a cooperative agreement.

    DATES:

    Applications for funding under this solicitation are due no later than 5 p.m. EDT, March 18, 2019. Applications for funding or supplemental material in support of an application received after 5 p.m. EDT, on March 18, 2019 will not be considered for funding. Incomplete applications for funding will not be considered for funding. See Section D of this notice for additional information on the application process.

    ADDRESSES:

    Applications must be submitted via www.Grants.gov. Only applicants who comply with all submission requirements described in this notice and submit applications through www.Grants.gov will be eligible for award. For any supporting application materials that an applicant is unable to submit via www.Grants.gov (such as oversized engineering drawings), an applicant may submit an original and two (2) copies to Amy Houser, Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W36-412, Washington, DC 20590. However, due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail delivered via the U.S. Postal Service, applicants are advised to use other means of conveyance (such as courier service) to assure timely receipt of materials before the application deadline.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information regarding project-related information in this notice, please contact Bryan Rodda, Office of Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W38-203, Washington, DC 20590; email: [email protected]; phone: 202-493-0443. Grant application submission and processing questions should be addressed to Amy Houser, Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W36-412, Washington, DC 20590; email: [email protected]; phone: 202-493-0303.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice to applicants: FRA recommends that applicants read this notice in its entirety prior to preparing application materials. A list providing the definitions of key terms used throughout the NOFO are listed under the Program Description in Section A(2). These key terms are capitalized throughout the NOFO. There are several administrative and eligibility requirements described herein that applicants must comply with to submit an application. Additionally, applicants should note that the required Project Narrative component of the application package may not exceed 25 pages in length.

    Table of Contents A. Program Description B. Federal Award Information C. Eligibility Information D. Application and Submission Information E. Application Review Information F. Federal Award Administration Information G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts A. Program Description 1. Overview

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications for grants for capital projects within the United States to repair, replace, or rehabilitate Qualified Railroad Assets to reduce the state of good repair backlog and improve Intercity Passenger Rail performance under the Partnership Program. The Partnership Program provides a Federal funding opportunity to leverage private, state, and local investments to significantly improve American rail infrastructure. The Partnership Program is authorized in Sections 11103 and 11302 of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 (Title XI of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, Public Law 114-94 (2015)) and is funded by the Appropriations Acts.

    The Department recognizes the importance of applying life cycle asset management principles throughout America's infrastructure. It is important for rail infrastructure owners and operators, as well as those who may apply on their behalf, to plan for the maintenance and replacement of assets and the associated costs. In light of recent fatal passenger rail accidents, the Department particularly recognizes the opportunity to enhance safety in both track and equipment through this grant program.

    The Partnership Program is intended to benefit both the Northeast Corridor (“NEC”) and the large number of publicly-owned or Amtrak-owned infrastructure, equipment, and facilities located in other areas of the country, including strengthening transportation options for rural American communities. Applicants should note that different requirements apply to NEC and non-NEC Partnership projects, with certain eligibility requirements applying only to proposed projects located on the Northeast Corridor, as defined in Section A(2)(f) in this notice. These NEC-specific requirements are described in Section C(3)(b). Further, the Partnership Program has different planning and cost-sharing requirements for Qualified Railroad Assets between proposed NEC and non-NEC projects. These differences are described in detail in Section D(2)(a)(v-vi).

    2. Definitions of Key Terms

    a. “Benefit-Cost Analysis” (or “Cost-Benefit Analysis”) is a systematic, data driven, and transparent analysis comparing monetized project benefits and costs, using a no-build baseline and properly discounted present values, including concise documentation of the assumptions and methodology used to produce the analysis, a description of the baseline, data sources used to project outcomes, and values of key input parameters, basis of modeling including spreadsheets, technical memos, etc., and presentation of the calculations in sufficient detail and transparency to allow the analysis to be reproduced and sensitivity of results evaluated by FRA. Please refer to the Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs prior to preparing a BCA at https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance. In addition, please also refer to the BCA FAQs on FRA's website for some rail-specific examples of how to apply the BCA Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs to Partnership applications.

    b. “Capital Project” is defined to mean a project primarily intended to replace, rehabilitate, or repair major infrastructure assets utilized for providing Intercity Passenger Rail service, including tunnels, bridges, and stations; or a project primarily intended to improve Intercity Passenger Rail performance, including reduced trip times, increased train frequencies, and higher operating speeds consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(2).

    c. “Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation” means short-haul rail passenger transportation in metropolitan and suburban areas usually having reduced fare, multiple ride, and commuter tickets and morning and evening peak period operations. See 49 U.S.C. 24102(3).

