Federal Register Vol. 83, No.227,

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 227 (November 26, 2018)

Page Range60333-60728
FR Document

83_FR_227
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
83 FR 60503 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60412 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60413 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60413 - Sunshine Act Meetings; CorrectionPDF
83 FR 60556 - Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of DirectorsPDF
83 FR 60426 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
83 FR 60539 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60516 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Amend Its Rules Regarding How the System Handles Market Orders in Series With No Bid or No OfferPDF
83 FR 60536 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Article II, Section 2.03(h)(ii) and Article VI of Its Operating AgreementPDF
83 FR 60522 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Eliminate Expired and Obsolete Provisions in Connection With Nasdaq's Transition to an All-Inclusive Annual Fee Program, Rename Certain Existing Annual Fees as All-Inclusive Annual Listing Fees, and Make Other Related ChangesPDF
83 FR 60527 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (“NOM”) FeesPDF
83 FR 60530 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating To Amend Its Rules Regarding How the System Handles Market Orders in Series With No Bid or No OfferPDF
83 FR 60545 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Nasdaq Rule 5615(b)(4) To Change the Threshold for Qualifying as a Smaller Reporting Company To Qualify for Certain Exemptions From the Compensation Committee RequirementsPDF
83 FR 60444 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Application To Withdraw Tribal Funds From Trust StatusPDF
83 FR 60382 - Proposed Expansion of R-3803 Restricted Area Complex; Fort Polk, LAPDF
83 FR 60396 - Forged Steel Fittings From the People's Republic of China: Countervailing Duty OrderPDF
83 FR 60397 - Forged Steel Fittings From Italy and the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty OrdersPDF
83 FR 60411 - Charter Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory CommitteesPDF
83 FR 60428 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60551 - Determination of Trade Surplus in Certain Sugar and Syrup Goods and Sugar-Containing Products of Chile, Morocco, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Peru, Colombia, and PanamaPDF
83 FR 60507 - Entergy Operations, Inc.; Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3PDF
83 FR 60559 - Advisory Committee: VA National Academic Affiliations Council, Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 60405 - Endangered and Threatened Species; Take of Anadromous FishPDF
83 FR 60444 - Notice To Acquire Land Into Trust for the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of OregonPDF
83 FR 60366 - Pyrifluquinazon; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
83 FR 60526 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60540 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60533 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60550 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60510 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60520 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60393 - Procedures for Participating in User Testing of the New Commerce 232 Exclusion Process PortalPDF
83 FR 60386 - Air Plan Approval; OR: Lane County Outdoor Burning and Enforcement Procedure RulesPDF
83 FR 60347 - Geomagnetic Disturbance Reliability Standard; Reliability Standard for Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance EventsPDF
83 FR 60427 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
83 FR 60422 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements (HWIR) Contaminated Media (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 60427 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
83 FR 60423 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Expanded Access to TSCA Confidential Business InformationPDF
83 FR 60424 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 60425 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants (Renewal)PDF
83 FR 60404 - Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60405 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
83 FR 60360 - Safety Zone; Delaware River, Dredging Operation Equipment Recovery, Marcus Hook Range, Chester, PAPDF
83 FR 60504 - Notice of Information CollectionPDF
83 FR 60508 - Omaha Public Power District, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1, Partial Site ReleasePDF
83 FR 60385 - Ratemaking Procedures for Inbound Letter Post and Related ServicesPDF
83 FR 60509 - New Postal ProductsPDF
83 FR 60333 - Transferred OTS Regulations Regarding Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations and Consent Requirements for the Exercise of Trust PowersPDF
83 FR 60551 - SJI Board of Directors Meeting, NoticePDF
83 FR 60440 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Legal Instructions Concerning Applications for Full Insurance Benefits-Assignment of Multifamily Mortgages to the SecretaryPDF
83 FR 60438 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Housing Trust Fund (HTF) ProgramPDF
83 FR 60441 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 Reporting NSP2PDF
83 FR 60442 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Multifamily Financial Management TemplatePDF
83 FR 60557 - Pipeline Safety: Information Collection Activities, Gas and Liquid Pipeline Safety Program CertificationPDF
83 FR 60393 - Correction: Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 60414 - Environmental Management Advisory Board MeetingPDF
83 FR 60443 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Manufactured Housing SurveyPDF
83 FR 60439 - The Performance Review BoardPDF
83 FR 60412 - Notice of Availability of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study-Brandon Road Integrated Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement-Will County, IllinoisPDF
83 FR 60506 - Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
83 FR 60507 - Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
83 FR 60392 - Notice of Public Meetings of the New York Advisory CommitteePDF
83 FR 60507 - Notice of Permit Modification Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
83 FR 60421 - Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review of the Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP-Willis Lateral ProjectPDF
83 FR 60417 - Notice of Supplement Filing; City of Vernon, CaliforniaPDF
83 FR 60429 - Privacy Act of 1974; Matching ProgramPDF
83 FR 60417 - Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Protests and Motions To Intervene; N.E.W. Hydro, LLCPDF
83 FR 60420 - Notice of Application; Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLCPDF
83 FR 60399 - Certain Steel Nails From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018PDF
83 FR 60502 - Proposed Extension of Information Collection; Records of Preshift and Onshift Inspections of Slope and Shaft Areas of Slope and Shaft Sinking Operations at Coal MinesPDF
83 FR 60502 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Revision of a Currently Approved Collection; Records Modification Form (FD-1115)PDF
83 FR 60431 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60430 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60431 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
83 FR 60431 - Office of the Director; Notice of Charter RenewalPDF
83 FR 60391 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60558 - Creating Options for Veterans Expedited Recovery (COVER) Commission; Notice of MeetingPDF
83 FR 60392 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60500 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Reinstatement, With Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
83 FR 60499 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Reinstatement, With Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
83 FR 60501 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Reinstatement, Without Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
83 FR 60395 - Order Denying Export PrivilegesPDF
83 FR 60413 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Borrower Defenses Against Loan RepaymentPDF
83 FR 60550 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Special Immigrant Visa Supervisor LocatorPDF
83 FR 60558 - Agency Information Collection Activity: Request for Restoration of Educational AssistancePDF
83 FR 60407 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60445 - Forged Steel Fittings From China and ItalyPDF
83 FR 60435 - Accreditation of Coastal Gulf and International (Luling, LA), as a Commercial LaboratoryPDF
83 FR 60433 - Approval of Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. (Donaldsonville, LA) as a Commercial GaugerPDF
83 FR 60433 - Approval of Laboratory Service Inc. (Savannah, GA) as a Commercial GaugerPDF
83 FR 60437 - Approval of Coastal Gulf and International (Baton Rouge, LA), as a Commercial GaugerPDF
83 FR 60437 - Approval of Coastal Gulf and International (Corpus Christi, TX), as a Commercial GaugerPDF
83 FR 60541 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Advance Notice, as Modified by Partial Amendment No. 1, Related to The Options Clearing Corporation's Margin Methodology for Incorporating Variations in Implied VolatilityPDF
83 FR 60434 - Approval of WFR Metering, Inc. (Houston, TX), as a Commercial GaugerPDF
83 FR 60434 - Accreditation and Approval of Atlantic Product Services, Inc. (Carteret, NJ), as a Commercial Gauger and LaboratoryPDF
83 FR 60436 - Accreditation and Approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a Commercial Gauger and LaboratoryPDF
83 FR 60341 - Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap ParticipantsPDF
83 FR 60547 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Establish Rules Governing the Give Up of a Clearing Member by a Member Organization on Exchange TransactionsPDF
83 FR 60529 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Modify Its Fee SchedulePDF
83 FR 60510 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Correct a Typographical Error in Rule 4702(b)(7)(A)PDF
83 FR 60514 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Introduce a New Midpoint Trade Now FunctionalityPDF
83 FR 60512 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Add Definitions to Rule 1000 and Amend Risk ProtectionsPDF
83 FR 60534 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Reserve OrdersPDF
83 FR 60519 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change To Allow Flexible Exchange Equity Options Where the Underlying Security Is an Exchange-Traded Fund That Is Included in the Option Penny Pilot To Be Settled in CashPDF
83 FR 60520 - Pacific Global ETF Trust and Cadence Capital Management LLCPDF
83 FR 60446 - United StatesPDF
83 FR 60557 - Notice of OFAC Sanctions ActionsPDF
83 FR 60400 - International Affairs; U.S. Fishing Opportunities in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Regulatory AreaPDF
83 FR 60427 - Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 60415 - Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing ApplicationsPDF
83 FR 60419 - Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC; Notice of FilingPDF
83 FR 60421 - Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing ApplicationsPDF
83 FR 60347 - Non-Discriminatory Open Access Transmission Tariff; CorrectionsPDF
83 FR 60419 - Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company; Notice of Amended Petition for Declaratory OrderPDF
83 FR 60416 - Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC; Notice of FilingPDF
83 FR 60414 - Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Jacksonville ProjectPDF
83 FR 60418 - Notice of Application Ready for Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions: Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P.PDF
83 FR 60384 - Modification and Amendment of Regulations To Conform to the MMA; Extension of Comment PeriodPDF
83 FR 60554 - Notice of Intent of Waiver With Respect to Land; Indianapolis International Airport, Indianapolis, IndianaPDF
83 FR 60556 - Public Notice for Intent To Release Airport PropertyPDF
83 FR 60340 - Amendment of Class E Airspace; Madison, MNPDF
83 FR 60380 - Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Carrizo Springs, TXPDF
83 FR 60503 - Request for Comments on Update to Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI)PDF
83 FR 60373 - Meeting of the National Organic Standards BoardPDF
83 FR 60425 - Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau Seek Comment on Catalog of Potentially Reimbursable Costs Incurred by Low Power Television, Television Translator and FM Broadcast StationsPDF
83 FR 60433 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
83 FR 60339 - Establishment of Class E Airspace, and Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace; Dothan, ALPDF
83 FR 60506 - Notice of Proposed Information Collection Request: IMLS Native American Library Basic Grant Program-Final Performance Report FormPDF
83 FR 60505 - Notice of Proposed Information Collection Request: Museum Application Program (MAP) ApplicationPDF
83 FR 60372 - Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota TransferPDF
83 FR 60504 - NASA Advisory Council; MeetingPDF
83 FR 60378 - Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace; Schenectady, NY, Ithaca, NY, and Albany, NYPDF
83 FR 60363 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress ReportPDF
83 FR 60389 - Notification of Submission to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services; Pesticides; Technical Amendment to Data Requirements for Antimicrobial PesticidesPDF
83 FR 60376 - Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) HelicoptersPDF
83 FR 60374 - Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) AirplanesPDF
83 FR 60337 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
83 FR 60362 - Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making Ephemeral Copies of Sound Recordings for Transmission to Business Establishments (Business Establishments III)PDF
83 FR 60411 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
83 FR 60408 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Application for an Exempted Fishing PermitPDF
83 FR 60696 - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source Performance Standards: Petroleum Refinery Sector AmendmentsPDF
83 FR 60562 - Modernization of the Labeling and Advertising Regulations for Wine, Distilled Spirits, and Malt BeveragesPDF

Issue

83 227 Monday, November 26, 2018 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Meetings: National Organic Standards Board, 60373 2018-25572 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60391-60392 2018-25615 2018-25623 2018-25625
Alcohol Tobacco Tax Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PROPOSED RULES Modernization of the Labeling and Advertising Regulations for Wine, Distilled Spirits, and Malt Beverages, 60562-60693 2018-24446 Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Response to Public Comment: United States v. CRH plc, et al., 60446-60499 2018-25593 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Meetings: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel, 60427-60428 2018-25589 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60428-60429 2018-25700 Privacy Act; Matching Program, 60429-60430 2018-25639 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Connecticut Advisory Committee, 60393 2018-25651 New York Advisory Committee, 60392-60393 2018-25644 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zones: Delaware River, Dredging Operation Equipment Recovery, Marcus Hook Range, Chester, PA, 60360-60362 2018-25668 Commerce Commerce Department See

Industry and Security Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission RULES Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 60341-60347 2018-25602 Copyright Royalty Board Copyright Royalty Board RULES Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making Ephemeral Copies of Sound Recordings for Transmission to Business Establishments (Business Establishments III), 60362-60363 2018-25458 PROPOSED RULES Modification and Amendment of Regulations to Conform to the MMA, 60384-60385 2018-25579 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60411 2018-25441 Charter Renewals: Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees, 60411 2018-25702
Defense Nuclear Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 60412-60413 2018-25831 2018-25832 Meetings; Sunshine Act: Correction, 60413 2018-25830 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Borrower Defenses Against Loan Repayment, 60413 2018-25617 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Meetings: Environmental Management Advisory Board, 60414 2018-25650
Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: The Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study—Brandon Road Integrated Feasibility Study; Will County, IL, 60412 2018-25647 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Maryland; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report, 60363-60366 2018-25556 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source Performance Standards: Petroleum Refinery Sector Amendments, 60696-60728 2018-25080 Pesticide Tolerances: Pyrifluquinazon, 60366-60372 2018-25690 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: OR: Lane County Outdoor Burning and Enforcement Procedure Rules, 60386-60389 2018-25679 Notification of Submission to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services; Pesticides; Technical Amendment to Data Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides, 60389-60390 2018-25554 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Expanded Access to Toxic Substances Control Act Confidential Business Information, 60423-60424 2018-25673 Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements Contaminated Media, 60422-60423 2018-25675 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants, 60425 2018-25671 New Source Performance Standards for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, 60424 2018-25672 Executive Office Executive Office for Immigration Review NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60499-60502 2018-25620 2018-25621 2018-25622 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: The Boeing Company Airplanes, 60337-60339 2018-25494 Amendment of Class E Airspace: Madison, MN, 60340-60341 2018-25576 Establishment of Class E Airspace, and Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace: Dothan, AL, 60339-60340 2018-25569 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) Helicopters, 60376-60378 2018-25497 Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes, 60374-60376 2018-25495 Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace: Schenectady, NY, Ithaca, NY, and Albany, NY, 60378-60380 2018-25564 Amendment of Class E Airspace: Carrizo Springs, TX, 60380-60382 2018-25575 Proposed Expansion of R-3803 Restricted Area Complex; Fort Polk, LA, 60382-60384 2018-25707 NOTICES Intent to Release Airport Property, 60556 2018-25577 Land Waivers: Indianapolis International Airport, Indianapolis, IN, 60554-60556 2018-25578 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau Seek Comment on Catalog of Potentially Reimbursable Costs Incurred by Low Power Television, Television Translator and FM Broadcast Stations, 60425-60426 2018-25571 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Transferred OTS Regulations Regarding Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations and Consent Requirements for the Exercise of Trust Powers, 60333-60337 2018-25659 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission RULES Geomagnetic Disturbance Reliability Standard; Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events, 60347-60360 2018-25678 Non-Discriminatory Open Access Transmission Tariff; Corrections, 60347 2018-25584 NOTICES Applications: Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, 60420-60421 2018-25637 Southeast Oklahoma Power Corp., 60421 2018-25585 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Erie Boulevard Hydropower, LP, 60418-60419 2018-25580 Gulf South Pipeline Co., LP, 60421-60422 2018-25641 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC; Jacksonville Project, 60414-60415 2018-25581 Filings: City of Vernon, CA, 60417 2018-25640 Oncor Electric Delivery Co., LLC, 60416-60417, 60419-60420 2018-25582 2018-25586 Hydroelectric Applications: N.E.W. Hydro, LLC, 60417-60418 2018-25638 Permit Applications: Southeast Oklahoma Power Corp., 60415-60416 2018-25587 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Alabama Power Co.; Georgia Power Co.; Gulf Power Co.; Mississippi Power Co., 60419 2018-25583 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 60426-60427 2018-25814 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 60556 2018-25822 2018-25823 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 60427 2018-25676 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 60427 2018-25674 Foreign Assets Foreign Assets Control Office NOTICES Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties, 60557-60558 2018-25592 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Housing Trust Fund Program, 60438-60439 2018-25655 Legal Instructions Concerning Applications for Full Insurance Benefits—Assignment of Multifamily Mortgages to the Secretary, 60440-60441 2018-25656 Manufactured Housing Survey, 60443-60444 2018-25649 Multifamily Financial Management Template, 60442 2018-25653 Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 Reporting NSP2, 60441-60442 2018-25654 Performance Review Board Appointments, 60439-60440 2018-25648 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Acquire Land into Trust for the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, 60444 2018-25692 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Order Denying Export Privileges: Gregory Allen Justice, 60395-60396 2018-25619 Procedures for Participating in User Testing of the New Commerce 232 Exclusion Process Portal, 60393-60395 2018-25680 Institute of Museum and Library Services Institute of Museum and Library Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Museum Application Program Application, 60505-60506 2018-25567 Native American Library Basic Grant Program—Final Performance Report Form, 60506 2018-25568 Interior Interior Department See

Indian Affairs Bureau

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application to Withdraw Tribal Funds from Trust Status, 60444-60445 2018-25726
International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 60399-60400 2018-25636 Forged Steel Fittings from Italy and the People's Republic of China, 60397-60399 2018-25703 Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, 60396-60397 2018-25704 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Forged Steel Fittings from China and Italy, 60445-60446 2018-25612 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

See

Executive Office for Immigration Review

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60502 2018-25632
Labor Department Labor Department See

Mine Safety and Health Administration

Library Library of Congress See

Copyright Royalty Board

Management Management and Budget Office NOTICES Update to Data Center Optimization Initiative, 60503 2018-25573 Mine Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Records of Preshift and Onshift Inspections of Slope and Shaft Areas of Slope and Shaft Sinking Operations at Coal Mines, 60502-60503 2018-25633 Morris K. Morris K. and Stewart L. Udall Foundation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 60503-60504 2018-25897 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60504-60505 2018-25667 Meetings: Advisory Council, 60504 2018-25565 National Foundation National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities See

Institute of Museum and Library Services

National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Charter Renewals: National Toxicology Program Board of Scientific Counselors, 60431 2018-25627 Meetings: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 60430-60431 2018-25629 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, 60431-60433 2018-25628 2018-25630 National Institute of Mental Health, 60433 2018-25570 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota Transfer, 60372 2018-25566 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60407-60408 2018-25613 Endangered and Threatened Species: Take of Anadromous Fish, 60405-60407 2018-25693 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska: Application for an Exempted Fishing Permit, 60408-60410 2018-25416 International Affairs; U.S. Fishing Opportunities in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Regulatory Area, 60400-60404 2018-25591 Meetings: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 60405 2018-25669 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 60404-60405 2018-25670 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Antarctic Conservation Act Permits, 60506-60507 2018-25642 2018-25643 2018-25646 Permits Issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act, 60507 2018-25645 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Entergy Operations, Inc., Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3, 60507-60508 2018-25695 Meetings: Omaha Public Power District, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1, Partial Site Release, 60508-60509 2018-25666 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Pipeline Safety: Information Collection Activities, Gas and Liquid Pipeline Safety Program Certification, 60557 2018-25652 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULES Ratemaking Procedures for Inbound Letter Post and Related Services, 60385-60386 2018-25665 NOTICES New Postal Products, 60509 2018-25664 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60510, 60520, 60526-60527, 60533-60534, 60540, 60550 2018-25682 2018-25683 2018-25684 2018-25685 2018-25686 2018-25687 2018-25688 2018-25689 Applications: Pacific Global ETF Trust and Cadence Capital Management, LLC, 60520-60522 2018-25594 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 60539-60540 2018-25748 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc., 60516-60519 2018-25739 Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., 60529-60530 2018-25600 Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc., 60530-60536 2018-25596 2018-25734 Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, 60512-60514, 60547-60550 2018-25597 2018-25601 NYSE American, LLC, 60519-60520, 60536-60539 2018-25595 2018-25738 The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC, 60510-60512, 60514-60516, 60522-60529, 60545-60547 2018-25598 2018-25599 2018-25731 2018-25735 2018-25736 The Options Clearing Corp., 60541-60545 2018-25606 State Department State Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Special Immigrant Visa Supervisor Locator, 60550-60551 2018-25616 State Justice State Justice Institute NOTICES Meetings: Board of Directors, 60551 2018-25657 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES Determination of Trade Surplus: Certain Sugar and Syrup Goods and Sugar-Containing Products of Chile, Morocco, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Peru, Colombia, and Panama, 60551-60554 2018-25699 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

See

Foreign Assets Control Office

Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Commercial Gaugers and Laboratories; Accreditations and Approvals: Atlantic Product Services, Inc., 60434-60435 2018-25604 Coastal Gulf and International, 60435-60437 2018-25607 2018-25608 2018-25611 Laboratory Service, Inc., 60433-60434 2018-25609 Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc., 60433 2018-25610 SGS North America, Inc., 60436-60437 2018-25603 WFR Metering, Inc., 60434 2018-25605 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Request for Restoration of Educational Assistance, 60558 2018-25614 Meetings: Creating Options for Veterans Expedited Recovery Commission, 60558-60559 2018-25624 National Academic Affiliations Council, 60559 2018-25694 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Treasury Department, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 60562-60693 2018-24446 Part III Environmental Protection Agency, 60696-60728 2018-25080 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.