    d. “Intercity Rail Passenger Transportation” is defined by 49 U.S.C. 24102(4) to mean rail passenger transportation, except Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation. In this notice, “Intercity Passenger Rail” is an equivalent term to “Intercity Rail Passenger Transportation.”

    e. “Major Capital Project” means a Capital Project with a proposed total project cost of $300 million or more.

    f. “Northeast Corridor” (“NEC”) means the main rail line between Boston, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia; the branch rail lines connecting to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Springfield, Massachusetts, and Spuyten Duyvil, New York; and facilities and services used to operate and maintain these lines.

    g. A “Qualified Railroad Asset” is defined by 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5) to mean infrastructure, equipment, or a facility that:

    i. Is owned or controlled by an eligible Partnership Program applicant;

    ii. is contained in the Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan prepared under 49 U.S.C. 24904, or an equivalent planning document; and for which the Northeast Corridor Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy developed under 49 U.S.C. 24905, or a similar cost-allocation policy has been developed;

    iii. was not in a State of Good Repair on December 4, 2015 (the date of enactment of the FAST Act).

    See Section D(2)(a), Project Narrative, for further details about the Qualified Railroad Asset requirements and application submission instructions related to Qualified Railroad Assets.

    h. “State of Good Repair” is defined by 49 U.S.C. 24102(12) to mean a condition in which physical assets, both individually and as a system, are performing at a level at least equal to that called for in their as-built or as-modified design specification during any period when the life cycle cost of maintaining the assets is lower than the cost of replacing them; and sustained through regular maintenance and replacement programs.

    B. Federal Award Information 1. Available Award Amount

    The total funding available for awards under this NOFO is $272,250,000 after $2,750,000 is set aside for FRA award and project management oversight as provided in the Appropriations Acts.

    2. Award Size

    While there are no predetermined minimum or maximum dollar thresholds for awards, FRA anticipates making multiple awards with the available funding. FRA encourages applicants to propose projects or components of projects that can be completed and implemented with the level of funding available. Projects may require more funding than is available. In these cases, applicants must identify and apply for specific project components that have operational independence and can be completed with the level of funding available. (See Section C(3)(c) for more information.)

    Applicants proposing a Major Capital Project are encouraged to identify and describe phases or elements that could be candidates for subsequent Partnership Program funding, if such funding becomes available. Applications for a Major Capital Project that would seek future funds beyond fiscal year 2017 and 2018 funding made available in this notice should indicate anticipated annual Federal funding requests from this program for the expected duration of the project. FRA may issue Letters of Intent to Partnership Program grantees proposing Major Capital Projects under 49 U.S.C. 24911(g); such Letters of Intent would serve to announce the FRA's intention to obligate an amount from future available budget authority toward a grantee's future project phases or elements. A Letter of Intent is not an obligation of the Federal government and is subject to the availability of appropriations for Partnership Program grants and subject to Federal laws in force or enacted after the date of the Letter of Intent.

    3. Award Type

    FRA will make awards for projects selected under this notice through grant agreements and/or cooperative agreements. Grant agreements are used when FRA does not expect to have substantial Federal involvement in carrying out the funded activity. Cooperative agreements allow for substantial Federal involvement in carrying out the agreed upon investment, including technical assistance, review of interim work products, and increased program oversight under 2 CFR 200.24. The funding provided under these cooperative agreements will be made available to grantees on a reimbursable basis. Applicants must certify that their expenditures are allowable, allocable, reasonable, and necessary to the approved project before seeking reimbursement from FRA. Additionally, the grantee must expend matching funds at the required percentage alongside Federal funds throughout the life of the project.

    4. Concurrent Applications

    As DOT and FRA may be concurrently soliciting applications for transportation infrastructure projects for several financial assistance programs, applicants may submit applications requesting funding for a particular project to one or more of these programs. In the application for Partnership Program funding, applicants must indicate the other programs to which they submitted or plan to submit an application for funding the entire project or certain project components, as well as highlight new or revised information in the Partnership Program application that differs from the application(s) submitted for other financial assistance programs.

    C. Eligibility Information

    This section of the notice explains applicant eligibility, cost sharing and matching requirements, project eligibility, and project component operational independence. Applications that do not meet the requirements in this section will be ineligible for funding. Instructions for submitting eligibility information to FRA are detailed in Section D of this NOFO.

    1. Eligible Applicants

    The following entities are eligible applicants for all project types permitted under this notice:

    (1) A State (including the District of Columbia);

    (2) a group of States;

    (3) an Interstate Compact;

    (4) a public agency or publicly chartered authority established by one or more States; 2

    2 See Section D(2)(a)(iv) for supporting documentation required to demonstrate eligibility under this eligibility category.