83 227 Monday, November 26, 2018 Rules and Regulations FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Parts 303, 333, and 390 RIN 3064-AE23 Transferred OTS Regulations Regarding Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations and Consent Requirements for the Exercise of Trust Powers AGENCY:

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is adopting a final rule to rescind and remove regulations entitled Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations, from the Code of Federal Regulations, and to amend current FDIC regulations regarding consent to exercise trust powers to reflect the applicability of these parts to both State savings associations and State nonmember banks.

DATES:

The final rule is effective January 1, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael W. Orange, Senior Examination Specialist-Trust, Division of Risk Management and Supervision, 678-916-2289, [email protected]; Karen J. Currie, Senior Examination Specialist, Division of Risk Management and Supervision, 202-898-3981, [email protected]; Annmarie Boyd, Counsel, Legal Division, 202-898-3714, [email protected]; or Alexander S. Bonander, Attorney, Legal Division, 202-898-3621, [email protected]; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

The Dodd-Frank Act provided for a substantial reorganization of the regulation of State and Federal savings associations and their holding companies.1 Beginning July 21, 2011, the transfer date established by section 311 of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 5411, the powers, duties, and functions formerly performed by the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) were divided between the FDIC, as to State savings associations, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), as to Federal savings associations, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, as to savings and loan holding companies. Section 316(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 5414(b), provides the manner of treatment for all orders, resolutions, determinations, regulations, and advisory materials, that were issued, made, prescribed, or allowed to become effective by the OTS. The section provides that, if such regulatory issuances were in effect on the day before the transfer date, they continue to be in effect and are enforceable by or against the appropriate successor agency until they are modified, terminated, set aside, or superseded in accordance with applicable law by such successor agency, by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by operation of law.

1 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (12 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.).

Section 316(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 5414(c), further directed the FDIC and OCC to consult with one another and to publish a list of the continued OTS regulations that would be enforced by each agency. On June 14, 2011, the FDIC's Board of Directors approved a “List of OTS Regulations to be enforced by the OCC and the FDIC Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.” This list was published by the FDIC and the OCC as a Joint Notice in the Federal Register on July 6, 2011.2

2 76 FR 39247 (July 6, 2011).

Although section 312(b)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 5412(b)(2)(B)(i)(II), granted the OCC rulemaking authority relating to both State and Federal savings associations, nothing in the Dodd-Frank Act affected the FDIC's existing authority to issue regulations under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act) and other laws as the “appropriate Federal banking agency” or under similar statutory terminology. Section 312(c) of the Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. 5412(c), amended the definition of “appropriate Federal banking agency” contained in section 3(q) of the FDI Act, 12 U.S.C. 1813(q), to add State savings associations to the list of entities for which the FDIC is designated as the “appropriate Federal banking agency.” As a result, when the FDIC acts as the designated “appropriate Federal banking agency” for State savings associations and State nonmember banks, as it does here, the FDIC is authorized to issue, modify, and rescind regulations involving such institutions.

On June 14, 2011, pursuant to this authority, the FDIC's Board of Directors reissued and redesignated certain transferred regulations of the former OTS as FDIC regulations. When these transferred OTS regulations were published as new FDIC regulations in the Federal Register on August 5, 2011,3 the FDIC specifically noted that it would evaluate the transferred OTS regulations and might later incorporate them into other FDIC rules, amend them, or rescind them, as appropriate.

3 76 FR 47652 (Aug. 5, 2011).

II. Part 390 Subpart J: Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations

The OTS regulation formerly found at 12 CFR 550.10(b)(1), which covered the fiduciary powers (also known as trust powers) of State savings associations, was transferred to the FDIC with only nominal changes and is now found in the FDIC's rules at 12 CFR part 390, subpart J (Subpart J). Subpart J provides that a State savings association must conduct its fiduciary operations in accordance with applicable State law and must exercise its fiduciary powers in a safe and sound manner.

III. State Nonmember Banks and Trust Powers

Unlike the explicit requirement applicable to State savings associations in Subpart J, there is no express rule requiring State nonmember banks to conduct fiduciary operations in accordance with applicable State law and to exercise their fiduciary powers in a safe and sound manner. However, the FDIC has long recognized that State nonmember banks, like State savings associations, must comply with State law when exercising trust or fiduciary powers.4 This reflects a widely understood industry principle that the trust powers of State chartered institutions are granted under State law and are primarily administered by the State chartering authority.5

4 FDIC Trust Examination Manual, http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/examinations/trustmanual/section_10/section_x.html#B1. (The trust powers of State nonmember banks are granted under State law and the administration of trust powers primarily rests with the State as a State nonmember bank's chartering authority.).

5Id.

State nonmember banks are generally required to file an application for consent to exercise trust powers.6 Therefore, if a State nonmember bank seeks to change the nature of its current business to include trust activities, section 333.2 requires the bank to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent.7 Under section 333.101(b), however, prior written consent is not required when a State nonmember bank seeks to act as trustee or custodian of certain qualified retirement, education, and health savings accounts, or other similar accounts in which the bank's duties are essentially custodial or ministerial in nature and the acceptance of such accounts without trust powers is not contrary to applicable State law.8

6 Banks granted trust powers by statute or charter prior to December 1, 1950, are considered grandfathered from the requirement to obtain consent to exercise trust powers. See 12 CFR 303.242(a).

7 A State nonmember bank is required to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent before changing its general character or type of business. 12 CFR 333.2.

8 These accounts include Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), Self-Employed Retirement Plans, Roth IRAs, Coverdell Education Savings Accounts, Health Savings Accounts, and other accounts in which: (1) The bank's duties are essentially custodial or ministerial in nature; (2) the bank is required to invest the funds from such plans only in its own time or savings deposits or in any other assets at the direction of the customer; and (3) the bank's acceptance of such accounts without trust powers is not contrary to applicable State law. See 12 CFR 333.101(b).

Section 303.242 contains application procedures that a State nonmember bank must follow to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent before engaging in trust activities.9 Prior to granting such consent, the FDIC considers whether the bank will conduct trust operations in a safe and sound manner, consistent with State law.

9 State nonmember banks must file an application to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent to exercise trust powers unless: (1) The bank received authority to exercise trust powers by its chartering authority prior to December 1, 1950; or (2) the insured depository institution continues to conduct trust activities pursuant to the authority granted to it by its chartering authority subsequent to a charter conversion or withdrawal from membership in the Federal Reserve System. 12 CFR 303.242(a).

IV. The Proposed Rule

On April 10, 2018, the FDIC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR or Proposed Rule) entitled Transferred OTS Regulations Regarding Fiduciary Powers of State Savings Associations and Consent Requirements for the Exercise of Trust Powers.10 The NPR proposed to: (1) Rescind Subpart J in its entirety; (2) add a new section 333.3 explicitly providing that State savings associations and State nonmember banks must obtain the FDIC's prior written consent before exercising trust powers by following the procedures contained in section 303.242; (3) revise section 333.101 to provide that State savings associations, as well as State nonmember banks, are not considered to be exercising trust powers when acting as trustees or custodians for certain qualified retirement, education, and health savings accounts, or other similar accounts in which the bank's duties are essentially custodial or ministerial in nature and the acceptance of such accounts without trust powers is not contrary to applicable State law; and (4) revise section 303.242 to make its application procedures applicable to both State savings associations and State nonmember banks and incorporate a listing of documents required to be submitted with the application for consent to exercise trust powers.

10 83 FR 15327 (Apr. 10, 2018).

V. Comments

The FDIC issued the NPR with a 60-day comment period that closed on June 11, 2018. The FDIC requested comments on all aspects of the Proposed Rule, including whether Subpart J should be retained and what positive or negative impacts could result from the proposed revisions to parts 333 and 303, including the impact on State savings associations not currently exercising trust powers that would need to obtain FDIC consent if they chose to do so in the future. The FDIC received no comments on the Proposed Rule. Accordingly, the FDIC is adopting the Proposed Rule largely as proposed, but without incorporating the listing of documents in section 303.242. As discussed further below, this change is intended to avoid unnecessary duplication or confusion with the existing application form and further regulatory revisions in the event of any future changes to the documentation listed on the form.

VI. Explanation of the Final Rule

As discussed in the NPR, the FDIC concluded that the rescission of Subpart J would streamline the FDIC rules and regulations, and no comments were received on this issue. Therefore, the final rule removes and rescinds 12 CFR part 390, subpart J in its entirety.

The final rule adds a new section 333.3, unchanged from the NPR, explicitly requiring State savings associations and State nonmember banks to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent before exercising trust powers. For State nonmember banks, section 333.3 makes explicit the FDIC's existing requirement that State nonmember banks receive the FDIC's consent before initially exercising trust powers, as such an action would constitute a change in the bank's general character or business under 12 CFR 333.2. For State savings associations, Section 333.3 adds a new requirement to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent should they choose in the future to exercise trust powers granted by their State chartering authorities. In effect, section 333.3 makes the requirement to file an application consistent for both State savings associations and State nonmember banks.

The final rule, like the NPR, also revises section 333.101(b) to permit both State savings associations and State nonmember banks to act as custodians for qualifying retirement, education, and health savings accounts, or other similar accounts without being deemed to exercise trust powers, and therefore without obtaining the FDIC's prior written consent.

The final rule, like the NPR, makes the application procedures in section 303.242 applicable to both State savings associations and State nonmember banks. Accordingly, under section 303.242(a) of the final rule, neither State savings associations nor State nonmember banks are required to receive the FDIC's prior written consent to exercise trust powers when: (1) The institution received authority to exercise trust powers from its chartering authority prior to December 1, 1950; or (2) the institution continues to conduct trust activities pursuant to authority granted by its chartering authority subsequent to a charter conversion or withdrawal from membership in the Federal Reserve System. The NPR originally proposed to amend section 303.242 (c) to list specific documents typically filed as part of an application to exercise trust powers.11 Upon further consideration, the FDIC determined not to list these items in the final rule in order to avoid duplication with the items already listed in the instructions on the existing application form for consent to exercise trust powers and the need for additional, corresponding changes to section 303.242(c) to reflect any future updates to the existing form.12 Accordingly, the final rule does not change section 303.242(c), which continues to provide that the required filing shall consist of the completed application form.13

11 83 FR 15327, 15320.

12 FDIC, Application for Consent to Exercise Trust Powers, https://www.fdic.gov/formsdocuments/6200-09.pdf.

13 12 CFR 303.242(c).

VII. Regulatory Process A. The Paperwork Reduction Act

Certain provisions of the final rule contain “collection of information” requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, codified at 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521. In accordance with the PRA, the FDIC may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection of information is 3064-0025.14 As required by the PRA and OMB implementing regulations (5 CFR part 1320), when the NPR was published, the FDIC submitted the information collection requirements contained in this final rulemaking to OMB for review and approval. OMB filed its Notice of Action preapproving this submission on May 16, 2018.

14 The information collection for Application for Consent to Exercise Trust Powers, OMB No. 3064-0025, was renewed by OMB on August 30, 2017, and now expires on August 31, 2020.

The final rule, like the NPR, would rescind and remove Part 390, Subpart J from Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations, amend Parts 303 and 333 to clarify the existing consent requirements for State nonmember banks, and incorporate references to State savings associations into those parts. These changes would not add additional burden to the FDIC's current information collection under OMB control number 3064-0025, Application for Consent to Exercise Trust Powers. However, the revision of Parts 303 and 333 to include State savings associations as potential filers would add additional burden to the FDIC's current information collection under OMB control number 3064-0025, as State savings associations would be required to complete the designated application and submit required documentation to comply with Parts 303 and 333. Currently, there are a total of forty one State savings associations. There is only one State savings association currently exercising trust powers, so there are forty State savings associations that would potentially need to seek the FDIC's consent pursuant to the proposed revisions to Parts 303 and 333 before exercising trust powers.15

15 Call Report Data, June 2018.

In the NPR, the FDIC proposed to revise this information collection as follows:

Title: Application for Consent to Exercise Trust Powers.

OMB Number: 3064-0025.

Form Number: FDIC 6200/09.

Affected Public: Insured State nonmember banks and insured State savings associations wishing to exercise trust powers.

Type of burden Estimated
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Estimated
  • hours per
  • response
  • Frequency of response Total annual
  • estimated
  • burden
  • (hours)
  • Eligible depository institutions Reporting 9 8 On Occasion 72 Not-eligible depository institutions Reporting 4 24 On Occasion 96 Totals 13 168

    The FDIC did not receive any comments on its proposed revisions to this information collection. Accordingly, the information collection revisions are adopted as proposed in the NPR and replicated in the chart above.

    B. The Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 16 requires that, in connection with a final rulemaking, an agency prepare and make available for public comment a final regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the impact of the proposed rule on small entities (defined in regulations promulgated by the United States Small Business Administration to include banking organizations with total assets of less than or equal to $550 million). However, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required if the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and publishes its certification and a short explanatory statement in the Federal Register together with the rule.17 As discussed above and in the NPR, the FDIC has authority to issue, modify and rescind regulations as the appropriate Federal banking agency for State savings associations and State nonmember banks. In addition to the approach taken in the NPR and final rule, the FDIC also considered the alternative of maintaining the status quo, which would have retained the separate regulatory regimes for State savings associations and State non-member banks.

    16 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    17 The FDIC supervises 3,675institutions, of which 2,850 are “small entities” according to the terms of RFA. There are 2,832 small state non-member banks and 38 small state savings associations. See Call Report Data, June 2018.

    The final rule amends part 333 to state that both State savings associations and State nonmember banks seeking to exercise trust powers must obtain FDIC consent. The final rule is not expected to impact State nonmember banks, as it results in no substantive changes for those institutions. Prior to the final rule, State nonmember banks were subject to the longstanding interpretation that the initial exercise of trust powers granted by a chartering authority constituted a change in the character of the bank's business under 12 CFR 333.2, and thereby required the FDIC's prior written approval. The final rule clarifies this issue by explicitly stating the longstanding requirement that State nonmember banks obtain the FDIC's prior written approval before exercising trust powers for the first time.

    As discussed above, the revisions to part 333 require a filing by those State savings associations that seek to exercise trust powers in the future. However, a State savings association's application for the FDIC's consent to exercise trust powers would be a one-time process that is not anticipated to create a significant economic impact. The information requested on the application form would require a State savings association to identify the type of trust power it seeks to exercise and to provide documentation that includes proof of the adoption of the FDIC's Statement of Principles of Trust Department Management, identification of the applicable trust officer, trust committee, trust counsel, servicing arrangements, proof of the requisite approvals by the appropriate State authority, a projection of the proposed trust activity's three-year performance, and a statement of its impact on the applicant.18

    18 FDIC 6200/09 (10-05).

    Based on the FDIC's supervisory experience, most of the documentation required, such as State approval, servicing arrangements, and designation of personnel to serve as appropriate trust counsel, trust officer, and trust committee directors, is based on information and resources that a State savings association applicant would already possess or have to establish in order to exercise trust powers, regardless of whether it seeks the FDIC's prior written consent. Submitting existing information is not expected to create significant, additional expenses for a State savings association seeking the FDIC's prior written consent to exercise trust powers. The FDIC estimates that it will receive relatively few applications, given the small overall number of State savings associations (40) that would be affected by the rule if they sought to exercise trust powers. In addition, no comments were received pertaining to the RFA discussion in the NPR.

    For these reasons, the FDIC certifies that the final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, within the meaning of those terms as used in the RFA. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.

    C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The OMB has determined that the final rule is not a “major rule” within the meaning of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).19 As required by SBREFA, the FDIC will submit the final rule and other appropriate reports to Congress and the Government Accountability Office for review.

    19 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.

    D. Plain Language

    Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act 20 requires each Federal banking agency to use plain language in all of its proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. In the NPR, the FDIC invited comments on whether the Proposed Rule was clearly stated and effectively organized, and how the FDIC might make it easier to understand. Although no comments were received, the FDIC has sought to present the final rule in a simple and straightforward manner.

    20 Public Law 106-102, section 722, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (1999).

    E. Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994

    Pursuant to section 302(a) of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act (RCDRIA),21 in determining the effective date and administrative compliance requirements for a new regulation that imposes additional reporting, disclosure, or other requirements on insured depository institutions, each Federal banking agency must consider, consistent with principles of safety and soundness and the public interest, any administrative burdens that such regulations would place on depository institutions, including small depository institutions, and customers of depository institutions, as well as the benefits of such regulations. In addition, section 302(b) of RCDRIA requires new regulations and amendments to regulations that impose additional reporting, disclosure, or other new requirements on insured depository institutions generally to take effect on the first day of a calendar quarter that begins on or after the date on which the regulations are published in final form.22

    21 12 U.S.C. 4802(a).

    22 12 U.S.C. 4802.

    In accordance with these provisions, the FDIC considered any administrative burdens, as well as benefits, that the final rule would place on depository institutions and their customers in determining the effective date and administrative compliance requirements of the final rule. The final rule imposes a new requirement on State savings associations to obtain the FDIC's consent before exercising trust powers granted by State chartering authorities and, in accordance with RCDRIA and the Administrative Procedure Act,23 will be effective no earlier than the first day of the calendar quarter that is at least 30 days following the date on which the final rule is published in the Federal Register. However, as discussed above, the application primarily requires submission of pre-existing documentation and is not expected to be burdensome for depository institutions or their customers. The final rule also provides greater clarity to FDIC-supervised institutions and results in greater consistency in the application process.

    23 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

    F. The Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under section 2222 of the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996 (EGRPRA), the FDIC is required to review all of its regulations at least once every ten years in order to identify any outdated or otherwise unnecessary regulations imposed on insured institutions.24 The FDIC, along with the other Federal banking agencies, submitted a Joint Report to Congress on March 21, 2017 (EGRPRA Report), discussing how the review was conducted, what has been done to date to address regulatory burden, and further measures to address issues identified during the review process. As noted in the EGRPRA Report, the FDIC is continuing to streamline and clarify its regulations through the OTS rule integration process. By removing outdated or unnecessary regulations, such as Subpart J, and amending Parts 303 and 333, this rule complements other actions the FDIC has taken, separately and with the other Federal banking agencies, to further the EGRPRA mandate.

    24 Public Law 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (1996).

    List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 303

    Administrative practice and procedure, Bank deposit insurance, Banks, banking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations, Trusts and trustees.

    12 CFR Part 333

    Banks, banking, Corporate powers, Savings associations, Trusts and trustees.

    12 CFR Part 390

    Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Aged, Civil rights, Conflict of interests, Credit, Crime, Equal employment opportunity, Fair housing, Government employees, Individuals with disabilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.

    Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation amends 12 CFR parts 308, 333, and 390 as follows:

    PART 303—FILING PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 303 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 378, 1464, 1813, 1815, 1817, 1818, 1819(a) (Seventh and Tenth), 1820, 1823, 1828, 1831a, 1831e, 1831o, 1831p-1, 1831w, 1835a, 1843(l), 3104, 3105, 3108, 3207, 5414, 5415 and 15 U.S.C. 1601-1607.

    2. Revise § 303.242 to read as follows:
    § 303.242 Exercise of trust powers.

    (a) Scope. This section contains the procedures to be followed by a State nonmember bank or State savings association that seeks to obtain the FDIC's prior written consent to exercise trust powers. The FDIC's prior written consent to exercise trust powers is not required in the following circumstances:

    (1) Where a State nonmember bank or State savings association received authority to exercise trust powers from its chartering authority prior to December 1, 1950; or

    (2) Where the institution continues to conduct trust activities pursuant to authority granted by its chartering authority subsequent to a charter conversion or withdrawal from membership in the Federal Reserve System.

    (b) Where to file. Applicants shall submit to the appropriate FDIC office a completed form, “Application for Consent to Exercise Trust Powers.” This form may be obtained from any FDIC regional director.

    (c) Content of filing. The filing shall consist of the completed trust application form.

    (d) Additional information. The FDIC may request additional information at any time during processing of the filing.

    (e) Expedited processing for eligible depository institutions. An application filed under this section by an eligible depository institution as defined in § 303.2(r) will be acknowledged in writing by the FDIC and will receive expedited processing, unless the applicant is notified in writing to the contrary and provided with the basis for that decision. The FDIC may remove an application from expedited processing for any of the reasons set forth in § 303.11(c)(2.). Absent such removal, an application processed under expedited procedures will be deemed approved 30 days after the FDIC's receipt of a substantially complete application.

    (f) Standard processing. For those applications that are not processed pursuant to the expedited procedures, the FDIC will provide the applicant with written notification of the final action when the decision is rendered.

    PART 333—EXTENSION OF CORPORATE POWERS 3. The authority citation for part 333 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 1816; 1817(i); 1818; 1819(a) (“Seventh”, “Eighth”, and “Tenth”), 1828, 1828(m), 1831p-1(c), 5414 and 5415.

    4. Add § 333.3 to read as follows:
    § 333.3 Consent required for exercise of trust powers.

    Except as provided in 12 CFR 303.242(a), a State nonmember bank or State savings association seeking to exercise trust powers must obtain prior written consent from the FDIC. Procedures for obtaining the FDIC's prior written consent are set forth in 12 CFR 303.242.

    5. Revise § 333.101(b) to read as follows:
    § 333.101 Prior consent not required.

    (b) An insured State nonmember bank or State savings association, not exercising trust powers, may act as trustee or custodian of Individual Retirement Accounts established pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 408), Self-Employed Retirement Plans established pursuant to the Self-Employed Individuals Retirement Act of 1962 (26 U.S.C. 401), Roth Individual Retirement Accounts and Coverdell Education Savings Accounts established pursuant to the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (26 U.S.C. 408A and 530 respectively), Health Savings Accounts established pursuant to the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (26 U.S.C. 223), and other similar accounts without the prior written consent of the Corporation provided:

    (1) The bank's or savings association's duties as trustee or custodian are essentially custodial or ministerial in nature,

    (2) The bank or savings association is required to invest the funds from such plans only

    (i) In its own time or savings deposits, or

    (ii) In any other assets at the direction of the customer, provided the bank or savings association does not exercise any investment discretion or provide any investment advice with respect to such account assets, and

    (3) The bank's or savings association's acceptance of such accounts without trust powers is not contrary to applicable State law.

    PART 390—REGULATIONS TRANSFERRED FROM THE OFFICE OF THRIFT SUPERVISION 6. The authority citation for part 390 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 1819.

    Subpart J—[Removed and reserved] 7. Remove and reserve subpart J, consisting of § 390.190. Dated at Washington, DC, on November 20, 2018.

    By order of the Board of Directors.

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25659 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0582; Product Identifier 2018-NM-085-AD; Amendment 39-19503; AD 93-14-19R1] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule; removal.

    SUMMARY:

    We are removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 93-14-19, which applied to certain The Boeing Company Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. AD 93-14-19 required inspections for disbonding of the trailing edge wedge of the leading edge slat; and repair, if necessary. We issued AD 93-14-19 to prevent the loss of a trailing edge wedge, which could result in reduced maneuver margins, reduced speed margins to stall, and unexpected roll before stall warning, all of which would adversely affect the controllability of the airplane. Since we issued AD 93-14-19, an updated stability and control analysis showed that the worst-case scenario of a trailing edge wedge disbond in-flight would not adversely affect the controllability of the airplane. Accordingly, AD 93-14-19 is removed.

    DATES:

    This AD becomes effective November 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0582; 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 regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations (telephone 800-647-5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3524; email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by removing AD 93-14-19, Amendment 39-8644 (58 FR 41177, August 3, 1993) (“AD 93-14-19”). AD 93-14-19 applied to certain The Boeing Company Model 767-200 and -300 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 17, 2018 (83 FR 33162) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by an updated stability and control analysis that showed the worst-case scenario of a trailing edge wedge disbond in-flight would not adversely affect the controllability of the airplane. The NPRM proposed to remove AD 93-14-19. We are issuing this AD to remove AD 93-14-19.

    Comments

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

    Support for the NPRM

    Boeing and Delta Air Lines (DAL) stated their support for the proposed AD. United Airlines stated that it has no objection to the proposed rule.

    Request to Withdraw the NPRM

    Airline Pilots Association, International (ALPA) stated that it opposes the rescission of AD 93-14-19 because the FAA continues to issue similar ADs effective to other airplanes. ALPA also noted that the required actions of AD 93-14-19 are relatively low cost.

    From these statements, we infer that ALPA was requesting that we withdraw the NPRM. We do not agree with the commenter's request. Updated stability and control data for the affected airplanes shows that damage and disbonding of the leading edge slat wedge is insufficient to be considered an airplane-level safety item. The updated data shows that there is sufficient lateral control up to stick shaker to counter any rolling moment caused by a missing or damaged slat wedge. Therefore, we have not changed this AD in this regard.

    Request to Rescind Similar AD on another Airplane Model

    DAL asked if AD 2017-22-12, Amendment 39-19092 (82 FR 55027, November 20, 2017) (“AD 2017-22-12”), would also be considered for rescission. DAL reasoned that AD 2017-22-12 required, among other things, inspection of the same structure (the trailing edge slat wedge of the leading edge slats) on The Boeing Company Model 757 series airplanes for the same reason (disbonding of slats) as AD 93-14-19.

    We agree to clarify. We do not find it appropriate to rescind AD 2017-22-12 at this time. The flight characteristics of The Boeing Company Model 757 series airplanes are different than the flight characteristics of The Boeing Company Model 767 series airplanes, and the stability and control analysis of the one model does not transfer to the other model. However, if new data indicates that the identified unsafe condition no longer exists on Model 757 airplanes, we might consider additional rulemaking at that time. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

    Conclusion

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

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

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

    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.

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 93-14-19, Amendment 39-8644 (58 FR 41177, August 3, 1993), and adding the following new AD: 93-14-19R1 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19503; Docket No. FAA-2018-0582; Product Identifier 2018-NM-085-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective November 26, 2018.

    (b) Affected AD

    This AD removes AD 93-14-19, Amendment 39-8644 (58 FR 41177, August 3, 1993).

    (c) Applicability

    This action applies to The Boeing Company Model 767 series airplanes, certificated in any category, line numbers 1 through 488 inclusive.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206-231-3524; email: [email protected].

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on November 8, 2018. Chris Spangenberg, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25494 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0744; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASO-14] RIN 2120-AA66 Establishment of Class E Airspace, and Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace; Dothan, AL AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action establishes Class E surface airspace at Dothan Regional Airport, Dothan, AL. The Class E surface airspace is established for the safety of aircraft landing and departing the airport when the air traffic control tower is closed. Also, this action amends Class D airspace by updating the airport's name and geographic coordinates, as well as replacing the outdated term `Airport/Facility Directory' with `Chart Supplement'. Additionally, the geographic coordinates of the airport and Wiregrass VORTAC are adjusted in the associated Class E airspace to match the FAA's aeronautical database; as well as removing the part-time status of the airspace for Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

    DATES:

    Effective 0901 UTC, January 3, 2019. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

    ADDRESSES:

    FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

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

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 47581, September 20, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0744 to establish Class E surface airspace, and amend Class D airspace, Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Dothan Regional Airport, Dothan, AL. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs 5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively of FAA Order 7400.11C dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class D and Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71:

    Amends Class D airspace at Dothan Regional Airport, Dothan, AL by recognizing the airport name change to Dothan Regional Airport (formerly Dothan Airport), and adjusting the geographic coordinates of the airport to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database. Also, this action makes an editorial change replacing the term “Airport/Facility Directory” with the term “Chart Supplement” in the airspace legal description;

    Establishes Class E surface area airspace within a 4.7-mile radius of Dothan Regional Airport, Dothan, AL, for the safety of aircraft landing and departing the airport after the air traffic control tower closes;

    Amends Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area by adjusting the geographic coordinates of the airport and the Wiregrass VORTAC to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database. In addition, the part-time status is removed from this airspace description, as the airspace is continuously active; and

    Amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Dothan Regional Airport, Dothan, AL, by adjusting the geographic coordinates of the airport and the Wiregrass VORTAC to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database, and by recognizing the airport name change to Dothan Regional Airport (formerly Dothan Airport).

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASO AL D Dothan, AL [Amended] Dothan Regional Airport, AL (Lat. 31°19′16″ N, long. 85°26′58″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,900 feet MSL within a 4.7-mile radius of Dothan Regional Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas. ASO AL E2 Dothan, AL [New] Dothan Regional Airport, AL (Lat. 31°19′16″ N, long. 85°26′58″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.7-mile radius of Dothan Regional Airport. This Class E surface airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area. ASO AL E4 Dothan, AL [Amended] Dothan Regional Airport, AL (Lat. 31°19′16″ N, long. 85°26′58″ W) Wiregrass VORTAC (Lat. 31°17′05″ N, long. 85°25′52″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3.2 miles each side of the Wiregrass VORTAC 156° radial, extending from the 4.7-mile radius of Dothan Regional Airport to 7-miles southeast of the VORTAC.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO AL E5 Dothan, AL [Amended] Dothan Regional Airport, AL (Lat. 31°19′16″ N, long. 85°26′58″ W) Wiregrass VORTAC (Lat. 31°17′05″ N, long. 85°25′52″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of Dothan Regional Airport within 3.2 miles each side of Wiregrass VORTAC 156° radial, extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 7 miles SE of the VORTAC excluding that airspace within the Fort Rucker, AL, Class E airspace area.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on November 14, 2018. Matthew Cathcart, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25569 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0194; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-6] RIN 2120-AA66 Amendment of Class E Airspace; Madison, MN AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action modifies Class E airspace extending up to 700 feet above the surface at Lac Qui Parle County Airport, Madison, MN, to accommodate new standard instrument approach procedures for instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport. The FAA is taking this action due to the decommissioning of the Madison non-directional radio beacon (NDB) and cancellation of the associated approach. This enhances the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.

    DATES:

    Effective 0901 UTC, February 28, 2019. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

    ADDRESSES:

    FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Walter Tweedy, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5900.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend controlled airspace in Class E airspace, at Lac Qui Parle County Airport, Madison, MN, to support instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

    History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 FR 44248; August 30, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2018-0194 to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Lac Qui Parle County Airport, Madison, MN. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

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

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius (increased from a 6.3-mile radius) at Lac Qui Parle County Airport, Madison, MN. The segment 7.4 miles southeast of the airport will be removed due to the decommissioning of the Madison NDB and cancellation of the associated approach. This action enhances the safety and management of the standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airport.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AGL MN E5 Madison, MN [Amended] Madison-Lac Qui Parle Airport, MN (Lat. 44°59′11″ N, long. 96°10′40″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of the Madison-Lac Qui Parle Airport, MN.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 14, 2018. Anthony Schneider, Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25576 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 17 CFR Part 23 RIN 3038-AE71 Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”) is adopting amendments (“Final Rule”) to its margin requirements for uncleared swaps for swap dealers (“SD”) and major swap participants (“MSP”) for which there is no prudential regulator (“CFTC Margin Rule”). The Commission is adopting these amendments in light of the rules recently adopted by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) (collectively, the “QFC Rules”) that impose restrictions on certain uncleared swaps and uncleared security-based swaps and other financial contracts. Specifically, the Commission is amending the definition of “eligible master netting agreement” in the CFTC Margin Rule to ensure that master netting agreements of firms subject to the CFTC Margin Rule are not excluded from the definition of “eligible master netting agreement” based solely on such agreements' compliance with the QFC Rules. The Commission also is amending the CFTC Margin Rule such that any legacy uncleared swap (i.e., an uncleared swap entered into before the applicable compliance date of the CFTC Margin Rule) that is not now subject to the margin requirements of the CFTC Margin Rule will not become so subject if it is amended solely to comply with the QFC Rules. These amendments are consistent with amendments that the Board, FDIC, OCC, the Farm Credit Administration (“FCA”), and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA” and, together with the Board, FDIC, OCC, and FCA, the “Prudential Regulators”), jointly published in the Federal Register on October 10, 2018.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective December 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Matthew Kulkin, Director, (202) 418-5213, [email protected]; Frank Fisanich, Chief Counsel, (202) 418-5949, [email protected]; or Jacob Chachkin, Special Counsel, (202) 418-5496, [email protected], Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background A. The CFTC Margin Rule

    Section 731 of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) 1 added a new section 4s to the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) 2 setting forth various requirements for SDs and MSPs. Section 4s(e) of the CEA directs the Commission to adopt rules establishing minimum initial and variation margin requirements on all swaps 3 that are (i) entered into by an SD or MSP for which there is no Prudential Regulator 4 (collectively, “covered swap entities” or “CSEs”) and (ii) not cleared by a registered derivatives clearing organization (“uncleared swaps”).5 To offset the greater risk to the SD or MSP 6 and the financial system arising from the use of uncleared swaps, these requirements must (i) help ensure the safety and soundness of the SD or MSP and (ii) be appropriate for the risk associated with the uncleared swaps held as an SD or MSP.7

    1 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).

    2 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.

    3 For the definition of swap, see section 1a(47) of the CEA and Commission regulation 1.3. 7 U.S.C. 1a(47) and 17 CFR 1.3. It includes, among other things, an interest rate swap, commodity swap, credit default swap, and currency swap.

    4See 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(1)(B). SDs and MSPs for which there is a Prudential Regulator must meet the margin requirements for uncleared swaps established by the applicable Prudential Regulator. 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(1)(A). See also 7 U.S.C. 1a(39) (defining the term “Prudential Regulator” to include the Board; the OCC; the FDIC; the FCA; and the FHFA). The definition further specifies the entities for which these agencies act as Prudential Regulators. The Prudential Regulators published final margin requirements in November 2015. See Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 80 FR 74840 (Nov. 30, 2015) (“Prudential Margin Rule”).

    5See 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(2)(B)(ii). In Commission regulation 23.151, the Commission further defined this statutory language to mean all swaps that are not cleared by a registered derivatives clearing organization or a derivatives clearing organization that the Commission has exempted from registration as provided under the CEA. 17 CFR 23.151.

    6 For the definitions of SD and MSP, see section 1a of the CEA and Commission regulation 1.3. 7 U.S.C. 1a and 17 CFR 1.3.

    7 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(3)(A).

    To this end, the Commission promulgated the CFTC Margin Rule in January 2016,8 establishing requirements for a CSE to collect and post initial margin 9 and variation margin 10 for uncleared swaps. These requirements vary based on the type of counterparty to such swaps.11 These requirements generally apply only to uncleared swaps entered into on or after the compliance date applicable to a particular CSE and its counterparty (“covered swap”).12 An uncleared swap entered into prior to a CSE's applicable compliance date for a particular counterparty (“legacy swap”) is generally not subject to the margin requirements in the CFTC Margin Rule.13

    8 Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 81 FR 636 (Jan. 6, 2016). The CFTC Margin Rule, which became effective April 1, 2016, is codified in part 23 of the Commission's regulations. 17 CFR 23.150-23.159, 23.161.

    9 Initial margin, as defined in Commission regulation 23.151 (17 CFR 23.151), is the collateral (calculated as provided by § 23.154 of the Commission's regulations) that is collected or posted in connection with one or more uncleared swaps. Initial margin is intended to secure potential future exposure following default of a counterparty (i.e., adverse changes in the value of an uncleared swap that may arise during the period of time when it is being closed out), while variation margin is provided from one counterparty to the other in consideration of changes that have occurred in the mark-to-market value of the uncleared swap. See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 664 and 683.

    10 Variation margin, as defined in Commission regulation 23.151 (17 CFR 23.151), is the collateral provided by a party to its counterparty to meet the performance of its obligation under one or more uncleared swaps between the parties as a result of a change in the value of such obligations since the trade was executed or the last time such collateral was provided.

    11See Commission regulations 23.152 and 23.153, 17 CFR 23.152 and 23.153. For example, the CFTC Margin Rule does not require a CSE to collect margin from, or post margin to, a counterparty that is neither a swap entity nor a financial end user (each as defined in 17 CFR 23.151). Pursuant to section 2(e) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 2(e), each counterparty to an uncleared swap must be an eligible contract participant (“ECP”), as defined in section 1a(18) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 1a(18).

    12 Pursuant to Commission regulation 23.161, compliance dates for the CFTC Margin Rule are staggered such that SDs must come into compliance in a series of phases over four years. The first phase affected SDs and their counterparties, each with the largest aggregate outstanding notional amounts of uncleared swaps and certain other financial products. These SDs began complying with both the initial and variation margin requirements of the CFTC Margin Rule on September 1, 2016. The second phase began March 1, 2017, and required SDs to comply with the variation margin requirements of Commission regulation 23.153 with all relevant counterparties not covered in the first phase. See 17 CFR 23.161. On each September 1 thereafter ending with September 1, 2020, SDs will begin to comply with the initial margin requirements with counterparties with successively lesser outstanding notional amounts.

    13See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 and Commission regulation 23.161. 17 CFR 23.161.

    To the extent that more than one uncleared swap is executed between a CSE and its covered counterparty, the CFTC Margin Rule permits the netting of required margin amounts of each swap under certain circumstances.14 In particular, the CFTC Margin Rule, subject to certain limitations, permits a CSE to calculate initial margin and variation margin, respectively, on an aggregate net basis across uncleared swaps that are executed under the same eligible master netting agreement (“EMNA”).15 Moreover, the CFTC Margin Rule permits swap counterparties to identify one or more separate netting portfolios (i.e., a specified group of uncleared swaps the margin obligations of which will be netted only against each other) under the same EMNA, including having separate netting portfolios for covered swaps and legacy swaps.16 A netting portfolio that contains only legacy swaps is not subject to the initial and variation margin requirements set out in the CFTC Margin Rule.17 However, if a netting portfolio contains any covered swaps, the entire netting portfolio (including all legacy swaps) is subject to such requirements.18

    14See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 and Commission regulations 23.152(c) and 23.153(d). 17 CFR 23.152(c) and 23.153(d).

    15Id. The term EMNA is defined in Commission regulation 23.151. 17 CFR 23.151. Generally, an EMNA creates a single legal obligation for all individual transactions covered by the agreement upon an event of default following certain specified permitted stays. For example, an International Swaps and Derivatives Association (“ISDA”) form Master Agreement may be an EMNA, if it meets the specified requirements in the EMNA definition.

    16See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 and Commission regulations 23.152(c)(2)(ii) and 23.153(d)(2)(ii). 17 CFR 23.152(c)(2)(ii) and 23.153(d)(2)(ii).

    17Id.

    18Id.

    A legacy swap may lose its legacy treatment under the CFTC Margin Rule, causing it to become a covered swap and causing any netting portfolio in which it is included to be subject to the requirements of the CFTC Margin Rule. For reasons discussed in the CFTC Margin Rule, the Commission elected not to extend the meaning of legacy swaps to include (1) legacy swaps that are amended in a material or nonmaterial manner; (2) novations of legacy swaps; and (3) new swaps that result from portfolio compression of legacy swaps.19 Therefore, and as relevant here, a legacy swap that is amended after the applicable compliance date may become a covered swap subject to the initial and variation margin requirements in the CFTC Margin Rule. In that case, netting portfolios that were intended to contain only legacy swaps and, thus, not be subject to the CFTC Margin Rule may become so subject.

    19See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 675. The Commission notes that certain limited relief has been given from this standard. See CFTC Staff Letter No. 17-52 (Oct. 27. 2017), available at http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/17-52.pdf.

    B. The QFC Rules

    In late 2017, as part of the broader regulatory reform effort following the financial crisis to promote U.S. financial stability and increase the resolvability and resiliency of U.S. global systemically important banking institutions (“U.S. GSIBs”) 20 and the U.S. operations of foreign global systemically important banking institutions (together with U.S. GSIBS, “GSIBs”), the Board, FDIC, and OCC adopted the QFC Rules. The QFC Rules establish restrictions on and requirements for uncleared qualified financial contracts 21 (collectively, “Covered QFCs”) of GSIBs, the subsidiaries of U.S. GSIBs, and certain other very large OCC-supervised national banks and Federal savings associations (collectively, “Covered QFC Entities”).22 They are designed to help ensure that a failed company's passage through a resolution proceeding—such as bankruptcy or the special resolution process created by the Dodd-Frank Act—would be more orderly, thereby helping to mitigate destabilizing effects on the rest of the financial system.23 Two aspects of the QFC Rules help achieve this goal.24

    20See 12 CFR 217.402 (defining global systemically important banking institution).

    21 Qualified financial contract (“QFC”) is defined in section 210(c)(8)(D) of the Dodd-Frank Act to mean any securities contract, commodity contract, forward contract, repurchase agreement, swap agreement, and any similar agreement that the FDIC determines by regulation, resolution, or order to be a qualified financial contract. 12 U.S.C. 5390(c)(8)(D).

    22See, e.g., 12 CFR 252.82(c) (defining Covered QFC). See also 82 FR 42882 (Sep. 12, 2017) (for the Board's QFC Rule). See also 82 FR 50228 (Oct. 30, 2017) (for FDIC's QFC Rule). See also 82 FR 56630 (Nov. 29, 2017) (for the OCC's QFC Rule). The effective date of the Board's QFC Rule is November 13, 2017, and the effective date for the OCC's QFC Rule and the substance of the FDIC's QFC Rule is January 1, 2018. The QFC Rules include a phased-in conformance period for a Covered QFC Entity, beginning on January 1, 2019 and ending on January 1, 2020, that varies depending upon the counterparty type of the Covered QFC Entity. See, e.g., 12 CFR 252.82(f).