    (5) a political subdivision of a State;

    (6) Amtrak, acting on its own behalf or under a cooperative agreement with one or more States; or

    (7) any combination of the entities described in (1) through (6).

    Selection preference will be provided for applications jointly submitted by multiple eligible applicants, as further discussed in Section E(1)(c). Joint applicants must identify an eligible applicant as the lead applicant. The lead applicant serves as the primary point of contact for the application, and if selected, as the recipient of the Partnership Program grant award. Eligible applicants may reference entities that are not eligible applicants (e.g., private sector firms) in an application as a project partner. However, FRA will provide selection preference to joint applications submitted by multiple eligible applicants only.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching

    The Federal share of total costs for a project funded under the Partnership Program shall not exceed 80 percent, though FRA will provide selection preference to applications where the proposed Federal share of total project costs does not exceed 50 percent. The estimated total cost of a project must be based on the best available information, including engineering studies, studies of economic feasibility, environmental analyses, and information on the expected use of equipment and facilities. The minimum 20 percent non-Federal share may be comprised of public sector (e.g., state or local) or private sector funding. However, FRA will not consider any other Federal grants, nor any non-Federal funds already expended (or otherwise encumbered), that do not comply with 2 CFR 200.458 toward the matching requirement.

    FRA is limiting the first 20 percent of the non-Federal match to cash contributions only. FRA will not accept “in-kind” contributions for the first 20 percent in matching funds. Eligible in-kind contributions may be accepted for any non-Federal matching beyond the first 20 percent. In-kind contributions including the donation of services, materials, and equipment, may be credited as a project cost, in a uniform manner consistent with 2 CFR 200.306.

    FRA strongly encourages applicants to identify and include other state, local, public agency or authority, or private funding or financing to support the proposed project. Non-federal shares consisting of funding from multiple sources to demonstrate broad participation and cost sharing from affected stakeholders, will be given preference. If Amtrak is an applicant, whether acting on its own behalf or as part of a joint application, Amtrak's ticket and other non-Federal revenues generated from its business operations and other sources may be used as matching funds. Applicants must identify the source(s) of their matching and other funds, and must clearly and distinctly reflect these funds as part of the total project cost in the application budget.

    FRA may not be able to award grants to all eligible applications, nor even to all applications that meet or exceed the stated evaluation criteria (see Section E, Application Review Information). Before submitting an application, applicants should carefully review the principles for cost sharing or matching in 2 CFR 200.306. FRA will approve pre-award costs consistent with 2 CFR 200.458. See Section D(6). Additionally, in preparing estimates of total project costs, applicants should refer to FRA's cost estimate guidance, “Capital Cost Estimating: Guidance for Project Sponsors,” which is available at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0926.

    3. Other a. Project Eligibility

    Eligible projects within the United States repair, replace, or rehabilitate Qualified Railroad Assets and improve Intercity Passenger Rail performance. Eligible Capital Projects include those that:

    (1) Replace existing assets in-kind;

    (2) Replace existing assets with assets that increase capacity or provide a higher level of service;

    (3) Ensure that service can be maintained while existing assets are brought to a State of Good Repair; and

    (4) Bring existing assets into a State of Good Repair.

    Qualified Railroad Assets, as further defined in Section A(2), are owned or controlled by an eligible applicant and may include: infrastructure, including track, ballast, switches and interlockings, bridges, communication and signal systems, power systems, highway-rail grade crossings, and other railroad infrastructure and support systems used in intercity passenger rail service; stations, including station buildings, support systems, signage, and track and platform areas; equipment, including passenger cars, locomotives, and maintenance-of-way equipment; and facilities, including yards and terminal areas and maintenance shops.

    Capital Projects, as further defined in Section A(2), may include final design; however, final design costs will only be eligible in conjunction with an award for project construction. Environmental and related clearances, including all work necessary for FRA to approve the project under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and related statutes and regulations are not eligible for funding under this notice. (See Section D(2)(a)(ix) for additional information.) Eligible projects with completed environmental and engineering documents, and, for projects located on the NEC, where Amtrak and the public authorities providing Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation on the NEC are in compliance with the cost allocation policy required at 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2), indicate strong project readiness. This allows FRA to maximize the funds available in this notice (see Section E(1)(c) for more information on Selection Criteria).

    b. Additional Eligibility Requirements for Northeast Corridor (NEC) Projects

    This sub-section provides additional eligibility requirements for projects where the proposed project location includes a portion of the NEC (NEC Projects). Applicants proposing non-NEC projects are not subject to the requirements in this sub-section, and may proceed to the next sub-section C(3)(c).