    23See, e.g., Board's QFC Rule at 42883. In particular, the QFC Rules seek to facilitate the orderly resolution of a failed GSIB by limiting the ability of the firm's Covered QFC counterparties to terminate such contracts immediately upon entry of the GSIB or one of its affiliates into resolution. Given the large volume of QFCs to which covered entities are a party, the exercise of default rights en masse as a result of the failure or significant distress of a covered entity could lead to failure and a disorderly resolution if the failed firm were forced to sell off assets, which could spread contagion by increasing volatility and lowering the value of similar assets held by other firms, or to withdraw liquidity that it had provided to other firms.

    24Id.

    First, the QFC Rules generally require the Covered QFCs of Covered QFC Entities to contain contractual provisions explicitly providing that any default rights or restrictions on the transfer of the Covered QFC are limited to the same extent as they would be pursuant to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDI Act”)25 and Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act. Requiring these points to be stated as explicit contractual provisions in the Covered QFCs is expected to reduce the risk that the relevant limitations on default rights or transfer restrictions would be challenged by a court in a foreign jurisdiction.26

    25 12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.

    26See, e.g., Board's QFC Rule at 42883 and 42890 and 12 CFR 252.83(b).

    Second, the QFC Rules generally prohibit Covered QFCs from allowing counterparties to Covered QFC Entities to exercise default rights related, directly or indirectly, to the entry into resolution of an affiliate of the Covered QFC Entity (“cross-default rights”).27 This is to ensure that if an affiliate of a solvent Covered QFC Entity fails, the counterparties of that solvent Covered QFC Entity cannot terminate their contracts with it based solely on the failure of its affiliate.28

    27See, e.g., Board's QFC Rule at 42883 and 12 CFR 252.84(b). Covered QFC Entities are similarly generally prohibited from entering into Covered QFCs that would restrict the transfer of a credit enhancement supporting the Covered QFC from the Covered QFC Entity's affiliate to a transferee upon the entry into resolution of the affiliate. See, e.g., Board's QFC Rule at 42890 and 12 CFR 252.84(b)(2).

    28Id.

    Covered QFC Entities are required to enter into amendments to certain pre-existing Covered QFCs to explicitly provide for these requirements and to ensure that Covered QFCs entered into after the applicable compliance date for the rule explicitly provide for the same.29

    29See, e.g., 12 CFR 252.82(a) and (c). The QFC Rules require a Covered QFC Entity to conform Covered QFCs (i) entered into, executed, or to which it otherwise becomes a party on or after January 1, 2019 or (ii) entered into, executed, or to which it otherwise became a party before January 1, 2019, if the Covered QFC Entity or any affiliate that is a Covered QFC Entity also enters, executes, or otherwise becomes a party to a new Covered QFC with the counterparty to the pre-existing Covered QFC or a consolidated affiliate of the counterparty on or after January 1, 2019.

    C. Interaction of CFTC Margin Rule and QFC Rules

    As noted above, the current definition of EMNA in Commission regulation 23.151 allows for certain specified permissible stays of default rights of the CSE. Specifically, consistent with the QFC Rules, the current definition provides that such rights may be stayed pursuant to a special resolution regime such as Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDI Act, and substantially similar foreign resolution regimes.30 However, the current EMNA definition does not explicitly recognize certain restrictions on the exercise of a CSE's cross-default rights required under the QFC Rules.31 Therefore, a pre-existing EMNA that is amended in order to become compliant with the QFC Rules or a new master netting agreement that conforms to the QFC Rules will not meet the current definition of EMNA, and a CSE that is a counterparty under such a master netting agreement—one that does not meet the definition of EMNA—would be required to measure its exposures from covered swaps on a gross basis, rather than aggregate net basis, for purposes of the CFTC Margin Rule.32 Further, if a legacy swap were amended to comply with the QFC Rules,33 it would become a covered swap subject to initial and variation margin requirements under the CFTC Margin Rule.34

    30 17 CFR 23.151.

    31Id.

    32See CFTC Margin Rule, 81 FR at 651 and Commission regulations 23.152(c) and 23.153(d). 17 CFR 23.152(c) and 23.153(d).

    33 Covered QFC Entities must conform to the requirements of the QFC Rules for Covered QFCs entered into on or after January 1, 2019 and, in some instances, Covered QFCs entered into before that date.33 To do so, a Covered QFC Entity may need to amend the contractual provisions of its pre-existing Covered QFCs.

    34 Note, therefore, that such amendment would affect all parties to the legacy swap, not only the Covered QFC Entity subject to the QFC Rules.

    II. Proposal

    On May 23, 2018, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“Proposal”) 35 to amend Commission regulations 23.151 and 23.161 to protect CSEs and their counterparties from being disadvantaged because their master netting agreements do not satisfy the definition of an EMNA, solely because such agreements' comply with the QFC Rules or because such agreements would have to be amended to achieve compliance. Specifically, the Commission proposed to (i) revise the definition of EMNA in Commission regulation 23.151 such that a master netting agreement that meets the requirements of the QFC Rules may be an EMNA and (ii) amend Commission regulation 23.161 such that a legacy swap will not be a covered swap under the CFTC Margin Rule if it is amended solely to conform to the QFC Rules.

    35 83 FR 23842 (May 23, 2018).

    The Commission requested comments on the Proposal and also solicited comments on the impact of the Proposal on small entities, the Commission's cost benefit considerations, and any anti-competitive effects of the Proposal. The comment period for the Proposal ended on July 23, 2018.

    III. Summary of Comments

    The Commission received four relevant comments in response to the Proposal—from the Institute of International Bankers (“IIB”), ISDA, Navient Corporation (“Navient”), and NEX Group plc (“NEX”), respectively.36 Though these comments raised issues unrelated to the Proposal or suggested additions that would go beyond the scope of the Proposal,37 the comments were generally supportive of the aims of the Proposal.

    36 The Commission also received one comment that was not relevant to the Proposal. All of the comments are available at https://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/CommentList.aspx?id=2878.

    37 Navient requested relief from covered swap status arising from certain amendments to legacy swaps involving special purpose vehicles created for securitization purposes (“Securitization SPVs”) and more generally requested an exemption from the CFTC Margin Rule for certain Securitization SPVs. NEX requested relief from covered swap status for legacy swaps which are compressed in a multilateral portfolio compression exercise. ISDA and IIB requested the Commission, in conjunction with the Prudential Regulators, more generally provide broad guidance on amendments to legacy swaps, including that amendments required by domestic or foreign regulatory or legislative developments (e.g., reforms of benchmark interest rates) will not cause them to become covered swaps. These requests for additional changes and exemptions to the CFTC Margin Rule are outside of the scope of the Proposal, as the Proposal relates solely to changes to the CFTC Margin Rule in relation to the requirements of the QFC Rules. However, as the Commission continues to assess industry developments such as interest rate benchmark reform, it will take into account any associated implementation ramifications surrounding the treatment of legacy swaps under the CFTC Margin Rule.

    Navient and NEX were supportive of the Commission's Proposal in full. ISDA was supportive of the Commission's proposal to revise the definition of EMNA. IIB did not comment on this aspect of the Proposal. ISDA and IIB were appreciative of the proposal on the treatment of legacy swaps impacted by the QFC Rules, but, on balance, thought broad guidance on the treatment of amendments to legacy swaps more generally was a better alternative to the proposed limited amendment of the CFTC Margin Rule relating to the QFC Rules. Such broad guidance requested by ISDA and IIB is outside of the scope of the Proposal.

    IV. Final Rule

    After consideration of relevant comments, the Commission is adopting this Final Rule as proposed.

    Accordingly, the Commission is adding a new paragraph (2)(ii) to the definition of “eligible master netting agreement” in Commission regulation 23.151 and making other minor related changes to that definition such that a master netting agreement may be an EMNA even though the agreement limits the right to accelerate, terminate, and close-out on a net basis all transactions under the agreement and to liquidate or set-off collateral promptly upon an event of default of the counterparty to the extent necessary for the counterparty to comply with the requirements of any of the following parts of Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations: Part 47, subpart I of part 252, or part 382, as applicable. These enumerated provisions contain the relevant requirements that have been added by the QFC Rules.

    Further, so that a legacy swap will not be a covered swap under the CFTC Margin Rule if it is amended solely to conform to the QFC Rules, the Commission is adding a new paragraph (d) to the end of Commission regulation 23.161, as shown in the rule text in this document. This addition will provide certainty to a CSE and its counterparties about the treatment of legacy swaps and any applicable netting arrangements in light of the QFC Rules. However, if, in addition to amendments required to comply with the QFC Rules, the parties enter into any other amendments, the amended legacy swap will be a covered swap in accordance with the application of the CFTC Margin Rule.

    This Final Rule is consistent with amendments to the Prudential Margin Rule that the Prudential Regulators jointly published in the Federal Register on October 10, 2018.38 Making amendments to the CFTC Margin Rule that are consistent with those of the Prudential Regulators furthers the Commission's efforts to harmonize its margin regime with the Prudential Regulators' margin regime and is responsive to suggestions received as part of the Commission's Project KISS initiative.39

    38 Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities; Final Rule, 83 FR 50805 (Oct. 10, 2018).

    39See Project KISS Initiatives, available at https://comments.cftc.gov/KISS/KissInitiative.aspx. The Commission received requests to coordinate revisions to the CFTC Margin Rule with the Prudential Regulators. See comments from Credit Suisse (“CS”), the Financial Services Roundtable (“FSR”), ISDA, the Managed Funds Association (“MFA”), and SIFMA Global Foreign Exchange Division (“GFMA”). GFMA requested that the Commission coordinate with the Prudential Regulators on proposing or making any changes to the CFTC Margin Rule to ensure harmonization and consistency across the respective rule sets. In addition, CS, FSR, ISDA, and MFA, as well as GFMA requested that the Commission make certain specific changes to the CFTC Margin Rule in coordination with the Prudential Regulators relating to, for example, initial margin calculations and requirements, margin settlement timeframes, netting product sets, inter-affiliate margin exemptions, and cross-border margin issues. Project KISS suggestions are available at https://comments.cftc.gov/KISS/KissInitiative.aspx.

    V. Related Matters A. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) requires Federal agencies, in promulgating regulations, to consider whether the rules they propose will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and, if so, to provide a regulatory flexibility analysis regarding the economic impact on those entities. In the Proposal, the Commission certified that the Proposal would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Commission requested comments with respect to the RFA and received no such comments.

    As discussed in the Proposal, this Final Rule only affects certain SDs and MSPs that are subject to the QFC Rules and their covered counterparties, all of which are required to be ECPs.40 The Commission has previously determined that SDs, MSPs, and ECPs are not small entities for purposes of the RFA.41 Therefore, the Commission finds that this Final Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as defined in the RFA.

    40See supra, n.12.

    41See Registration of Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 77 FR 2613, 2620 (Jan. 19, 2012) (SDs and MSPs) and Opting Out of Segregation, 66 FR 20740, 20743 (April 25, 2001) (ECPs).

    Accordingly, the Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, hereby certifies pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this Final Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) 42 imposes certain requirements on Federal agencies, including the Commission, in connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of information, as defined by the PRA. The Commission may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget control number. As discussed in the Proposal, this Final Rule contains no requirements subject to the PRA.

    42 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    C. Cost-Benefit Considerations

    The Commission received no comments with regard to its preliminary cost-benefit considerations in the Proposal. Section 15(a) of the CEA requires the Commission to consider the costs and benefits of its actions before promulgating a regulation under the CEA. Section 15(a) further specifies that the costs and benefits shall be evaluated in light of the following five broad areas of market and public concern: (1) Protection of market participants and the public; (2) efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of futures markets; (3) price discovery; (4) sound risk management practices; and (5) other public interest considerations. The Commission considers the costs and benefits resulting from its discretionary determinations with respect to the section 15(a) considerations.

    This Final Rule prevents certain CSEs and their counterparties from being disadvantaged because their master netting agreements do not satisfy the definition of an EMNA, solely because such agreements' comply with the QFC Rules or because such agreements would have to be amended to achieve compliance. It revises the definition of EMNA such that a master netting agreement that meets the requirements of the QFC Rules may be an EMNA and provides that an amendment to a legacy swap solely to conform to the QFC Rules will not cause that swap to be a covered swap under the CFTC Margin Rule.

    The Commission notes that the consideration of costs and benefits below is based on the understanding that the markets function internationally, with many transactions involving United States firms taking place across international boundaries; with some Commission registrants being organized outside of the United States; with leading industry members typically conducting operations both within and outside the United States; and with industry members commonly following substantially similar business practices wherever located. Where the Commission does not specifically refer to matters of location, the below discussion of costs and benefits refers to the effects of this Final Rule on all activity subject to it, whether by virtue of the activity's physical location in the United States or by virtue of the activity's connection with or effect on United States commerce under CEA section 2(i).43 In particular, the Commission notes that some persons affected by this rulemaking are located outside of the United States.

    43 7 U.S.C. 2(i).

    The baseline against which the benefits and costs associated with this Final Rule is compared is the uncleared swaps markets as they exist today, with the QFC Rules in effect.44 With this as the baseline for this Final Rule, the following are the benefits and costs of this Proposal.

    44 Although, as described above, the QFC Rules will be gradually phased in, for purposes of the cost benefit considerations, we assume that the affected CSEs are in compliance with the QFC Rules.

    1. Benefits

    As described above, this Final Rule will allow parties whose master netting agreements satisfy the proposed revised definition of EMNA to continue to calculate initial margin and variation margin, respectively, on an aggregate net basis across uncleared swaps that are executed under that EMNA. Otherwise, a CSE that is a counterparty under a master netting agreement that complies with the QFC Rules and, thus, does not satisfy the current definition of EMNA, would be required to measure its exposures from covered swaps on a gross basis for purposes of the CFTC Margin Rule. In addition, this Final Rule allows legacy swaps to maintain their legacy status, notwithstanding that they are amended to comply with the QFC Rules. Otherwise, such swaps would become covered swaps subject to initial and variation margin requirements under the CFTC Margin Rule. This Final Rule provides certainty to CSEs and their counterparties about the treatment of legacy swaps and any applicable netting arrangements in light of the QFC Rules.

    2. Costs

    Because this Final Rule (i) will solely expand the definition of EMNA to potentially include those master netting agreements that meet the requirements of the QFC Rules and allow the amendment of legacy swaps solely to conform to the QFC Rules without causing such swaps to become covered swaps and (ii) does not require market participants to take any action to benefit from these changes, the Commission believes that this Final Rule will not impose any additional costs on market participants.

    3. Section 15(a) Considerations

    In light of the foregoing, the CFTC has evaluated the costs and benefits of this Final Rule pursuant to the five considerations identified in section 15(a) of the CEA as follows:

    (a) Protection of Market Participants and the Public

    As noted above, this Final Rule will protect market participants by allowing them to comply with the QFC Rules without being disadvantaged under the CFTC Margin Rule. This Final Rule will facilitate market participants' use of swaps that would be affected by this Final Rule to hedge. Without this Final Rule, posting gross margin instead of net margin for those swaps would be required, which would raise transaction costs and thus likely reduce the use of such swaps for hedging.

    (b) Efficiency, Competitiveness, and Financial Integrity of Markets

    This Final Rule will make the uncleared swap markets more efficient by allowing net margining of swap portfolios under master netting agreements that comply with the QFC Rules and, thus, do not satisfy the current EMNA definition instead of requiring the payment of gross margin under such agreements. Also, absent this Final Rule, market participants that are required to amend their EMNAs to comply with the QFC Rules and, thereafter, required to measure their exposure on a gross basis and to post margin on their legacy swaps, would be placed at a competitive disadvantage as compared to those market participants that are not so required to amend their EMNAs. Therefore, this Final Rule may increase the competitiveness of the uncleared swaps markets. In addition, this Final Rule furthers the Commission's efforts to harmonize its margin regime with the Prudential Regulators' margin regime, and therefore may improve the efficiency, competitiveness, and financial integrity of markets.

    (c) Price Discovery

    This Final Rule permits the payment of net margin instead of gross margin on portfolios of swaps affected by this Final Rule, which would reduce margining costs to those swaps transactions. Reducing the cost to transact these swaps, might lead to more trading, which could potentially improve liquidity and benefit price discovery.

    (d) Sound Risk Management

    This Final Rule prevents the payment of gross margin on swaps affected by this Final Rule, which does not reflect true economic counterparty credit risk for swap portfolios transacted with counterparties. Therefore, this Final Rule supports sound risk management.

    (e) Other Public Interest Considerations

    The Commission has not identified an impact on other public interest considerations as a result of this Final Rule.

    D. Antitrust Laws

    Section 15(b) of the CEA requires the Commission to take into consideration the public interest to be protected by the antitrust laws and endeavor to take the least anticompetitive means of achieving the purposes of the CEA, in issuing any order or adopting any Commission rule or regulation.45 The Commission believes that the public interest to be protected by the antitrust laws is generally to protect competition. The Commission requested and did not receive any comments on whether the Proposal implicated any other specific public interest to be protected by the antitrust laws.

    45 7 U.S.C. 19(b).

    The Commission has considered this Final Rule to determine whether it is anticompetitive and has preliminarily identified no anticompetitive effects. The Commission requested and did not receive any comments on whether the Proposal was anticompetitive and, if it is, what the anticompetitive effects are.

    Because the Commission has preliminarily determined that this Final Rule is not anticompetitive and has no anticompetitive effects and received no comments on its determination, the Commission has not identified any less anticompetitive means of achieving the purposes of the CEA.

    List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 23

    Capital and margin requirements, Major swap participants, Swap dealers, Swaps.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission amends 17 CFR part 23 as follows:

    PART 23—SWAP DEALERS AND MAJOR SWAP PARTICIPANTS 1. The authority citation for part 23 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 6, 6a, 6b, 6b-1,6c, 6p, 6r, 6s, 6t, 9, 9a, 12, 12a, 13b, 13c, 16a, 18, 19, 21.

    Section 23.160 also issued under 7 U.S.C. 2(i); Sec. 721(b), Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1641 (2010).

    2. In § 23.151, revise paragraph (2) in the definition of Eligible master netting agreement to read as follows:
    § 23.151 Definitions applicable to margin requirements.

    Eligible master netting agreement * * *

    (2) The agreement provides the covered swap entity the right to accelerate, terminate, and close-out on a net basis all transactions under the agreement and to liquidate or set-off collateral promptly upon an event of default, including upon an event of receivership, conservatorship, insolvency, liquidation, or similar proceeding, of the counterparty, provided that, in any such case,

    (i) Any exercise of rights under the agreement will not be stayed or avoided under applicable law in the relevant jurisdictions, other than:

    (A) In receivership, conservatorship, or resolution under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.), Title II of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5381 et seq.), the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as amended (12 U.S.C. 4617), or the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended (12 U.S.C. 2183 and 2279cc), or laws of foreign jurisdictions that are substantially similar to the U.S. laws referenced in this paragraph in order to facilitate the orderly resolution of the defaulting counterparty; or

    (B) Where the agreement is subject by its terms to, or incorporates, any of the laws referenced in paragraph (2)(i)(A) of this definition; and

    (ii) The agreement may limit the right to accelerate, terminate, and close-out on a net basis all transactions under the agreement and to liquidate or set-off collateral promptly upon an event of default of the counterparty to the extent necessary for the counterparty to comply with the requirements of 12 CFR part 47; 12 CFR part 252, subpart I; or 12 CFR part 382, as applicable;

    3. In § 23.161, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 23.161 Compliance dates.

    (d) For purposes of determining whether an uncleared swap was entered into prior to the applicable compliance date under this section, a covered swap entity may disregard amendments to the uncleared swap that were entered into solely to comply with the requirements of 12 CFR part 47; 12 CFR part 252, subpart I; or 12 CFR part 382, as applicable.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 19, 2018, by the Commission. Robert Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission. Note:

    The following appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

    Appendix to Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants—Commission Voting Summary and Chairman's Statement Appendix 1—Commission Voting Summary

    On this matter, Chairman Giancarlo, and Commissioners Quintenz, Behnam, Stump, and Berkovitz voted in the affirmative. No Commissioner voted in the negative.

    Appendix 2—Statement of Chairman J. Christopher Giancarlo

    Through the Commission's Project KISS initiative, the Commission received suggestions to harmonize its uncleared swap margin rule with that of the Prudential Regulators. In response, this final rule does so and provides market certainty, specifically with respect to amending the CFTC's definition of “eligible master netting agreement” (EMNA) and amending the CFTC Margin Rule such that any legacy swap will not become subject to the CFTC Margin Rule if it is amended solely to comply with changes adopted by the Prudential Regulators in 2017. The Commission recognizes that the CFTC Margin Rule does not provide relief for legacy swaps that might need to be amended to meet regulatory changes or requirements, and is committed to considering other meritorious requests for relief.

    [FR Doc. 2018-25602 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Part 35 [Docket Nos. RM16-5-000; RM16-5-001; RM16-23-000; AD16-20-000] Non-Discriminatory Open Access Transmission Tariff; Corrections AGENCY:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Correcting amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    This document corrects one section of the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, as published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2018. This correction restores regulatory text that was inadvertently replaced with other regulatory text adopted in another, later final rule.

    DATES:

    Effective November 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anne Marie Hirschberger, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8387, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    1. On November 17, 2016, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issued Order No. 831 concerning offer caps in Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) and Independent System Operator (ISO) markets,1 which was published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2016. Order No. 831 amended 18 CFR 35.28 by adding new paragraph (g)(9).

    1Offer Caps in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, Order No. 831, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,387 (2016) (cross-referenced at 157 FERC ¶ 61,115), order on reh'g and clarification, Order No. 831-A, 82 FR 53403 (Nov. 16, 2017), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,394 (2017).

    2. On November 9, 2017, the Commission issued Order No. 831-A,2 which was published in the Federal Register on November 16, 2017. Order No. 831-A further revised 18 CFR 35.28(g)(9) regarding offer caps.

    2 Order No. 831-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,394.

    3. On February 15, 2018, the Commission issued Order No. 841 concerning electric storage participation in RTO/ISO markets,3 which was published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2018. Order No. 841 amended 18 CFR 35.28(g) by adding a further new paragraph, which was also numbered (g)(9).4 As a result, the regulatory text adopted in Order No. 841 incorrectly replaced—rather than added to—the regulatory text adopted in Order Nos. 831 and 831-A.

    3Electric Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, Order No. 841, 83 FR 9580 (Mar. 6, 2018), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,398 (2018) (cross-referenced at 162 FERC ¶ 61,127).

    4 On February 28, 2018, the Commission issued an Errata Notice for Order No. 841. Electric Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, Errata Notice, Docket Nos. RM16-23-000, AD16-20-000 (Feb. 28, 2018). Among other things, the Errata Notice revised 18 CFR 35.28(g)(9).

    4. In this Correcting Amendment, 18 CFR 35.28(g) is corrected by restoring the regulatory text from Order Nos. 831 and 831-A as new paragraph 18 CFR 35.28(g)(11). Nothing in this Correcting Amendment is intended to alter any previous compliance requirements or effective dates established under Order Nos. 831, 831-A, or 841, nor does this Correcting Amendment affect any tariff changes previously accepted by the Commission in compliance with these orders.

    List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 35

    Electric power rates, Electric utilities, Non-discriminatory open access transmission tariffs.

    By the Commission. Commissioner McIntyre is not voting on this order.

    Issued: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 18 CFR part 35 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:

    PART 35—FILING OF RATE SCHEDULES AND TARIFFS 1. The authority citation for part 35 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 791a-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

    2. Amend § 35.28 by adding a new paragraph (g)(11) to read as follows:
    § 35.28 Non-discriminatory open access transmission tariff.

    (g) * * *

    (11) A resource's incremental energy offer must be capped at the higher of $1,000/MWh or that resource's cost-based incremental energy offer. For the purpose of calculating Locational Marginal Prices, Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators must cap cost-based incremental energy offers at $2,000/MWh. The actual or expected costs underlying a resource's cost-based incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh must be verified before that offer can be used for purposes of calculating Locational Marginal Prices. If a resource submits an incremental energy offer above $1,000/MWh and the actual or expected costs underlying that offer cannot be verified before the market clearing process begins, that offer may not be used to calculate Locational Marginal Prices and the resource would be eligible for a make-whole payment if that resource is dispatched and the resource's actual costs are verified after-the-fact. A resource would also be eligible for a make-whole payment if it is dispatched and its verified cost-based incremental energy offer exceeds $2,000/MWh. All resources, regardless of type, are eligible to submit cost-based incremental energy offers in excess of $1,000/MWh.

    [FR Doc. 2018-25584 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Part 40 [Docket Nos. RM18-8-000 and RM15-11-003; Order No. 851] Geomagnetic Disturbance Reliability Standard; Reliability Standard for Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events AGENCY:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) approves Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 (Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events). The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization, submitted Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 for Commission approval. The Commission also directs NERC to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2: To require the development and implementation of corrective action plans to mitigate assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities; and to authorize extensions of time to implement corrective action plans on a case-by-case basis. In addition, the Commission accepts the revised GMD research work plan submitted by NERC.

    DATES:

    This rule will become effective January 25, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:. Michael Gandolfo (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6817, [email protected]. Matthew Vlissides (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8408, [email protected].
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the Commission approves Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 (Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events).1 The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO), submitted Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 for Commission approval in response to directives in Order No. 830.2 As discussed in this final rule, we determine that Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 better addresses the risks posed by geomagnetic disturbances (GMDs) to the Bulk-Power System, particularly with respect to the potential impacts of locally-enhanced GMD events, than currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 and complies with the Commission's directives in Order No. 830.

    1 16 U.S.C. 824o.

    2Reliability Standard for Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events, Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215, (2016) reh'g denied, Order No. 830-A, 158 FERC ¶ 61,041 (2017).

    2. GMD events occur when the sun ejects charged particles that interact with and cause changes in the earth's magnetic fields. GMD events have the potential to cause severe, wide-spread impacts on the Bulk-Power System.3 Currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 requires applicable entities to assess the vulnerability of their transmission systems to a “benchmark GMD event.” An applicable entity that does not meet certain performance requirements, based on the results of the benchmark GMD vulnerability assessment, must develop and implement a corrective action plan to achieve the performance requirements.

    3Reliability Standards for Geomagnetic Disturbances, Order No. 779, 143 FERC ¶ 61,147, at P 3, reh'g denied, 144 FERC ¶ 61,113 (2013); see also Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Background.

    3. The improvements in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 are responsive to the directives in Order No. 830: (1) To revise the benchmark GMD event definition, as it pertains to the required GMD vulnerability assessments and transformer thermal impact assessments, so that the definition is not based solely on spatially-averaged data; (2) to require the collection of necessary geomagnetically induced current (GIC) monitoring and magnetometer data; and (3) to include a one-year deadline for the completion of corrective action plans and two- and four-year deadlines to complete mitigation actions involving non-hardware and hardware mitigation.4 As discussed below, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 complies with these directives and improves upon the currently-effective version of the Reliability Standard by requiring applicable entities to: (1) In addition to the benchmark GMD event requirements, conduct supplemental GMD vulnerability assessments and thermal impact assessments, which apply a new supplemental GMD event definition that does not rely solely on spatially-averaged data; (2) obtain GIC and magnetometer data; and (3) meet the Commission-directed deadlines for the development and completion of tasks in corrective action plans. Accordingly, pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we approve Reliability Standard TPL-007-2.5

    4 “Spatial averaging” refers to the averaging of magnetometer readings over a geographic area. In developing the benchmark GMD event definition, the standard drafting team averaged several (but not all) geomagnetic field readings taken by magnetometers located within square geographical areas of 500 km per side.

    5 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).

    4. In addition, as discussed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we determine that it is appropriate, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA,6 to direct NERC to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to require the development and completion of corrective action plans to mitigate assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities.7 As discussed below, requiring corrective action plans for supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities is appropriate to ensure the reliability of the Bulk-Power System when confronted with locally-enhanced GMD events, just as corrective action plans are necessary to mitigate the effects of benchmark GMD events. Based on the record in this proceeding, we discern no technical barriers to either developing or complying with such a requirement. Moreover, the record supports issuance of a directive at this time notwithstanding comments in response to the NOPR advocating postponement of any directive until after the completion of additional GMD research. As discussed below, the relevant GMD research tasks are scheduled to be completed before the modified Reliability Standard must be submitted. The Commission directs NERC to submit the modified Reliability Standard for approval within 12 months from the effective date of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2.

    6Id. 824o(d)(5).

    7Geomagnetic Disturbance Reliability Standard, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 83 FR 23854 (May 23, 2018), 163 FERC ¶ 61,126 (2018) (NOPR).

    5. We also determine that it is appropriate, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to direct that NERC modify the provision in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirement R7.4 that allows applicable entities to exceed deadlines for completing corrective action plan tasks when “situations beyond the control of the responsible entity [arise].” The NOPR raised concerns regarding the appropriateness of a self-executing deadline extension and observed that it was inconsistent with guidance in Order No. 830 that extension requests be considered on a case-by-case basis.8 We recognize the point made in NERC's comments in response to the NOPR that, under NERC's proposal, “NERC and Regional Entity staff would exercise their authority to review the reasonableness of any Corrective Action Plan delay, including reviewing the `situations beyond the control of the responsible entity' that are cited as causing the delay” and that Requirement R7.4 is “not so flexible . . . as to allow entities to extend Corrective Action Plan deadlines indefinitely or for any reason whatsoever.” 9 While we generally agree with the standard of review that NERC states it will use to assess the merits of extension requests, we conclude that such assessments should be made before any time extensions are permitted. By requiring prior approval of extension requests, the modified Reliability Standard will limit the potential for unwarranted delays in implementing corrective action plans while also providing NERC with an advance and more holistic understanding of where, to whom, and for how long, extensions are granted. We expect that the extension process developed by NERC in response to our directive will be timely and efficient such that applicable entities will receive prompt responses after submitting to NERC or a Regional Entity, as appropriate, the extension request and associated information described in Requirement R7.4.10 We also direct NERC, as proposed in the NOPR, to prepare and submit a report addressing how often and why applicable entities are exceeding corrective action plan deadlines as well as the disposition of extension requests, which is due within 12 months from the date on which applicable entities must comply with the last requirement of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. Following receipt of the report, the Commission will determine whether further action is necessary.

    8 Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215 at P 102.

    9 NERC Comments at 20-21.

    10 NOPR, 163 FERC ¶ 61,126 at P 50.

    6. The Commission, as discussed below, also accepts the revised GMD research work plan submitted by NERC on April 19, 2018.11

    11 North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Filing, Docket No. RM15-11-003 (filed Apr. 19, 2018) (Revised GMD Research Work Plan).

    I. Background A. Section 215 and Mandatory Reliability Standards

    7. Section 215 of the FPA requires the Commission to certify an ERO to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced in the United States by the ERO, subject to Commission oversight, or by the Commission independently.12

    12 16 U.S.C. 824o(e).

    B. GMD Primer

    8. GMD events occur when the sun ejects charged particles that interact and cause changes in the earth's magnetic fields.13 Once a solar particle is ejected, it can take between 17 to 96 hours (depending on its energy level) to reach earth.14 A geoelectric field is the electric potential (measured in volts per kilometer (V/km)) on the earth's surface and is directly related to the rate of change of the magnetic fields.15 The geoelectric field has an amplitude and direction and acts as a voltage source that can cause GICs to flow on long conductors, such as transmission lines.16 The magnitude of the geoelectric field amplitude is impacted by local factors such as geomagnetic latitude and local earth conductivity.17 Geomagnetic latitude is the proximity to earth's magnetic north and south poles, as opposed to earth's geographic poles.18 Local earth conductivity is the ability of the earth's crust to conduct electricity at a certain location to depths of hundreds of kilometers down to the earth's mantle. Local earth conductivity impacts the magnitude (i.e., severity) of the geoelectric fields that are formed during a GMD event by, all else being equal, a lower earth conductivity resulting in higher geoelectric fields.19

    13See NERC, 2012 Special Reliability Assessment Interim Report: Effects of Geomagnetic Disturbances on the Bulk Power System at i-ii (February 2012).

    14Id. at ii.

    15Id.

    16Id.

    17 NERC, Benchmark Geomagnetic Disturbance Event Description, Docket No. 15-11-000, at 4 (filed June 28, 2016) (2016 NERC White Paper).

    18Id.

    19Id.

    9. GICs can flow in an electric power system with varying intensity depending on the various factors discussed above. As explained in the Background section of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, “[d]uring a GMD event, geomagnetically‐induced currents (GIC) may cause transformer hot‐spot heating or damage, loss of Reactive Power sources, increased Reactive Power demand, and Misoperation(s), the combination of which may result in voltage collapse and blackout.”

    C. Currently-Effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 and Order No. 830 1. Currently-Effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1

    10. Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 consists of seven requirements and applies to planning coordinators, transmission planners, transmission owners and generation owners who own or whose planning coordinator area or transmission planning area includes a power transformer with a high side, wye-grounded winding connected at 200 kV or higher.

    11. Requirement R1 requires planning coordinators and transmission planners (i.e., “responsible entities”) to determine the individual and joint responsibilities in the planning coordinator's planning area for maintaining models and performing studies needed to complete the GMD vulnerability assessment required in Requirement R4. Requirement R2 requires responsible entities to maintain system models and GIC system models needed to complete the GMD vulnerability assessment required in Requirement R4. Requirement R3 requires each responsible entity to have criteria for acceptable system steady state voltage performance for its system during the GMD conditions described in Attachment 1 of Reliability Standard TPL-007-1. Requirement R4 requires responsible entities to conduct a GMD vulnerability assessment every 60 months using the benchmark GMD event described in Attachment 1. Requirement R5 requires responsible entities to provide GIC flow information, based on the benchmark GMD event definition, to be used in the transformer thermal impact assessments required in Requirement R6, to each transmission owner and generator owner that owns an applicable transformer within the applicable planning area. Requirement R6 requires transmission owners and generator owners to conduct thermal impact assessments on solely and jointly owned applicable transformers where the maximum effective GIC value provided in Requirement R5 is 75 Amperes per phase (A/phase) or greater. Requirement R7 requires responsible entities to develop corrective action plans if the GMD vulnerability assessment concludes that the system does not meet the performance requirements in Table 1 of Reliability Standard TPL-007-1.

    12. Calculation of the benchmark GMD event, against which applicable entities must assess their facilities, is fundamental to compliance with Reliability Standard TPL-007-1. Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, Requirement R3 states that “[e]ach responsible entity, as determined in Requirement R1, shall have criteria for acceptable System steady state voltage performance for its System during the benchmark GMD event described in Attachment 1.”

    13. Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, Attachment 1 states that the benchmark GMD event is composed of four elements: (1) A reference peak geoelectric field amplitude of 8 V/km derived from statistical analysis of historical magnetometer data; (2) a scaling factor to account for local geomagnetic latitude; (3) a scaling factor to account for local earth conductivity; and (4) a reference geomagnetic field time series or wave shape to facilitate time-domain analysis of GMD impact on equipment. The product of the first three elements is referred to as the regional peak geoelectric field amplitude. The benchmark GMD event defines the geoelectric field values used to compute GIC flows for a GMD vulnerability assessment, which is required in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1.20

    20See Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, Requirements R4 and R5. Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 does not set a threshold amount of GIC flow that would constitute a vulnerable transformer. However, if a transformer is calculated to experience a maximum effective GIC flow during a benchmark GMD event of a least 75 A/phase, a thermal impact assessment of that transformer is required. See Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, Requirement R6.

    14. For the purpose of determining a benchmark event that specifies what severity GMD events a responsible entity must assess for potential impacts on the Bulk-Power System, NERC determined that a 1-in-100 year GMD event would cause an 8 V/km reference peak geoelectric field amplitude at 60 degree north geomagnetic latitude using Québec's earth conductivity.21 Scaling factors (i.e., multiplying values) are applied to this reference peak geoelectric field amplitude to adjust the 8 V/km value for different geomagnetic latitudes (scaling factors between 0.1 and 1.0) and earth conductivities (scaling factors between 0.21 and 1.17). NERC identified a reference geomagnetic field time series from an Ottawa, Ontario magnetic observatory during a 1989 GMD storm affecting Québec. NERC used this to estimate a time series (i.e., 10-second values over a period of days) of the geoelectric field that is representative of what is expected to occur at 60 degree geomagnetic latitude during a 1-in-100 year GMD event. Such a time series is used in some methods of calculating the vulnerability of a transformer to damage from heating caused by GIC.

    21 NERC used Québec as the location for the reference peak 1-in-100 year GMD event because of its proximity to 60 degree geomagnetic latitude and its well understood earth model. By creating scaling factors, each entity can scale this reference peak geoelectric field and geoelectric field time series values to match its own expected field conditions.

    15. NERC used field measurements taken from the International Monitor for Auroral Geomagnetic Effects (IMAGE) magnetometer chain, which consists of 39 magnetometer stations in Northern Europe, for the period 1993-2013 to calculate the reference peak geoelectric field amplitude. As described in the 2016 NERC White Paper, to arrive at a reference peak geoelectric field amplitude of 8 V/km, NERC “spatially averaged” four different station groups each spanning a square area of approximately 500 km (roughly 310 miles) in width.

    2. Order No. 830

    16. On January 21, 2015, NERC submitted for Commission approval Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 in response to the directive in Order No. 779 that NERC develop one or more Reliability Standards to address the effects of GMD events on the electric grid.22 In Order No. 830, the Commission approved Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, concluding that Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 addressed the Commission's directive by requiring applicable Bulk-Power System owners and operators to conduct, on a recurring five-year cycle, initial and ongoing vulnerability assessments regarding the potential impact of a benchmark GMD event on the Bulk-Power System as a whole and on Bulk-Power System components. In addition, the Commission determined that Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 requires applicable entities to develop and implement corrective action plans to mitigate vulnerabilities identified through those recurring vulnerability assessments and that potential mitigation strategies identified in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 include, but are not limited to, the installation, modification or removal of transmission and generation facilities and associated equipment.

    22 Order No. 779, 144 FERC ¶ 61,113 at P 54.

    17. In Order No. 830, the Commission also determined that Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 should be modified. Specifically, Order No. 830 directed NERC to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 concerning: (1) The calculation of the reference peak geoelectric field amplitude component of the benchmark GMD event definition; (2) the collection and public availability of necessary GIC monitoring and magnetometer data; and (3) deadlines for completing corrective action plans and the mitigation measures called for in corrective action plans. Order No. 830 directed NERC to develop and submit these revisions for Commission approval within 18 months of the effective date of Order No. 830.

    18. With respect to the calculation of the reference peak geoelectric field amplitude component of the benchmark GMD event definition, Order No. 830 expressed concern with relying solely on spatial averaging in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 because “the use of spatial averaging in this context is new, and thus there is a dearth of information or research regarding its application or appropriate scale.” 23 While Order No. 830 directed that the peak geoelectric field amplitude should not be based solely on spatially-averaged data, the Commission indicated that this “directive should not be construed to prohibit the use of spatial averaging in some capacity, particularly if more research results in a better understanding of how spatial averaging can be used to reflect actual GMD events.” 24

    23 Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215 at P 45.

    24Id. P 46.

    D. NERC Petition and Reliability Standard TPL-007-2

    19. NERC states that Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 enhances currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 by addressing reliability risks posed by GMDs more effectively and implementing the directives in Order No. 830.25 NERC asserts that Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 reflects the latest in GMD understanding and provides a technically sound and flexible approach to addressing the concerns discussed in Order No. 830. NERC contends that the proposed modifications enhance reliability by expanding GMD vulnerability assessments to include severe, localized impacts and by implementing deadlines and processes to maintain accountability in the development, completion, and revision of corrective action plans developed to address identified vulnerabilities. Further, NERC states that the proposed modifications improve the availability of GMD monitoring data that may be used to inform GMD vulnerability assessments.

    25 Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 is not attached to this final rule. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 is available on the Commission's eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No. RM18-8-000 and on the NERC website, www.nerc.com.

    20. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 modifies currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 by requiring applicable entities to: (1) Conduct supplemental GMD vulnerability and transformer thermal impact assessments in addition to the existing benchmark GMD vulnerability and transformer thermal impact assessments required in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1; (2) collect data from GIC monitors and magnetometers as necessary to enable model validation and situational awareness; and (3) develop necessary corrective action plans within one year from the completion of the benchmark GMD vulnerability assessment, include a two-year deadline for the implementation of non-hardware mitigation, and include a four-year deadline to complete hardware mitigation.26

    26 Unless otherwise indicated, the requirements of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 are substantively the same as the requirements in currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1.

    21. In particular, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 modifies Requirements R1 (identification of responsibilities), R2 (system and GIC system models) and R3 (criteria for acceptable System steady state) to extend the existing requirements pertaining to benchmark GMD assessments to the new supplemental GMD assessments. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 adds the newly mandated supplemental GMD vulnerability and transformer thermal impact assessments in new Requirements R8 (supplemental GMD vulnerability assessment), R9 (GIC flow information needed for supplemental GMD thermal impact assessments) and R10 (supplemental GMD thermal impact assessments). The supplemental GMD event definition contains a higher, non-spatially-averaged reference peak geoelectric field amplitude component than the benchmark GMD event definition (12 V/km versus 8 V/km). These three new requirements largely mirror existing Requirements R4, R5, and R6 that currently apply, and continue to apply, only to benchmark GMD vulnerability and transformer thermal impact assessments.27

    27 An exception is the qualifying threshold for transformers required to undergo thermal impact assessments: For the supplemental GMD assessment the qualifying threshold for transformers is a maximum effective GIC value of 85 A/phase while the threshold for benchmark GMD event assessments is 75 A/phase.

    22. In addition, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 includes two other new requirements, Requirements R11 and R12, that require applicable entities to gather GIC monitoring data (Requirement R11) and magnetometer data (Requirement R12).