    In the Partnership Program, the NEC is defined as the main rail line between Boston, Massachusetts and the District of Columbia, and the branch rail lines connecting to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Springfield, Massachusetts, and Spuyten Duyvil, New York.

    Passenger railroad owners and operators on the NEC are subject to a cost allocation policy under 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2), and, via the NEC Commission, are required to annually adopt a five-year Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan for the NEC under 49 U.S.C. 24904(a). When selecting projects on the NEC, FRA will consider the appropriate sequence and phasing of projects as contained in the currently approved Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan.

    NEC applicants must provide the status of compliance by Amtrak and the public authorities providing Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation at the eligible project location with the cost allocation policy required at 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2). FRA may not obligate a grant for a NEC Project unless each of the above service providers at the eligible project location are in compliance with that cost allocation policy. Such providers must maintain compliance with the cost allocation policy for the duration of the project.

    c. Project Component Operational Independence

    If an applicant requests funding for a project that is a component or set of components of a larger project, the project component(s) must be attainable with the award amount and comply with all eligibility requirements described in Section C.

    In addition, the component(s) must be capable of independent analysis and decision making, as determined by FRA, under NEPA (i.e., have independent utility, connect logical termini, and not restrict the consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable rail projects.) Components must also generate independent utility and will be evaluated as such in the BCA.

    D. Application and Submission Information

    Required documents for the application are outlined in the following paragraphs. Applicants must complete and submit all components of the application. See Section D(2) for the application checklist. FRA welcomes the submission of additional relevant supporting documentation, such as planning, engineering and design documentation, and letters of support from partnering organizations that will not count against the Project Narrative page limit.

    1. Address To Request Application Package

    Applicants must submit all application materials in their entirety through www.Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT, on March 18, 2019. FRA reserves the right to modify this deadline. General information for submitting applications through Grants.gov can be found at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0270.

    For any supporting application materials that an applicant cannot submit via Grants.gov, such as oversized engineering drawings, an applicant may submit an original and two (2) copies to Amy Houser, Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W36-412, Washington, DC 20590. However, due to delays caused by enhanced screening of mail delivered via the U.S. Postal Service, FRA advises applicants to use other means of conveyance (such as courier service) to assure timely receipt of materials before the application deadline. Additionally, if documents can be obtained online, explaining to FRA how to access files on a referenced website may also be sufficient.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission

    FRA strongly advises applicants to read this section carefully. Applicants must submit all required information and components of the application package to be considered for funding. Additionally, applicants selected to receive funding must generally satisfy the grant readiness checklist requirements on https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0268 as a precondition to FRA issuing a grant award, as well as the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 24405 explained in part at https://www.fra.dot.gov/page/P0185.

    Required documents for an application package are outlined in the checklist below.

    • Project Narrative (see D.2.a).

    • Statement of Work (see D.2.b.i).

    • Benefit-Cost Analysis (see D.2.b.ii).

    • Environmental Compliance Documentation (see D.2.b.iii).

    • SF424—Application for Federal Assistance.

    • SF 424C—Budget Information for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any construction costs, or SF 424A—Budget Information for Non-Construction.

    • SF 424D—Assurances for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any construction costs, or SF 424B—Assurances for Non-Construction.

    • FRA's Additional Assurances and Certifications.

    • SF LLL—Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.

    a. Project Narrative

    This section describes the minimum content required in the Project Narrative of grant applications. The Project Narrative must follow the basic outline below to address the program requirements and assist evaluators in locating relevant information.

    I. Cover Page See D.2.a.i. II. Project Summary See D.2.a.ii. III. Project Funding See D.2.a.iii. IV. Applicant Eligibility Criteria See D.2.a.iv. V. Non-NEC Project Eligibility Criteria See D.2.a.v. VI. NEC Project Eligibility Criteria See D.2.a.vi. VII. Detailed Project Description See D.2.a.vii. VIII. Project Location See D.2.a.viii. IX. Grade Crossing Information, if applicable See D.2.a.ix. X. Evaluation and Selection Criteria See D.2.a.x. XI. Project Implementation and Management See D.2.a.xi. XII. Environmental Readiness See D.2.a.xii.