    23. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 modifies existing Requirement R7 (corrective action plans) to create a one-year deadline for the development of corrective action plans and two and four-year deadlines to complete actions involving non-hardware and hardware mitigation, respectively, for vulnerabilities identified in the benchmark GMD assessment. The modifications to Requirement R7 include a provision allowing for extension of deadlines if “situations beyond the control of the responsible entity determined in Requirement R1 prevent implementation of the [corrective action plan] within the timetable for implementation.”

    E. NOPR

    24. On May 17, 2018, the Commission issued a NOPR that proposed to approve Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 as the Reliability Standard largely addresses the directives in Order No. 830. However, the NOPR identified two aspects of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 that are inconsistent with Order No. 830: (1) The lack of any requirement to develop and implement corrective action plans in response to assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities; and (2) a general allowance, per proposed Requirement R7.4, of extensions of time to complete corrective action plans as opposed to permitting extensions of time on a case-by-case basis.

    25. Having identified these issues, the NOPR proposed to direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to require applicable entities to develop and implement corrective action plans to mitigate vulnerabilities discovered through supplemental GMD vulnerability assessments. The NOPR proposed to direct NERC to submit the modified Reliability Standard for approval within 12 months from the effective date of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. The NOPR also sought comment on two options for addressing the Commission's concerns regarding the potential for undue delay of mitigation because of the proposed time-extension process in Requirement R7.4: (1) Direct NERC to bring Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 into alignment with Order No. 830 through a process whereby NERC or Regional Entities consider extensions on a case-by-case basis using the information that must be submitted under Requirement R7.4; or (2) approve the proposed provision without directing modifications. Under either option, NERC would prepare and submit a report regarding how often and why applicable entities are exceeding corrective action plan deadlines following implementation of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2.28

    28 The NOPR proposed that the report, under the first option, would also include statistics describing how often extension requests were granted.

    26. The Commission received NOPR comments from nine entities. We address below the issues raised in the NOPR and comments as well as NERC's revised GMD research work plan and the comments submitted in response. The Appendix to this final rule lists the entities that filed comments in both matters.

    II. Discussion

    27. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, the Commission approves Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest. We conclude that Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 is an improvement over currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 and responds to the directives in Order No. 830: (1) To revise the benchmark GMD event definition, as it pertains to the required GMD Vulnerability Assessments and transformer thermal impact assessments, so that the definition is not based solely on spatially-averaged data; (2) to require the collection of necessary GIC monitoring and magnetometer data; and (3) to include a one-year deadline for the completion of corrective action plans and two and four-year deadlines to complete mitigation actions involving non-hardware and hardware mitigation, respectively.29

    29 In its petition, NERC stated that it would address the directive in Order No. 830 on the collection of GIC monitoring and magnetometer data through a forthcoming NERC data request to applicable entities pursuant to Section 1600 of the NERC Rules of Procedure rather than through a Reliability Standard requirement. NERC Petition at 27. On February 7, 2018, NERC released a draft data request for a 45-day comment period. The NERC Board of Trustees (BOT) subsequently approved the GMD data request at the August 2018 BOT meeting.

    28. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 complies with the directives in Order No. 830 by requiring, in addition to the benchmark GMD event vulnerability and thermal impact assessments, supplemental GMD vulnerability and thermal impact assessments. The supplemental GMD event definition in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 contains a non-spatially-averaged reference peak geoelectric field amplitude component of 12 V/km, in contrast to the 8 V/km figure in the spatially-averaged benchmark GMD event definition. As NERC explains in its petition, the supplemental GMD event will be used to “represent conditions associated with localized enhancement of the geomagnetic field during a severe GMD event for use in assessing GMD impacts.” 30 Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 therefore addresses the Commission's directive to modify currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 so that the benchmark GMD event does not rely solely on spatially-averaged data to calculate the reference peak geoelectric field amplitude.

    30 NERC Petition at 12.

    29. As proposed in the NOPR, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we also determine that it is appropriate to direct NERC to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to require the development and completion of corrective action plans to mitigate assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities. Given that NERC has acknowledged the potential for “severe, localized impacts” associated with supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities, we see no basis for requiring corrective action plans for benchmark GMD events but not for supplemental GMD events.31 Based on the record in this proceeding, there appear to be no technical barriers to developing or complying with such a requirement. Moreover, as discussed below, the record supports issuance of a directive at this time, notwithstanding NOPR comments advocating postponement of any directive until after the completion of additional GMD research, because relevant GMD research is scheduled to be completed before the due date for submitting a modified Reliability Standard. The Commission therefore adopts the NOPR proposal and directs NERC to submit the modified Reliability Standard for approval within 12 months from the effective date of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2.

    31 NERC Petition at 4 (“these revisions would enhance reliability by expanding GMD Vulnerability Assessments to include severe, localized impacts and by implementing new deadlines and processes to maintain accountability in the development, completion, and revision of entity Corrective Action Plans developed to address identified vulnerabilities”).

    30. We also determine, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, that it is appropriate to direct that NERC develop further modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirement R7.4. Under NERC's proposal, applicable entities are allowed, without prior approval, to exceed deadlines for completing corrective action plan tasks when “situations beyond the control of the responsible entity [arise].” 32 Instead, as discussed below, we direct NERC to develop a timely and efficient process, consistent with the Commission's guidance in Order No. 830, to consider time extension requests on a case-by-case basis. Our directive balances the availability of time extensions when applicable entities are presented with the types of uncontrollable delays identified in NERC's petition and NOPR comments with the need to ensure that the mitigation of known GMD vulnerabilities is not being improperly delayed through such requests. Further, as proposed in the NOPR, we direct NERC to prepare and submit a report addressing how often and why applicable entities are exceeding corrective action plan deadlines as well as the disposition of time extension requests. The report is due within 12 months from the date on which applicable entities must comply with the last requirement of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. Following receipt of the report, the Commission will determine whether further action is necessary.

    32 In the Supplemental Material section of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, examples of situations beyond the control of the of the responsible entity include, but are not limited to, delays resulting from regulatory/legal processes, such as permitting; delays resulting from stakeholder processes required by tariff; delays resulting from equipment lead times; or delays resulting from the inability to acquire necessary Right-of-Way.

    31. The Commission, as discussed below, also accepts the revised GMD research work plan submitted by NERC on April 19, 2018.

    A. Corrective Action Plan for Supplemental GMD Event Vulnerabilities NOPR

    32. The NOPR proposed to determine that the absence of a requirement to mitigate assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities is inconsistent with Order No. 830, and Order No. 779, because the proposal does not require “owners and operators [to] develop and implement a plan to protect against instability, uncontrolled separation, or cascading failures of the Bulk-Power System.” 33

    33 NOPR, 163 FERC ¶ 61,126 at P 32.

    33. The NOPR explained that the Commission was not persuaded by NERC's justification that technical limitations—specifically the small number of observations used to define the supplemental GMD event and the availability of modeling tools to assist entities in assessing vulnerabilities—make requiring mitigation premature at this time.34 The NOPR, instead, accepted NERC's statement that the supplemental GMD event definition “provides a technically justified method of assessing vulnerabilities to the localized peak effects of severe GMD events.” 35 The NOPR also observed that mitigation of supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities is appropriate because Reliability Standard TPL-007-2: (1) Does not prescribe how applicable entities must perform such studies, and thus may incorporate any uncertainties regarding the geographic size of such events into their studies; (2) there are commercially-available tools that could allow for modeling of supplemental GMD events; and (3) other methods could be used within the framework of the Reliability Standard to study planning areas (e.g., superposition or sensitivity studies) in conjunction with other power system modeling tools. The NOPR further recognized that research tasks under way pursuant to the GMD research work plan that are relevant to the supplemental GMD event definition are scheduled to be completed in 2019 and the results of such research should inform the work of the standard drafting team.

    34 The Commission also rejected the assertion in NERC's petition that an evaluation of possible actions for supplemental GMD events that result in Cascading is similar to the treatment of extreme events in Reliability Standard TPL-001-4 (Transmission System Planning Performance Requirements).

    35 NOPR, 163 FERC ¶ 61,126 at P 35 (quoting NERC Petition at 13).

    Comments

    34. NERC does not support the proposed directive. NERC maintains that the provision in Requirement R8.3 that requires applicable entities to evaluate possible actions designed to reduce the likelihood or mitigate the adverse impacts of a supplemental GMD event “is not merely advisory, but rather supports a range of potential mitigating actions, such as additional hardware mitigation, operating procedures, or other resilience actions to enhance recovery and restoration.” 36 NERC expounds on this by noting that the requirement to consider mitigation in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 “would directly support mitigation that is required by [Reliability Standard EOP-010-1].” 37 NERC also contends that it “anticipates that the Corrective Action Plans, when needed to address performance requirements for the benchmark GMD event, will also provide a large degree of protection to the Bulk-Power System for events with locally-enhanced geomagnetic fields.” 38

    36 NERC Comments at 9.

    37Id. at 10.

    38Id. at 11.

    35. NERC's comments reiterate the rationale in its petition that requiring mitigation “would result in the de facto replacement of the benchmark GMD event with the proposed supplemental GMD event.” 39 NERC maintains that “while the supplemental GMD event is strongly supported by data and analysis in ways that mirror the benchmark GMD event, there are aspects of it that are less definitive than the benchmark GMD event and less appropriate as the basis of requiring Corrective Action Plans.” 40 NERC also claims that the uncertainty of geographic size of the supplemental GMD event could not be addressed adequately by sensitivity analysis or through other methods because there are “inherent sources of modeling uncertainty (e.g., earth conductivity model, substation grounding grid resistance values, transformer thermal and magnetic response models) . . . [and] introducing additional variables for sensitivity analysis, such as the size of the localized enhancement, may not improve the accuracy of GMD Vulnerability Assessments.” 41 NERC further states that “commercially-available modeling tools now advertise capabilities that could be used to model localized GMD enhancements, [but] to NERC's knowledge these capabilities have not been used extensively by planners, nor have the different software tools been benchmarked for consistency in results.” 42

    39Id. at 11-12; see also id. at 14 (“many entities would likely employ the most conservative approach for conducting supplemental GMD Vulnerability Assessments, which would be to apply extreme peak values uniformly over an entire planning area”).

    40Id. at 13.

    41Id. at 15.

    42Id.

    36. NERC contends that completing the GMD work plan is a better alternative to the NOPR directive. Moreover, NERC states that it “commits to initiate a review of TPL-007-2 following the completion of the GMD Research Work Plan to evaluate whether the standard continues to be supported by the available knowledge or whether additional refinements are necessary . . . [which] could result in modifications to, or additional support for, the proposed supplemental GMD event, and thereby inform what the TPL-007 standard should require in terms of mitigation based on supplemental GMD Vulnerability Assessments.” 43 In response to the NOPR's statement that the results of the GMD research work plan may inform the work of the standard drafting team tasked with carrying out the Commission's proposed directive, NERC comments state that “it expects that the last of the project's deliverables will be ready by early 2020 . . . [but] [a]ny scientific research project schedule, however, must account for the possibility that additional time may be needed to explore potential findings or amend project approaches to provide more useful results.” 44 NERC states that while the technical report for Task 1 is scheduled to be completed by the fourth quarter of 2019 according to the revised GMD research work plan, NERC estimates that it will file a report with the Commission, after allowing a period of public comment, six months later (i.e., mid-2020).45

    43Id. at 18.

    44Id. at 17.

    45 Revised GMD Research Work Plan at 5 (“NERC expects to submit [informational filings with the Commission] approximately six months following EPRI's completion of the associated technical report(s)”); id., Attachment 1 (Order No. 830 GMD Research Work Plan (April 2018)) at 7 (identifying “Q4 2019” as the estimated completion date of “Final technical report to provide additional technical support for the existing supplementary (localized) benchmark; or, propose update to the benchmark, as appropriate”).

    37. Trade Associations, Idaho Power, NE ISO, TVA and BPA do not support the proposed directive. They contend that requiring corrective action plans for supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities: (1) May be premature given the limited data regarding localized GMD events; (2) would address low-probability events that are unlikely to affect a wide area; and (3) could impose costs on applicable entities that outweigh the potential benefits of such a directive. Like NERC, these commenters support completing the GMD research work plan before considering mandating corrective action plans for supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities. Idaho Power, moreover, contends that it would be better for registered entities to gain experience with corrective action plans for benchmark GMD events before mandating corrective action plans for supplemental GMD events. Trade Associations state that instead of the NOPR directive, any Commission directive should be limited to requiring NERC to develop “a study of the mitigation measures deployed and the effectiveness of these measures to mitigate benchmark GMD events before mandating mitigation measures on more localized events.” 46 Similarly, BPA maintains that instead of the NOPR directive, in order to assess the costs and benefits of requiring corrective action plans for supplemental GMD events, the Commission should require NERC to file periodic reports on supplemental GMD events and the possible actions to mitigate them.

    46 Trade Associations Comments at 12.

    38. Resilient Societies and Reclamation support the NOPR directive. Reclamation states, and Resilient Societies concurs, that “[a]n exercise to only identify vulnerabilities arising from localized GMD events is not a cost-effective use of resources unless accompanied by activities to mitigate the identified vulnerabilities.” 47

    47 Reclamation Comments at 1; Resilient Societies Comments at 3.

    Commission Determination

    39. Pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the Commission adopts the NOPR proposal and directs NERC to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to require corrective action plans for assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities. While Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 requires applicable entities to assess supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities, it does not require corrective action plans to address assessed vulnerabilities. Instead, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirement R8.3 only requires applicable entities to make “an evaluation of possible actions to reduce the likelihood or mitigate the consequences and adverse impacts of the events if a supplemental GMD event is assessed to result in Cascading.” As the Commission observed in the NOPR, NERC's proposal differs significantly from Order No. 830 because the intent of the directive was not only to identify vulnerabilities arising from localized GMD events but also to mitigate such vulnerabilities.

    40. The comments opposing the NOPR directive offer two rationales for approving Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 without directing modifications at this time: (1) Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 provides sufficient protection against supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities; and (2) requiring mitigation of supplemental GMD events is premature at this time.

    41. With respect to the first rationale, NERC observes that the provision requiring applicable entities to consider supplemental GMD event mitigation is not “merely advisory.” However, there is no dispute that an applicable entity must “consider” mitigation under Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. What is significant is that after having done so, an applicable entity has no obligation under Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to implement mitigation even if the applicable entity “considered” mitigation necessary to address an assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerability.

    42. NERC also maintains that Reliability Standard EOP-010-1 requires transmission operators to “develop, maintain, and implement a GMD Operating Procedure or Operating Process to mitigate the effects of GMD events on the reliable operation of its respective system.” And in Order No. 779, the Commission determined that “while the development of the required mitigation plan [for benchmark GMD event vulnerabilities] cannot be limited to considering operational procedures or enhanced training alone, operational procedures and enhanced training may be sufficient if that is verified by the vulnerability assessments.” 48 Again, NERC's point does not resolve the Commission's concern because Reliability Standard EOP-010-1 does not ensure mitigation of all supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities assessed under Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. That is because: (1) Reliability Standard EOP-010-1 applies, in relevant part, only to transmission operators (viz., it does not apply to other applicable entity types, such as planning coordinators, transmission planners and generator owners, subject to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2); and (2) Reliability Standard EOP-010-1 does not require mitigation if the supplemental GMD event vulnerability cannot be addressed through operational procedures or enhanced training alone. Thus, Reliability Standard EOP-010-1 does not ensure satisfactory mitigation or provide an adequate substitute for mitigation as contemplated in Order No. 830.

    48 Order No. 779, 143 FERC ¶ 61,147 at P 83.

    43. In addition, NERC asserts that the required mitigation of benchmark GMD event vulnerabilities could also address supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities. Of course that may occur in some circumstances, but that is not a substitute for requiring mitigation to the extent that benchmark GMD event mitigation does not completely address a supplemental GMD event vulnerability. Under Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 there is currently no requirement to mitigate the remaining vulnerability to the Bulk-Power System.

    44. Regarding the second rationale in the NOPR comments, NERC and other commenters reiterate the assertion in NERC's petition that it would be premature, from a technical standpoint, to require corrective action plans to address supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities. As reflected in the comment summary, these commenters instead request that NERC complete the GMD research work plan and then produce a report that assesses the possible need for modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2.

    45. The NOPR discussed how a standard drafting team could use new information gathered through the GMD research work plan to develop a modified Reliability Standard. The Commission noted that Task 1 of the GMD research work plan (Further Analyze Spatial Averaging Used in the Benchmark GMD Event), which encompasses localized GMD event research, would be delivered in 2019 according to the most recent version of the GMD research work plan (i.e., the revised GMD research work plan). The NOPR stated that “[s]uch GMD research on localized events should inform the standard development process and aid applicable entities when implementing a modified Reliability Standard.” 49 While we appreciate that the informational filing for Task 1 may not be submitted to the Commission prior to the deadline for submitting a modified Reliability Standard, the underlying research in Task 1 is scheduled to be completed before then. As such, the standard drafting team and personnel working on the GMD research work plan could operate in parallel and share information to ensure that research relevant to the Commission's directive is incorporated into the modified Reliability Standard. Thus we are not persuaded by the comments seeking a delay of our directive.

    49 NOPR, 163 FERC ¶ 61,126 at P 39.

    46. We are not persuaded by the other points raised by commenters to support their assertion that requiring corrective action plans is premature. First, NERC assumes that under such a requirement “many” applicable entities will adopt a “conservative approach” and use the supplemental GMD event definition in all GMD vulnerability assessments, thus effectively supplanting the benchmark GMD event definition. NERC bases this assumption on the standard drafting team's “extensive experience in system planning and the relative immaturity of tools and methods for modeling localized enhancements.” 50 NERC acknowledges the discussion in the NOPR on how uncertainties regarding the supplemental GMD event definition—in particular the geographic size of localized events—are ameliorated by the flexibility afforded by Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. Specifically, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 permits applicable entities to apply the supplemental GMD event definition to an entire planning area or any subset of a planning area. However, NERC asserts that even with this flexibility, at least some applicable entities would default to using the supplemental GMD event definition in an overly-broad manner. Notwithstanding NERC's assertion, nothing in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 requires applicable entities to apply the supplemental GMD event definition to an entire planning area or otherwise supplant the benchmark GMD event definition.

    50 NERC Comments at 14.

    47. With respect to the statement in the NOPR that modeling tools are currently available to support corrective action plans, NERC admits that “some commercially-available modeling tools now advertise capabilities that could be used to model localized GMD enhancements.” 51 However, NERC contends that to its “knowledge these capabilities have not been used extensively by planners, nor have the different software tools been benchmarked for consistency in result.” 52 Given that GMDs have only recently been addressed in the Reliability Standards and there is currently no requirement to model and assess, let alone mitigate, localized GMD events, it is not unexpected that these modeling tools have not been used extensively for that purpose. Moreover, NERC does not assert that existing tools are incapable of performing the desired modeling function.53 Thus, NERC's objections on this point are not persuasive.

    51Id. at 15.

    52Id. at 15-16.

    53See also Trade Associations Comments at 8 (“Although current tools are available to model localized events, we understand that such modeling will require significant time as the processes involved are still largely manual, making it difficult to develop accurate, system-wide models that appropriately consider the localized impacts of the supplemental GMD event.”).

    48. NERC does not offer support for its comment in response to the NOPR's observation that sensitivity analysis can serve, among other methods, as a method to refine the geographic scope of localized GMD impacts on planning areas. NERC responds that it “does not believe that concerns regarding the uncertainty of the geographic size of the supplemental GMD event could be addressed adequately by sensitivity analysis or though other methods in planning studies.” 54 NERC claims there are already inherent sources of modeling uncertainty and that introducing another variable, such as the size of the localized enhancement, “may not improve the accuracy of the GMD Vulnerability Analysis.” 55 And yet NERC's concern implies that the benchmark GMD event contains a geographic domain that does not itself inject uncertainties. However, as the Commission stated in Order No. 830, the geographic area for spatial averaging in the benchmark GMD event definition is itself a “subjective” figure.56 Indeed, in Order No. 830, as part of the GMD research work plan directive, to address the uncertainties surrounding the geographic scale of spatial averaging, the Commission directed that NERC should “further analyze the area over which spatial averaging should be calculated for stability studies, including performing sensitivity analyses on squares less than 500 km per side (e.g., 100 km, 200 km),” which NERC is addressing in Task 1.57 As such, we see no basis, technical or otherwise, for not requiring corrective action plans for assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities while requiring corrective action plans for assessed benchmark GMD event vulnerabilities consistent with the Commission's directions in Order Nos. 779 and 830. Accordingly, the Commission is not persuaded by the arguments of NERC and other commenters for the reasons discussed above, and directs that NERC develop modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to require corrective action plans for assessed supplemental GMD event vulnerabilities.

    54 NERC Comments at 15.

    55Id.

    56 Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215 at P 45 (quoting Pulkkinen, A., Bernabeu, E., Eichner, J., Viljanen, A., Ngwira, C., “Regional-Scale High-Latitude Extreme Geoelectric Fields Pertaining to Geomagnetically Induced Currents,” Earth, Planets and Space at 2 (June 19, 2015)).

    57Id. P 26; see also revised GMD Research Work Plan (Task 1) at 6 (“further analyze the area over which spatial averaging should be used in stability studies and transformer thermal assessments by performing GIC analysis on squares less than 500 km per side (e.g., 100 km, 200 km) and using the results to perform power flow and transformer thermal assessments”).

    B. Corrective Action Plan Deadline Extensions NOPR

    49. The NOPR stated that Requirement R7.4 of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 differs from Order No. 830 by allowing applicable entities to “revise” or “update” corrective action plans to extend deadlines. This provision contrasts with the guidance in Order No. 830 that “NERC should consider extensions of time on a case-by-case basis.” While agreeing that there should be a mechanism for allowing extensions of corrective action plan implementation deadlines, the NOPR expressed concern with unnecessary delays in implementing protection against GMD threats.

    50. The NOPR identified two options for addressing Requirement R7.4. Under the first option, the Commission would, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, direct NERC to modify Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to comport with Order No. 830, by requiring that NERC and the Regional Entities, as appropriate, consider requests for extension of time on a case-by-case basis. Under this option, responsible entities seeking an extension would submit the information required by Requirement R7.4 to NERC and the Regional Entities for their consideration of the request. The Commission would also direct NERC to prepare and submit a report addressing the disposition of any such requests, as well as information regarding how often and why applicable entities are exceeding corrective action plan deadlines following implementation of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. Under such a directive, NERC would submit the report within 12 months from the date on which applicable entities must comply with the last requirement of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. Following receipt of the report, the Commission would determine whether further action is necessary. Under the second option, the Commission would approve proposed Requirement R7.4 but also direct NERC to prepare and submit the report described in the first option (without the statistics on disposition). Following receipt of the report, the Commission would determine whether further action is necessary.

    Comments

    51. NERC supports the second option in the NOPR. NERC contends that Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 “provides clarity and certainty regarding when an entity may extend a Corrective Action Plan mitigation deadline and what steps must be followed to maintain accountability and thus compliance with the standard.” 58 NERC also maintains that the proposal “avoids the administrative burden, uncertainty, and further delay that could be associated with implementing a new ERO adjudication process, such as one that would be dedicated to evaluating GMD Corrective Action Plan deadline extensions on a case-by-case basis. ” 59 To address concerns regarding the possible abuse of deadline extensions, NERC states that as “part of the compliance monitoring and enforcement activities for the proposed standard, NERC and Regional Entity staff would exercise their authority to review the reasonableness of any Corrective Action Plan delay, including reviewing the ‘situations beyond the control of the responsible entity’ that are cited as causing the delay.” 60 As noted in the Supplemental Material section of Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, NERC explains that examples of such situations include “lengthy legal or regulatory processes, stakeholder processes required by tariff, or long equipment lead times.” 61 NERC, moreover, “agrees that a report describing the results of NERC's monitoring of this provision could provide useful information . . . [and] therefore commits to prepare and submit to the Commission a report that describes how often and the reasons why entities in the United States are exceeding Corrective Action Plan deadlines.” 62

    58 NERC Comments at 20.

    59Id.

    60Id. at 20-21.

    61Id. at 20.

    62Id. at 22.

    52. Trade Associations, BPA, ISO NE, Idaho Power, and TVA support the second option and echo the rationale for adopting the second option in NERC's comments. Trade Associations explain that while they previously supported a case-by-case exception process, they now believe NERC's proposal to be more efficient and effective. Trade Associations contend that a case-by-case approach would “only increase administrative tasks for NERC and applicable entities . . . [and] would further delay any actions to mitigate rather than expedite the approval process.” 63 Trade Associations also maintain that Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 “will not delay mitigation because this requirement is only applicable if circumstances are beyond the entity's control.” 64

    63 Trade Associations Comments at 13.

    64Id.

    53. Reclamation does not appear to support modifying Requirement R7 to institute a case-by-case time extension process. However, Reclamation comments that the sub-requirement in Requirement R7.4.1 requiring documentation of reasons for delaying corrective action plans should be eliminated because it “is merely a compliance exercise and does not improve Bulk Electric System reliability.” Reclamation makes the same contention regarding the sub-requirement in Requirement R7.4.2 that a revised corrective action plan describe the original corrective action plan.

    Commission Determination

    54. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirement R7.4 differs from Order No. 830 by allowing applicable entities, under certain conditions, to extend corrective action plan implementation deadlines without prior approval. This conflicts with the Commission's guidance in Order No. 830 that, using its compliance discretion, “NERC should consider extensions of time on a case-by-case basis.” 65 Based on our consideration of the record, we believe that the case-by-case review process contemplated by Order No. 830 is the appropriate means for considering extension requests. Accordingly, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we direct that NERC develop modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 to replace the time-extension provision in Requirement R7.4 with a process through which extensions of time are considered on a case-by-case basis.

    65 Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215 at P 102.

    55. At the outset, we note that the extension process in Requirement R7.4 applies only to the implementation of corrective action plans and not to the development of corrective action plans.66 NERC and other commenters supportive of the second option in the NOPR urge approval of Requirement R7.4 without modification largely because of the perceived uncertainty and burden associated with treating extension requests on a case-by-case basis. While it is true that granting extensions on a case-by-case basis involves more uncertainty and potential burdens versus the automatic extension of time afforded by Requirement R7.4, we must weigh this against the potential for abuse of Requirement R7.4 to unduly delay mitigation, as well as the delayed visibility that NERC would have into the deployment of needed GMD protections. Presented with these competing concerns, we conclude that the imperative to address known GMD vulnerabilities in a timely manner, and without unwarranted delays, is more compelling. We recognize that applicable entities that have a legitimate need for extensions require timely responses from NERC and Regional Entities, as appropriate. Accordingly, we expect that the extension process developed by NERC in response to our directive will be timely and efficient such that applicable entities will receive prompt responses after submitting to NERC or a Regional Entity, as appropriate, the extension request and associated information described in Requirement R7.4.67

    66 Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirement R7.4 (“[t]he [corrective action plan] shall . . . [b]e revised if situations beyond the control of the responsible entity . . . prevent implementation of the [corrective action plan] within the timetable for implementation”).

    67 NOPR, 163 FERC ¶ 61,126 at P 50.

    56. In reaching our determination on this issue, we considered NERC's NOPR comments, which attempted to address the concerns with Requirement R7.4 expressed in the NOPR, stating that NERC and Regional Entity compliance and enforcement staff will review the reasonableness of any delay in implementing corrective action plans, including reviewing the asserted “situations beyond the control of the responsible entity” cited by the applicable entity, and by citing specific examples of the types of delays that might justify the invocation of Requirement R7.4. NERC's comments also characterized Requirement R7.4 as being “not so flexible . . . as to allow entities to extend Corrective Action Plan deadlines indefinitely or for any reason whatsoever.” 68 We generally agree with the standard of review that NERC indicates it will use to determine whether an extension of time to implement a corrective action plan is appropriate. However, the assessment of whether an extension of time is warranted is more appropriately made before an applicable entity is permitted to delay mitigation of a known GMD vulnerability. While NERC indicates that under proposed Requirement R7.4 there are compliance consequences for improperly delaying mitigation, mitigation of a known GMD vulnerability will nonetheless have been delayed, and we conclude it is important that any proposed delay be reviewed ahead of time. Therefore, we direct NERC to modify Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirement R7.4 to develop a timely and efficient process, consistent with the Commission's guidance in Order No. 830, to consider time extension requests on a case-by-case basis.

    68 NERC Comments at 20.

    57. We disagree with Reclamation's comment regarding Requirement R7.4.1, which requires a description of the circumstances necessitating mitigation delays, because it is at odds with NERC's NOPR comments, discussed above, in which NERC states that NERC and Regional Entities will review the reasons for delaying mitigation. Contrary to Reclamation's assertion that this requirement is “merely a documentation exercise and does not improve [bulk electric system] reliability,” unreasonable delays of mitigation could harm bulk electric system reliability by leaving it vulnerable to GMDs. Moreover, Requirement R7.4.2, also opposed by Reclamation, requiring that revised corrective action plans describe the original and previous revisions, provides compliance enforcement authorities with a revision history of the corrective action plan in a single document, thus facilitating compliance review.

    C. Other Issues Raised in NOPR Comments

    58. Resilient Societies' comments raise three issues not addressed in the NOPR. First, Resilient Societies maintains that transformers that experience an estimated GIC above 15 A/phase should be subject to mandatory corrective action plans and the Commission should “encourage owner-operators and their research partners to develop `Corrective Action Plans' for both [extra high voltage] transformers and for associated generation stations, even if these long replacement-time systems experience overstress at levels significantly below 75 amps per phase.” Second, Resilient Societies states that the Commission should encourage best practices by industry beyond the mandatory requirements of the Reliability Standards, including allowing cost recovery for such practices. Third, Resilient Societies states that the Commission should address combined GMD and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) protection.

    59. In Order No. 830, the Commission approved the 75 A/phase threshold in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 based on the record and despite objections from certain commenters. The Commission, however, directed further study of this issue as part of the GMD research work plan. Resilient Societies' comments provide no new basis for revisiting this issue at this time. Moreover, as reflected in the NOPR proposal, NERC has adequately supported the 85 A/phase threshold proposed in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 for the supplemental GMD event analysis. However, new information resulting from the GMD research work plan will also be relevant to this higher threshold. We will consider such research at the appropriate time.

    60. In Order No. 830, the Commission stated that “cost recovery for prudent costs associated with or incurred to comply with Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 and future revisions to the Reliability Standard will be available to registered entities.” 69 It is therefore beyond the scope of this proceeding to determine, as a general matter, whether voluntary measures beyond those required to comply with the governing Reliability Standards are eligible for cost recovery. That said, jurisdictional entities may of course pursue such voluntary measures, and the Commission would consider appropriate cost recovery for those investments through a formula rate or other rate proceeding.

    69 Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215 at P 24.

    61. The Commission in previous orders has indicated that the Commission's GMD proceedings are not directed to EMPs and thus Resilient Societies' comments on EMP are out-of-scope.70

    70See, e.g., Order No. 830, 156 FERC ¶ 61,215 at P 119.

    D. Revised GMD Research Work Plan

    62. On April 19, 2018, NERC submitted a revised GMD research work plan in response to a Commission order issued on October 19, 2017.71 In the October 19 Order, the Commission accepted the initial GMD research work plan filed by NERC on May 30, 2017. The Commission also directed NERC to file a final GMD research work plan within six months and ensure that the final GMD research work plan included a reevaluation of reliance on single station readings when adjusting for latitude as part of the benchmark GMD event definition. At NERC's request, the October 19 Order also provided guidance on how NERC should prioritize the tasks in the GMD research work plan.

    71Reliability Standard for Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events, 161 FERC ¶ 61,048 (2017) (October 19 Order).

    63. Bardin and Resilient Societies submitted comments in response to the revised GMD research work plan, which largely focused on a request for combined research on GMDs and EMPs. As discussed above, however, EMPs are outside the scope of the Commission's directive regarding GMD research. Resilient Societies also submitted comments criticizing aspects of five tasks in the revised GMD research work plan. With respect to Tasks 1, 2, 8 and 9, Resilient Societies' criticism is based on the contention that the “real-world data” will not be used to verify models. For example, Resilient Societies contends that NERC will not use “real-world” GIC data to validate spatial averaging (Task 1) or latitude scaling (Task 2). These assertions, however, are refuted by the revised GMD research work plan. The revised GMD research work plan indicates that the research on spatial averaging includes an analysis of “a large number (10-20) of localized extreme events and collection of both ground-based and space-based data around the times of these events.” 72 For latitude scaling, the revised GMD research work plan states that NERC will evaluate the scaling factor “using existing models and developing new models to extrapolate, from historical data, the potential scaling of a 1-in-100 year GMD event on lower geomagnetic latitudes.” 73 In addition, NERC indicates that the data gathered through the Section 1600 data request “will help validate various models used in calculating GIC's and assessing their impacts in data systems.” 74

    72 Revised GMD Research Work Plan, Attachment 1 (Order No. 830 GMD Research Work Plan (April 2018)) at 2.

    73Id. at 8.

    74Id. at 19.

    64. Resilient Societies other comments are directed to an alleged lack of specificity, granularity or “scientific assurance” in the testing described in Tasks 5, 8 and 9 of the revised GMD research work plan. These criticisms are misplaced as they demand an unreasonable degree of detail in the revised GMD research work plan. For example, regarding Task 5, NERC states that it will “validate[e] existing transformer tools with all data that is presently available and with upcoming field/laboratory test results.” 75 Resilient Societies, however, contends unpersuasively that “NERC neglects to specify `all data that is presently available' . . . and the number of transformers to be employed in `upcoming field laboratory test results' and also neglects to disclose details of the test protocols to be used.” 76 Regarding harmonics (Tasks 8 and 9), Task 9 specifically includes “tank vibration measurements,” not just simulations.77 Moreover, Task 8 (Improving Harmonic Analysis Capabilities) is intended to develop more basic information than some of the other tasks in the revised GMD research work plan where industry has more knowledge. As with all of the revised GMD research work plan tasks (with the exception of Task 6, which deals with the Section 1600 data request), NERC will submit a report to the Commission on its findings.

    75Id. at 17.

    76 Resilient Societies Comments on Revised GMD Research Work Plan at 11.

    77Id. at 25.

    65. As the revised GMD research work plan complies with Order No. 830 and the Commission's October 19 Order, we accept the revised GMD research work plan.

    III. Information Collection Statement

    66. The collection of information contained in this final rule is subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.78 OMB's regulations require review and approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules.79 Upon approval of a collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents subject to the information collection requirements of a rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to the collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number.

    78 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).

    79 5 CFR part 1320 (2018).

    67. In the NOPR, the Commission solicited comments on the need for this information, whether the information will have practical utility, the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected or retained, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including the use of automated information techniques. Specifically, the Commission asked that any revised burden or cost estimates submitted by commenters be supported by sufficient detail to understand how the estimates were generated. The Commission did not receive any comments regarding the Commission's burden estimates.

    68. The Commission approves Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, which replaces currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1. When compared to Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 maintains the current information collection requirements, modifies existing Requirements R1 through R7 and adds new requirements in Requirements R8 through R12.

    69. Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 includes new corrective action plan development and implementation deadlines in Requirement R7, new supplemental GMD vulnerability and transformer thermal impact assessments in Requirements R8 through R10, and requirements for applicable entities to gather magnetometer and GIC monitored data in Requirements R11 and R12. Deadlines in Requirement R7 for the development and implementation of corrective action plans would only change the timeline of such documentation and are not expected to revise the burden to applicable entities. The burden estimates for new Requirements R8 through R10 are expected to be similar to the burden estimates for Requirements R4 through R6 in currently-effective Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 due to the closely-mirrored requirements.80 The Commission expects that only 25 percent or fewer of transmission owners and generator owners would have to complete a supplemental transformer thermal impact assessment per Requirement R10. Requirements R11 and R12 require applicable entities to have a process to collect GIC and magnetometer data from meters in planning coordinator planning areas.

    80 NERC Petition at 14-17.

    Public Reporting Burden: The burden and cost estimates below are based on the changes to the reporting and recordkeeping burden imposed by Reliability Standard TPL-007-2. Our estimates for the number of respondents are based on the NERC Compliance Registry as of March 3, 2018, which indicates there are 183 entities registered as transmission planner (TP), 65 planning coordinators (PC), 330 transmission owners (TO), 944 generator owners (GO) within the United States. However, due to significant overlap, the total number of unique affected entities (i.e., entities registered as a transmission planner, planning coordinator, transmission owner or generator owner, or some combination of these functional entities) is 1,130 entities. This includes 188 entities that are registered as a transmission planner or planning coordinator (applicability for Requirements R7 to R9 and R11 to R12), and 1,119 entities registered as a transmission or generation owner (applicability for Requirement R10). Given the assumption above, there is an expectation that at most only 25 percent of the 1,119 entities (or 280 entities) will have to complete compliance activities for Requirement R10. The estimated burden and cost are as follow.81

    81 Hourly costs are based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) figures for May 2017 (Sector 22, Utilities) for wages (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and benefits for December 2017 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). We estimate that an Electrical Engineer (NAICS code 17-2071) would perform the functions associated with reporting requirements, at an average hourly cost (for wages and benefits) of $66.90 The functions associated with recordkeeping requirements, we estimate, would be performed by a File Clerk (NAICS code 43-4071) at an average hourly cost of $32.04 for wages and benefits.

    The estimated burden and cost are in addition to the burden and cost that are associated with the existing requirements in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 (and in the current OMB-approved inventory), which would continue under Reliability Standard TPL-007-2.

    The requirements for NERC to provide reports to the Commission and to develop and submit modifications to Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 are already covered under FERC-725 (OMB Control No. 1902-0225).

    FERC-725N, Changes Due to Final Rule in Docket No. RM18-8 82 83 Requirement (R) Number and type of respondents
  • (1)
  • Annual number of responses per
  • respondent
  • (2)
  • Total number of responses
  • (1) × (2) = (3)
  • Average burden hrs. & cost per
  • response
  • (4)
  • Total annual
  • burden hrs. & total
  • annual cost
  • (rounded)
  • (3) × (4) = (5)
  • Cost per
  • respondent ($)
  • (5) ÷ (1)
  • R1 through R6 84 No change No change No change No change No change No change R7 188 (PC and TP) 1/5 (once for every five year study) 37.6 Rep. 5 hrs., $334.50; RK 5 hrs., $160.20 Rep. 188 hrs., $12,577; RK 188 hrs., $6,023 Rep. 1 hr., $66.90; RK 1 hr., $32.04 R8 188 (PC and TP) 1/5 (once for every five year study) 37.6 Rep., 27 hrs., $1,806.30; RK, 21 hrs., $672.84 Rep. 1,015 hrs., $67,917; RK 790 hrs., $25,299 Rep., 5.4 hrs., $361.26; RK 4.2 hrs., $134.57 R9 188 (PC and TP) 1/5 (once for every five year study) 37.6 Rep. 9 hrs., $602.10; RK 7 hrs., $224.28 Rep. 338 hrs., $22,639; RK 263 hrs., $8,432 Rep. 1.8 hrs., $120.42; RK 1.4 hrs., $44.85 R10 280 (25% of 1,119) (GO and TO) 1/5 (once for every five year study) 56 Rep. 22 hrs., $1,471.80; RK 18 hrs., $576.72 Rep. 1,232 hrs., $82,421; RK 1,008 hrs., $32,296 Rep. 4.4 hrs., $294.36; RK 3.6 hrs., $115.34 R11 188 (PC and TP) 1 (on-going reporting) 188 Rep. 10 hrs., $669; RK. 10 hrs., $320.40 Rep. 1,880 hrs., $125,772; RK 1,880 hrs., $60,235 Rep. 10 hrs., $669; RK 10 hrs., $320.40 R12 188 (PC and TP) 1 (on-going reporting) 188 Rep. 10 hrs., $669; RK. 10 hrs., 320.40 Rep. 1,880 hrs. $125,772; RK 1,880 hrs., $60,235 Rep. 10 hrs., $669; RK 10 hrs., $320.40 Total Additional Hrs. and Cost (rounded), due to Final Rule in RM18-8 Rep., 6,533 hrs., $437,057; RK 6,009 hrs., $192,528

    Title: FERC-725N, Mandatory Reliability Standards: TPL Reliability Standards

    82 Rep.=reporting requirements; RK-recordkeeping requirements (Evidence Retention).

    83 For each Reliability Standard, the Measure shows the acceptable evidence (Reporting Requirement) for the associated Requirement (R numbers), and the Compliance section details the related Recordkeeping Requirement.

    84 While Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 extends the requirements in existing Reliability Standard TPL-007-1, Requirements R1 through R3 to the newly required supplemental GMD event analyses, the obligation to conduct the supplemental GMD event analyses is found in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, Requirements R8 through R10.

    Action: Revisions to an existing collection of information

    OMB Control No: 1902-0264

    Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit institutions.

    Frequency of Responses:85 Every five years (for Requirement R7-R10), annually (for Requirement R11 and R12), and ongoing.

    85 The frequency of Requirements R1 through R6 in Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 is unchanged from the existing requirements in Reliability Standard TPL-007-1.

    Necessity of the Information: Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 implements the Congressional mandate of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards to better ensure the reliability of the nation's Bulk-Power System. Specifically, these requirements address the threat posed by GMD events to the Bulk-Power System and conform to the Commission's directives to modify Reliability Standard TPL-007-1 as directed in Order No. 830.

    Internal review: The Commission has reviewed Reliability Standard TPL-007-2, and made a determination that its action is necessary to implement section 215 of the FPA. The Commission has assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with the information requirements.

    70. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of the Executive Director, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, email: [email protected], phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873].