    These requirements must be satisfied through a narrative statement submitted by the applicant. The Project Narrative may not exceed 25 pages in length (excluding cover pages, table of contents, and supporting documentation). FRA will not review or consider for award applications with Project Narratives exceeding the 25-page limitation. If possible, applicants should submit supporting documents via website links rather than hard copies. If supporting documents are submitted, applicants must clearly identify the relevant portion of the supporting document with the page numbers of the cited information in the Project Narrative. The Project Narrative must adhere to the following outline.

    i. Cover Page: Include a cover page that lists the following elements in either a table or formatted list: project title; location (e.g., city, State, Congressional district); lead applicant organization name; name of any co-applicants; amount of Federal funding requested; and proposed non-Federal match.

    ii. Project Summary: Provide a brief 4-6 sentence summary of the proposed project and what the project will entail. Include challenges the proposed project aims to address, and summarize the intended outcomes and anticipated benefits that will result from the proposed project.

    iii. Project Funding: Indicate the amount of Federal funding requested, the proposed non-Federal match, and total project cost. Identify the source(s) of matching and other funds, and clearly and distinctly reflect these funds as part of the total project cost in the application budget. Also, note if the requested Federal funding under this NOFO or other programs must be obligated or spent by a certain date due to dependencies or relationships with other Federal or non-Federal funding sources, related projects, law, or other factors. If applicable, provide the type and estimated value of any proposed in-kind contributions, as well as substantiate how the in-kind contributions meet the requirements in 2 CFR 200.306. For a Major Capital Project that would seek future funds beyond fiscal years 2017 and 2018 funding made available in this notice, provide the anticipated annual Federal funding requests from this grant program for the expected duration of the project. Finally, specify whether Federal funding for the project has previously been sought, and identify the Federal program and fiscal year of the funding request(s), as well as highlight new or revised information in the Partnership Program application that differs from the application(s) to other financial assistance programs.

    iv. Applicant Eligibility Criteria: Explain how the applicant meets the applicant eligibility criteria outlined in Section C of this notice, including references to creation or enabling legislation for public agencies and publicly chartered authorities established by one or more States. Joint applications must include a description of the roles and responsibilities of each applicant, including budget and sub-recipient information showing how the applicants will share project costs, and must be signed by an authorized representative of each.

    v. Non-NEC Project Eligibility Criteria: This sub-section provides project eligibility requirements for projects not on the NEC. (Applicants proposing NEC Projects may proceed to the next sub-section D(2)(a)(vi).) For non-NEC projects, explain how the project meets the project eligibility criteria in Section C of this notice. Describe how the project is a Qualified Railroad Asset under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5), as follows:

    (A) To demonstrate ownership or control by the applicant under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(A), show either:

    (1) The applicant owns or will, at project completion, have ownership of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project; or

    (2) The applicant controls or will, at project completion, have control over the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project by agreement with the owner(s). An agreement should specify the extent of the applicant's management and decision-making authority regarding the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project. Agreements involving railroad rights-of-way projects should also demonstrate the applicant has dispatching rights for the right-of-way and maintenance-of-way responsibilities.

    (B) To demonstrate the planning requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B), show that the project is included in the applicant's current State Rail Plan(s) and, as applicable, in the current Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) or Statewide Transportation Improvement Programs (STIP) plan.

    (C) To demonstrate the cost-sharing requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B), the applicant must:

    (1) Be an operator or contributing funding partner of Intercity Rail Passenger transportation who is subject to the Cost Methodology Policy adopted under Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), Public Law 110-432, Oct. 16, 2008; or

    (2) demonstrate the applicant(s) involvement in a similar cost-sharing agreement for the project as described in (1).

    (D) To demonstrate the state of good repair requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B):

    (1) Describe the condition and performance of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility as of the time of enactment of the FAST Act (Dec. 4, 2015);

    (2) indicate how the infrastructure, equipment, or facility's condition or performance falls short of the definition of “state of good repair” in Section A(2) (49 U.S.C. 24102(12) parts (A) and/or (B)); and

    (3) indicate, if known, when the infrastructure, equipment, or facility last received comprehensive repair, replacement, or rehabilitation work similar to the applicant's proposed scope of work.

    vi. NEC Project Eligibility Criteria: This sub-section provides project eligibility requirements for NEC Projects. (Applicants proposing non-NEC projects may proceed to the next sub-section D(2)(a)(vii).) For NEC applicants, explain how the NEC Project meets the project eligibility criteria in Section C(3)(b) of this notice including the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 24911(e). Describe how the NEC Project is a Qualified Railroad Asset under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5), as follows:

    (A) To demonstrate ownership or control by the applicant under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(A), show either:

    (1) The applicant owns or will, at project completion, have ownership of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project; or

    (2) The applicant controls or will, at project completion, have control over the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project by agreement with the owner(s). An agreement should specify the extent of the applicant's management and decision-making authority regarding the infrastructure, equipment, or facility improved by the project. Agreements involving railroad rights-of-way projects should also demonstrate the applicant has dispatching rights for the right-of-way and maintenance-of-way responsibilities.

    (B) To demonstrate the planning requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B), the NEC applicant must show that the infrastructure, equipment, or facility is included in the current approved Five-Year Capital Investment Plan prepared by the NEC Commission under 49 U.S.C. 24904(a).

    (C) To demonstrate the cost-sharing requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(B), the infrastructure, equipment, or facility must be subject to the NEC Cost Allocation Policy developed under 49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(2).

    (D) To demonstrate the state of good repair requirement under 49 U.S.C. 24911(a)(5)(C), the NEC applicant must:

    (1) Describe the condition and performance of the infrastructure, equipment, or facility as of the time of enactment of the FAST Act (Dec. 4, 2015);

    (2) indicate how the infrastructure, equipment, or facility's condition or performance falls short of the definition of “state of good repair” in Section A(2) (49 U.S.C. 24102(12) parts (A) and/or (B)); and

    (3) indicate, if known, when the infrastructure, equipment, or facility last received comprehensive repair, replacement, or rehabilitation work similar to the applicant's proposed scope of work.

    vii. Detailed Project Description: Include a detailed project description that expands upon the brief summary required above. This detailed description must provide, at a minimum: Additional background on the challenges the project aims to address; the expected users and beneficiaries of the project, including all railroad operators; the specific components and elements of the project; and any other information the applicant deems necessary to justify the proposed project. Applicants with Major Capital Projects are encouraged to identify and describe project phases or elements that would be candidates for subsequent Partnership Program funding if such funding becomes available. Include information to demonstrate the project is reasonably expected to begin construction in a timely manner. For all projects, applicants must provide information about proposed performance measures, as described in Section F(3)(c) and required in 2 CFR 200.301.

    viii. Project Location: Include geospatial data for the project, as well as a map of the project's location. Include the Congressional districts in which the project will take place.

    ix. Grade Crossing Information, if applicable: For any project that includes grade crossing components, cite specific DOT National Grade Crossing Inventory information, including the railroad that owns the infrastructure (or the crossing owner, if different from the railroad), the primary railroad operator, the DOT crossing inventory number, and the roadway at the crossing. Applicants can search for data to meet this requirement at the following link: http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/default.aspx.

    x. Evaluation and Selection Criteria: Include a thorough discussion of how the proposed project meets all of the evaluation and selection criteria, as outlined in Section E of this notice. If an application does not sufficiently address the evaluation criteria and the selection criteria, it is unlikely to be a competitive application.

    xi. Project Implementation and Management: Describe proposed project implementation and project management arrangements. Include descriptions of the expected arrangements for project contracting, contract oversight, change-order management, risk management, and conformance to Federal requirements for project progress reporting. Describe past experience in managing and overseeing similar projects. For Major Capital Projects, explain plans for a rigorous project management and oversight approach.

    xii. Environmental Readiness: If the NEPA process is complete, indicate the date of completion, and provide a website link or other reference to the final Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No Significant Impact, Record of Decision, and any other NEPA documents prepared. If the NEPA process is not complete, the application should detail the type of NEPA review underway, if applicable, where the project is in the process, and indicate the anticipated date of completion of all milestones and of the final NEPA determination. If the last agency action with respect to NEPA documents occurred more than three years before the application date, the applicant should describe why the project has been delayed and why NEPA documents have not been updated and include a proposed approach for verifying and, if necessary, updating this material in accordance with applicable NEPA requirements. Additional information regarding FRA's environmental processes and requirements are located at https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L05286.

    b. Additional Application Elements

    Applicants must submit:

    i. A Statement of Work (SOW) addressing the scope, schedule, and budget for the proposed project if it were selected for award. For Major Capital Projects, the SOW must include annual budget estimates and anticipated Federal funding for the expected duration of the project. The SOW must contain sufficient detail so FRA, and the applicant, can understand the expected outcomes of the proposed work to be performed and can monitor progress toward completing project tasks and deliverables during a prospective grant's period of performance. Applicants must use FRA's standard SOW template to be considered for award. The SOW template is located at https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L18661. When preparing the budget, the total cost of a project must be based on the best available information as indicated in cited references that include engineering studies, economic feasibility studies, environmental analyses, and information on the expected use of equipment or facilities.

    ii. A Benefit-Cost Analysis consistent with 49 U.S.C. 24911(d)(2)(A) that demonstrates the merit of investing in the proposed project. The analysis should be systematic, data driven, and examine the trade-offs between reasonably expected project costs and benefits. Please refer to the Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs prior to preparing a BCA at https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance. In addition, please also refer to the BCA FAQs on FRA's website (https://www.fra.dot.gov/grants) for some rail-specific examples of how to apply the Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs to Partnership applications. The complexity and level of detail in the Benefit-Cost Analysis prepared for the Partnership Program should reflect the scope and scale of the proposed project.

    iii. Environmental compliance documentation, if a website link is not cited in the Project Narrative.

    iv. SF 424—Application for Federal Assistance.

    v. SF 424C—Budget Information for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any other construction elements, the SF 424A—Budget Information for Non-Construction.

    vi. SF 424D—Assurances for Construction, or, for an equipment procurement project without any other construction elements, the SF 424B—Assurances for Non-Construction.

    vii. FRA's Additional Assurances and Certifications.

    viii. An SF LLL—Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.

    Forms needed for the electronic application process are at www.Grants.gov.

    c. Post-Selection Requirements

    See subsection F(2) of this notice for post-selection requirements.

    3. Unique Entity Identifier, System for Award Management (SAM), and Submission Instructions

    To apply for funding through Grants.gov, applicants must be properly registered. Complete instructions on how to register and submit an application can be found at www.Grants.gov. Registering with Grants.gov is a one-time process; however, it can take up to several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation and a user password. FRA recommends that applicants start the registration process as early as possible to prevent delays that may preclude submitting an application package by the application deadline. Applications will not be accepted after the due date. Delayed registration is not an acceptable justification for an application extension.

    FRA may not make a discretionary grant award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) and SAM requirements. (Please note that if a Dun & Bradstreet DUNS number must be obtained or renewed, this may take a significant amount of time to complete.) Late applications that are the result of a failure to register or comply with Grants.gov applicant requirements in a timely manner will not be considered. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the submission deadline, the application will not be considered. To submit an application through Grants.gov, applicants must:

    a. Obtain a DUNS Number

    A DUNS number is required for Grants.gov registration. The Office of Management and Budget requires that all businesses and nonprofit applicants for Federal funds include a DUNS number in their applications for a new award or renewal of an existing award. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the universal standard for the government in identifying and keeping track of entities receiving Federal funds. The identifier is used for tracking purposes and to validate address and point of contact information for Federal assistance applicants, recipients, and sub-recipients. The DUNS number will be used throughout the grant life cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, one-time activity. Applicants may obtain a DUNS number by calling 1-866-705-5711 or by applying online at http://www.dnb.com/us.

    b. Register With the SAM

    All applicants for Federal financial assistance must maintain current registrations in the SAM database. An applicant must be registered in SAM to successfully register in Grants.gov. The SAM database is the repository for standard information about Federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, and sub recipients. Organizations that have previously submitted applications via Grants.gov are already registered with SAM, as it is a requirement for Grants.gov registration. Please note, however, that applicants must update or renew their SAM registration at least once per year to maintain an active status. Therefore, it is critical to check registration status well in advance of the application deadline. If an applicant is selected for an award, the applicant must maintain an active SAM registration with current information throughout the period of the award. Information about SAM registration procedures is available at www.sam.gov.

    c. Create a Grants.gov Username and Password

    Applicants must complete an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) profile on www.Grants.gov and create a username and password. Applicants must use the organization's DUNS number to complete this step. Additional information about the registration process is available at: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration.html.

    d. Acquire Authorization for Your AOR From the E-Business Point of Contact (E-Biz POC)

    The E-Biz POC at the applicant's organization must respond to the registration email from Grants.gov and login at www.Grants.gov to authorize the applicant as the AOR. Please note there can be more than one AOR for an organization.

    e. Submit an Application Addressing All Requirements Outlined in This NOFO

    If an applicant experiences difficulties at any point during this process, please call the Grants.gov Customer Center Hotline at 1-800-518-4726, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (closed on Federal holidays). For information and instructions on each of these processes, please see instructions at: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html

    Note:

    Please use generally accepted formats such as .pdf, .doc, .docx, .xls, .xlsx and .ppt, when uploading attachments. While applicants may embed picture files, such as .jpg, .gif, and .bmp, in document files, applicants should not submit attachments in these formats. Additionally, the following formats will not be accepted: .com, .bat, .exe, .vbs, .cfg, .dat, .db, .dbf, .dll, .ini, .log, .ora, .sys, and .zip.

    4. Submission Dates and Times

    Applicants must submit complete applications to www.Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT, March 18, 2019. FRA reviews www.Grants.gov information on dates/times of applications submitted to determine timeliness of submissions. Delayed registration is not an acceptable reason for late submission. In order to apply for funding under this announcement, all applicants are expected to be registered as an organization with Grants.gov. Applicants are strongly encouraged to apply early to ensure all materials are received before this deadline.

    To ensure a fair competition of limited discretionary funds, the following conditions are not valid reasons to permit late submissions: (1) Failure to complete the Grants.gov registration process before the deadline; (2) failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply as posted on its website; (3) failure to follow all the instructions in this NOFO; and (4) technical issues experienced with the applicant's computer or information technology environment.

    5. Intergovernmental Review

    Executive Order 12372 requires applicants from State and local units of government or other organizations providing services within a State to submit a copy of the application to the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC), if one exists, and if this program has been selected for review by the State. Applicants must contact their State SPOC to determine if the program has been selected for State review.

    6. Funding Restrictions

    FRA will not fund any preliminary engineering, environmental work, or related clearances under this NOFO. FRA will only consider funding a project's final design activities if the applicant is also seeking funding for construction activities. FRA will only approve pre-award costs if such costs are incurred pursuant to the negotiation and in anticipation of the grant agreement and if such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work consistent with 2 CFR 200.458. Under 2 CFR 200.458, grant recipients must seek written approval from FRA for pre-award activities to be eligible for reimbursement under the grant. Activities initiated prior to the execution of a grant or without FRA's written approval may not be eligible for reimbursement or included as a grantee's matching contribution.

    FRA is prohibited under 49 U.S.C. 24405(f) 3 from providing Partnership Program grants for Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation. FRA's interpretation of this provision is informed by the language in 49 U.S.C. 24911, and specifically the definitions of capital project in § 24911(2)(a) and (b). FRA's primary intent in funding Partnership Program projects is to make reasonable investments in Capital Projects used in Intercity Rail Passenger Transportation. Such projects may be located on shared corridors where Commuter Rail Passenger Transportation also benefits from the project.

    3 Under 49 U.S.C. 24911(i), Partnership grants are subject to the conditions in 49 U.S.C. 24405.

    E. Application Review Information 1. Criteria a. Eligibility and Completeness Review

    FRA will first screen each application for applicant and project eligibility (eligibility requirements are outlined in Section C of this notice), completeness (application documentation and submission requirements are outlined in Section D of this notice), and the 20 percent minimum match in determining whether the application is eligible.

    FRA will then consider the applicant's past performance in developing and delivering similar projects, and previous financial contributions.

    b. Evaluation Criteria

    FRA subject-matter experts will evaluate all eligible and complete applications using the evaluation criteria outlined in this section to determine technical merit and project benefits.

    i. Technical Merit: FRA will evaluate application information for the degree to which—

    (A) The tasks and subtasks outlined in the SOW are appropriate to achieve the expected outcomes of the proposed project.

    (B) The technical qualifications and demonstrated experience of key personnel proposed to lead and perform the technical efforts, and the qualifications of the primary and supporting organizations to fully and successfully execute the proposed project within the proposed timeframe and budget.

    (C) The proposed project's business plan considers potential private sector participation in the financing, construction, or operation of the proposed project.

    (D) The applicant has, or will have the legal, financial, and technical capacity to carry out the project; satisfactory continuing control over the use of the equipment or facilities; and the capability and willingness to maintain the equipment or facilities.

    (E) Eligible Projects have completed necessary pre-construction activities and indicate strong project readiness.

    (F) For NEC Projects, the sequence and phasing of the proposed project is consistent with the Five-Year Capital Investment Plan prepared by the NEC Commission under 49 U.S.C. 24904(a).

    (G) The project is consistent with planning guidance and documents set forth by the Secretary of Transportation or required by law.

    ii. Project Benefits: FRA will evaluate the benefit-cost analysis of the proposed project for the anticipated private and public benefits relative to the costs of the proposed project including—

    (A) Effects on system and service performance;

    (B) Effects on safety, competitiveness, reliability, trip or transit time, and resilience;

    (C) Efficiencies from improved integration with other modes; and

    (D) Ability to meet existing or anticipated demand.

    c. Selection Criteria

    In addition to the eligibility and completeness review and the evaluation criteria outlined in this subsection, the FRA Administrator will apply the following selection criteria.

    i. FRA will give preference to projects for which:

    (A) Amtrak is not the sole applicant;

    (B) Applications were submitted jointly by multiple applicants;

    (C) Proposed Federal share of total project costs does not exceed 50 percent;

    ii. After applying the above preferences, the FRA Administrator will take in account the following key Departmental priorities:

    (A) Supporting economic vitality at the national and regional level;

    (B) Leveraging Federal funding to attract other, non-Federal sources of infrastructure investment;

    (C) Preparing for future operations and maintenance costs associated with their project's life-cycle, as demonstrated by a credible plan to maintain assets without having to rely on future Federal funding;

    (D) Using innovative approaches to improve safety and expedite project delivery; and

    (E) Holding grant recipients accounta