    71. Comments concerning the collection of information and the associated burden estimate should be sent to the Commission in this docket and may also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. Due to security concerns, comments should be sent electronically to the following email address: [email protected]. Comments submitted to OMB should refer to FERC-725N and OMB Control No. 1902-0264.

    IV. Environmental Analysis

    72. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.86 The Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from this requirement as not having a significant effect on the human environment. Included in the exclusion are rules that are clarifying, corrective, or procedural or that do not substantially change the effect of the regulations being amended.87 The actions here fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's regulations.

    86Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284).

    87 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2018).

    V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    73. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 88 generally requires a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The definition of small business is provided by the Small Business Administration (SBA) at 13 CFR 121.201. The threshold for a small utility (using SBA's sub-sector 221) is based on the number of employees for a concern and its affiliates. As discussed above, Reliability Standard TPL-007-2 applies to a total of 1,130 unique planning coordinators, transmission planners, transmission owners, and generation owners.89 A small utility (and its affiliates) is defined as having no more than the following number of employees:

    88 5 U.S.C. 601-12.

    89 In the NERC Registry, there are approximately 65 PCs, 188 TPs, 944 GOs, and 330 TOs (in the United States), which will be affected by this final rule. Because some entities serve in more than one role, these figures involve some double counting.

    • For planning coordinators, transmission planners, and transmission owners (NAICS code 221121, Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control), a maximum of 500 employees

    • for generator owners, a maximum of 750 employees.90

    90 The maximum number of employees for a generator owner (and its affiliates) to be “small” varies from 250 to 750 employees, depending on the type of generation (e.g., hydroelectric, nuclear, fossil fuel, wind). For this analysis, we use the most conservative threshold of 750 employees.

    74. As estimated in the NOPR, the total cost to all entities (large and small) is $629,585 annually (or an average of $1,345.27 for each of the estimated 468 entities affected annually). For the estimated 280 generator owners and transmission owners affected annually, the average cost would be $409.70 per year. For the estimated 188 planning coordinators and transmission planners, the estimated average annual cost would be $2,738.84. The estimated annual cost to each affected entity varies from $409.70 to $2,738.84 and is not considered significant. The Commission did not receive any comments regarding these burden and cost estimates.

    75. Accordingly, the Commission certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    VI. Document Availability

    76. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington DC 20426.

    77. From FERC's Home Page on the internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field.

    78. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's website during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202) 502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at [email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-8371, TTY (202)502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at [email protected].

    VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    These regulations are effective January 25, 2019. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB that this rule is not a “major rule” as defined in section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. The rule will be provided to the Senate, House, Government Accountability Office, and the SBA.

    By the Commission. Commissioner McIntyre is not voting on this order.

    Issued: November 15, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    Note:

    The following appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

    APPENDIX—List of Commenters Abbreviation Commenter Bardin David Bardin. BPA Bonneville Power Administration. Idaho Power Idaho Power Company. ISO NE ISO New England Inc. NERC North American Electric Reliability Corporation. Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation. Resilient Societies Foundation for Resilient Societies. Trade Associations American Public Power Association, Edison Electric Institute, Electricity Consumers Resource Council, Large Public Power Council, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. TVA Tennessee Valley Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25678 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2018-0913] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Delaware River, Dredging Operation Equipment Recovery, Marcus Hook Range, Chester, PA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for navigable waters within a 250-yard radius of Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company vessels and machinery conducting emergency diving and equipment removal operations in the Delaware River within Marcus Hook Range near Chester, Pennsylvania. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by broken equipment removal operations. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Delaware Bay or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from November 19, 2018 through November 26, 2018. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from November 26, 2018 through November 30, 2018. This rule may be withdrawn if the project is completed before the stated end date. This rule will be enforced continuously each day the rule is in effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2018-0913 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer Thomas Welker, U.S. Coast Guard, Sector Delaware Bay, Waterways Management Division; telephone (215) 271-4814, email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations COTP Captain of the Port DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to do so. The rule must be established by November 18, 2018, to serve its purpose of providing safety during the recovery of a broken hydro-hammer associated with dredging operations. The Coast Guard was notified of the recovery operation schedule on November 18, 2018, and a safety zone must be established by November 18, 2018 to address the hazards associated with diving and equipment removal operations.

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest because immediate action is needed to mitigate the potential safety hazards associated with diving and equipment removal operations.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with emergency diving and equipment recovery operations beginning November 19, 2018, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 250-yard radius of diving and equipment recovery vessels and machinery. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while the operations to recover the broken hydro-hammer are being conducted.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone on November 19, 2018 through November 30, 2018, within 250 yards of vessels and machinery being used by personnel to conduct diving and equipment recovery operations, at approximately 39°49.3002′ N Latitude, −75°22.8966′ W Longitude, in the Marcus Hook Range of the Delaware River. During diving and equipment recovery operations, persons or vessels will not be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or the COTP's designated representative. Vessels wishing to transit the safety zone in the clear side of the main navigational channel may do so if they can make satisfactory passing arrangements with dredge NEW YORK or tug INDIAN DAWN in accordance with the Navigational Rules in 33 CFR subchapter E via VHF-FM 88 at least 1 hour prior to arrival and at 30 minutes prior to arrival to arrange safe passage. If vessels are unable to make satisfactory passing arrangements with the dredge NEW YORK or tug INDIAN DAWN, they may request permission from the COTP, or his designated representative, to enter and transit the safety zone on VHF-FM channel 16. All vessels must operate at the minimum safe speed necessary to maintain steerage and reduce wake while transiting the safety zone. The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 and Marine Safety Information Bulletin further defining specific work locations and traffic patterns.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone, which will impact a small designated area of the Delaware River. Although persons and vessels may not enter the safety zone without authorization from the COTP or a designated representative of the COTP, they may operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 and Marine Safety Information Bulletin about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves an emergency safety zone that will prohibit persons and vessels from entering a limited area on the navigable water in the Delaware Bay, during an emergency diving and equipment recovery operation. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(c) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T05-0913 to read as follows:
    § 165.T05-0913 Safety Zone; Delaware River, Dredging Operation Equipment Recovery, Mantua Creek Anchorage.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters within 250 yards of vessels and machinery associated with diving and pipeline removal operating on the Delaware River, at approximately 39°49.3002′ N Latitude, 075°22.8966′ W Longitude, in the Marcus Hook Range near Chester, Pennsylvania. All coordinates are based on Datum NAD 1983.

    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard petty officer, warrant or commissioned officer on board a Coast Guard vessel or on board a federal, state, or local law enforcement vessel assisting the Captain of the Port Delaware Bay (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Entry into or transiting within the safety zone is prohibited unless vessels obtain permission from the Captain of the Port via VHF-FM channel 16, or make satisfactory passing arrangements via VHF-FM channel 88, with the dredge NEW YORK or tug INDIAN DAWN per this section and the Rules of the Road (33 CFR chapter I, subchapter E). Vessels requesting to transit shall contact the dredge NEW YORK or tug INDIAN DAWN on channel 88 at least 1 hour prior to arrival and at 30 minutes prior to arrival.

    (2) Vessels granted permission to enter and transit the safety zone must do so in accordance with any directions or orders of the Captain of the Port, his designated representative, dredge NEW YORK, or tug INDIAN DAWN. No person or vessel may enter or remain in a safety zone without permission from the Captain of the Port, dredge NEW YORK, or tug INDIAN DAWN.

    (3) All vessels must operate at the minimum safe speed necessary to maintain steerage and reduce wake.

    (4) This section applies to all vessels that intend to transit through the safety zone except vessels that are engaged in the following operations: Enforcement of laws, service of aids to navigation, and emergency response.

    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by federal, state, and local agencies.

    (e) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced continuously from November 19, 2018 through November 30, 2018, or completion of the equipment removal, whichever is sooner.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. S.E. Anderson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port Delaware Bay.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25668 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board 37 CFR Part 384 [Docket No. 17-CRB-0001-BER (2019-2023)] Determination of Royalty Rates and Terms for Making Ephemeral Copies of Sound Recordings for Transmission to Business Establishments (Business Establishments III) AGENCY:

    Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) publish final regulations setting rates and terms for the making of an ephemeral recording of a sound recording by a business establishment service for the period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2023.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 1, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    For access to the docket to read submitted background documents go to eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board's electronic filing and case management system, at https://app.crb.gov/ and search for docket number 17-CRB-0001-BER (2019-2023).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707-7658 or email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In 1995, Congress enacted the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act, Public Law 104-39, which created an exclusive right, subject to certain limitations, for copyright owners of sound recordings to perform publicly those sound recordings by means of certain digital audio transmissions. Among the limitations on the performance right was the creation of a statutory license for nonexempt, noninteractive digital subscription transmissions. 17 U.S.C. 114(d).

    The scope of the section 114 statutory license was expanded in 1998 upon the passage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA), Public Law 105-34. The DMCA created, inter alia, a statutory license for the making of an “ephemeral recording” of a sound recording by certain transmitting organizations. 17 U.S.C. 112(e). This license, among other things, allows entities that transmit performances of sound recordings to business establishments to make an ephemeral recording of a sound recording for later transmission, pursuant to the limitations set forth in section 114(d)(1)(C)(iv).

    Chapter 8 of the Copyright Act requires the Judges to conduct proceedings every five years to determine the royalty rates and terms for “the activities described in section 112(e)(1) relating to the limitation on exclusive rights specified by section 114(d)(1)(C)(iv).” 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(1), 804(b)(2). Accordingly, the Judges published a notice commencing the current proceeding and requesting that interested parties submit petitions to participate. 82 FR 143 (Jan. 3, 2017).

    The Judges received Petitions to Participate from Mood Media Corporation, Music Choice, David Powell, David Rahn,1 Rockbot, Inc.,2 Sirius XM Radio Inc., and SoundExchange, Inc. The Judges initiated the three-month negotiation period and directed the participants to submit written direct statements no later than May 14, 2018.

    1 In his Petition to Participate, Mr. Rahn identified himself as a shareholder in SBR Creative Media, Inc. and its subsidiary CustomerChannels.net, LLC.

    2 Rockbot withdrew its Petition to Participate on January 11, 2018.

    On May 4, 2018, the Judges received a joint Motion to Adopt Settlement from Mr. Rahn, Mood Media Corp., Music Choice, Sirius XM Radio Inc., and SoundExchange, Inc., (Moving Parties) stating that they had reached a settlement obviating the need for written evidentiary statements or a hearing.3

    3 According to the Motion, David Powell, although having filed a Petition to Participate, did not otherwise participate in the proceeding. Motion at 2. The Moving Parties represent that counsel for Mood Media attempted unsuccessfully to contact Mr. Powell to discuss the filing of the Motion. Id. at 2-3. Mr. Powell also did not respond to the request for comments on the proposed regulations. On May 14, 2018, shortly before the proposed regulations were published, however, Mr. Powell filed a “Verified Motion for Enlargement of Time, and Agreed with Settlement Parties to Adopt Settlement Ex-Parte,” which the Judges accept as a notice that Mr. Powell does not object to the settlement. The Judges make no finding with regard to Mr. Powell's eligibility to participate in this proceeding. To the extent Mr. Powell has an interest in the business establishment services license, he will be bound by the royalty rates and terms the Judges adopt.

    Section 801(b)(7)(A) of the Copyright Act authorizes the Judges to adopt royalty rates and terms negotiated by “some or all of the participants in a proceeding at any time during the proceeding” provided they are submitted to the Judges for approval. The Judges must provide “an opportunity to comment on the agreement” to participants and non-participants in the rate proceeding who “would be bound by the terms, rates, or other determination set by any agreement. . . .” 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(7)(A)(i). Participants in the proceeding may also “object to [the agreement's] adoption as a basis for statutory terms and rates.” Id.

    The Judges “may decline to adopt the agreement as a basis for statutory terms and rates for participants that are not parties to the agreement,” only “if any participant [in the proceeding] objects to the agreement and the [Judges] conclude, based on the record before them if one exists, that the agreement does not provide a reasonable basis for setting statutory terms or rates.” 17 U.S.C. 801(b)(7)(A)(ii). Accordingly, on May 17, 2018, the Judges published a document requesting comment on the proposed rates and terms. 83 FR 22907. The Judges received no timely comments or objections in response to the May 17 document.

    Having received no opposition to the proposal and finding that the agreement among the moving parties provides a reasonable basis for setting statutory terms and rates, the Judges, by this notice, adopt as final regulations the rates and terms for the making of an ephemeral recording by a business establishment service for the period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2023.

    List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 384

    Copyright, Digital audio transmissions, Ephemeral recordings, Performance right, Sound recordings.

    Final Regulations

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Judges amend part 384 of chapter III of title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

    PART 384—RATES AND TERMS FOR THE MAKING OF EPHEMERAL RECORDINGS BY BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENT SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 384 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    17 U.S.C. 112(e), 801(b)(1).

    § 384.1 [Amended]
    2. In § 384.1, amend paragraph (a) by removing “January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2018” and adding “January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2023” in its place. 3. Amend § 384.3 by: a. Revising paragraph (a); and b. In paragraph (b), removing “$10,000” and adding “$20,000” in its place.

    The revision reads as follows:

    § 384.3 Royalty fees for ephemeral recordings.

    (a) Basic royalty rate. (1) For the making of any number of Ephemeral Recordings in the operation of a Business Establishment Service, a Licensee shall pay a royalty equal to the following percentages of such Licensee's “Gross Proceeds” derived from the use in such service of musical programs that are attributable to copyrighted recordings:

    Year Rate
  • %
  • 2019 12.5 2020 12.75 2021 13.0 2022 13.25 2023 13.5

    (2) “Gross Proceeds” as used in this section means all fees and payments, including those made in kind, received from any source before, during or after the License Period that are derived from the use of copyrighted sound recordings during the License Period pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 112(e) for the sole purpose of facilitating a transmission to the public of a performance of a sound recording under the limitation on exclusive rights specified in 17 U.S.C. 114(d)(1)(C)(iv). The attribution of Gross Proceeds to copyrighted recordings may be made on the basis of:

    (i) For classical programs, the proportion that the playing time of copyrighted classical recordings bears to the total playing time of all classical recordings in the program; and

    (ii) For all other programs, the proportion that the number of copyrighted recordings bears to the total number of all recordings in the program.

    § 384.5 [Amended]
    4. In § 384.5, amend paragraph (d)(4) by removing the second comma before the word “subject”.

    Dated: September 17, 2018.

    David R. Strickler, Copyright Royalty Judge. Jesse M. Feder, Copyright Royalty Judge. Suzanne M. Barnett, Chief Copyright Royalty Judge.
    Carla D. Hayden, Librarian of Congress.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25458 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410-72-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0598; FRL-9986-76-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving Maryland's regional haze progress report, submitted on August 9, 2017, as a revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). Maryland's SIP revision addresses Clean Air Act (CAA) provisions and EPA regulations that require each state to submit periodic reports describing the State's progress towards reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and to make a determination of the adequacy of the State's existing regional haze SIP. The EPA is approving Maryland's determination that the State's regional haze SIP is adequate to meet the RPGs for the first implementation period.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0598. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Erin Trouba, (215) 814-2023, or by email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Under the Regional Haze Rule, each state was required to submit to EPA an implementation plan addressing regional haze visibility impairment for the first implementation period through 2018, and then was required to submit a progress report in the form of a SIP revision that evaluates progress towards the RPGs set for each mandatory Class I Federal area within the state and for each mandatory Class I Federal area outside the state which may be affected by emissions from within the state. 40 CFR 51.308(g). Each state is also required to submit, at the same time as the progress report, a determination of the adequacy of its existing regional haze SIP. 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report SIP is due five years after submittal of the initial regional haze SIP.

    On February 13, 2012, Maryland submitted the State's first regional haze SIP in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308. The progress report SIP was submitted by Maryland, through the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), on August 9, 2017. On August 27, 2018 (83 FR 43571), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in which EPA proposed approval of Maryland's regional haze 5-year progress report SIP, a report on progress made in the first implementation period towards RPGs for Class I areas outside the State that are affected by emissions from Maryland's sources. Because there are no Class I areas in Maryland, the State did not need to address progress towards RPGs for Class I areas “inside” the State. This progress report SIP also included the State's determination that its existing regional haze SIP requires no substantive revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility improvement and emissions reduction goals for 2018.

    II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    Maryland's regional haze 5-year progress report SIP submittal (2017 Progress Report) addresses the required elements for progress reports under the provisions of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and includes a determination that the State's existing regional haze SIP requires no substantive revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility improvement and emissions reduction goals for 2018 as required by 40 CFR 51.308(h).

    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to approve the 2017 Progress Report because EPA found that the 2017 Progress Report addressed the elements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) regarding progress implementing the approved regional haze SIP and discussed visibility improvement in Class I areas impacted by Maryland's emissions. The detailed rationale for EPA's action is explained in the NPRM and will not be restated here. In addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are required to submit, at the same time as the progress report submission, a determination of the adequacy of their existing regional haze SIP. In the 2017 Progress Report, Maryland declared that its existing regional haze SIP required no substantive revision to achieve the RPGs for Class I areas. As explained in detail in the NPRM, EPA concluded Maryland adequately addressed 40 CFR 51.308(h) because decreasing emissions of visibility impairing pollutants and progress of regional Class I areas towards RPGs for 2018 indicate that no further revisions to Maryland's SIP are necessary for this first regional haze implementation period. Therefore, EPA concluded the 2017 Progress Report met the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(h).

    III. Summary of Public Comments and EPA's Response

    One public comment was received on the NPRM. A summary of the comment and EPA's response are provided in this section. The comment is provided in the docket for this final rulemaking action.

    Comment: The commenter stated Maryland's plan does not adequately address regional haze progress, alleged that the State's electric generating units (EGUs) did not reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions by ninety percent (90%), and alleged a pulp mill and EGU in Maryland continue to emit large amounts of SO2. The commenter stated Maryland's BART (Best Available Retrofit Technology) determinations were and continue to be inadequate. The commenter stated Maryland's sulfur fuel oil limits are not low and asked EPA to compare Maryland's limits to other states.

    Response: EPA reviewed Maryland's 2017 Progress Report against the requirements for progress reports in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h). EPA found the 2017 Progress Report evaluated progress towards the RPGs and determined that the existing Maryland regional haze SIP is adequate to meet those RPGs because the 2017 Progress Report showed decreasing emissions of visibility impairing pollutants and significant progress of regional Class I areas to meeting or exceeding RPGs for 2018. Maryland's 2017 Progress Report documented emission reductions from point source, non-road, on-road, and area source sectors. Thus, EPA agreed with Maryland's determination that no further revisions to Maryland's SIP are necessary for this first regional haze implementation period.

    40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) requires progress reports to contain a description of the status of implementation of all measures included in the implementation plan for achieving RPGs for Class I areas. One implementation measure that is required to be described in the progress report is the implementation of BART. As stated in the NPRM and in the 2017 Progress Report, Maryland discussed the implementation of BART at EGUs and at Holcim Cement and Luke Pulp and Paper Mill. The adequacy of these measures as BART was determined by EPA when EPA approved the Maryland regional haze SIP in 2012. 77 FR 39938 (July 6, 2012). Nothing in the CAA or in 40 CFR 51.308(g) or (h) requires Maryland or EPA to reexamine the BART determinations when reviewing a progress report.

    In addition, in the 2017 Progress Report, Maryland addressed the implementation of the Healthy Air Act (HAA) which was a measure employed by Maryland for its regional haze SIP to achieve a 90% reduction of SO2 from coal-fired EGUs within the State to address RPGs for Class I areas impacted by Maryland and to address BART for those eligible EGUs. For a discussion of the HAA as the approved BART-alternative for EGUs in Maryland, see EPA's approval of the Maryland regional haze SIP at 77 FR 39938. In the 2017 Progress Report, Maryland included SO2 emissions data for EGUs demonstrating reductions from the HAA as well as from other SO2 reducing regulations. Therefore, as a factual matter, EPA disagrees with the commenter that Maryland did not reduce SO2 emissions by 90% from EGUs to meet the regional haze SIP measures. Maryland also discussed the implementation of BART within the State and thus met requirements for progress reports in 40 CFR 51.308. The commenter provided no information that Maryland had not implemented BART as approved by EPA.1

    1 In June 2012, EPA approved BART emission limits for power boiler 25, a BART subject source, at the Verso Luke Paper Mill. 77 FR 39938 (June 13, 2012). In July 2017, EPA removed the previously approved BART requirements for SO2 and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from power boiler 25 (No. 25) and replaced them with new, alternative emission requirements as BART. EPA established an annual SO2 cap for power boiler 25 and approved alternative BART emission limits for SO2 and NOx for power boiler 24 (No. 24). 82 FR 35451 (July 31, 2017).

    Regarding the commenter's concern about fuel sulfur limits, EPA addressed Maryland's fuel sulfur requirements in the approval of Maryland's regional haze SIP. As EPA stated when proposing to approve Maryland's regional haze SIP, since Maryland has not adopted a low sulfur fuel oil strategy, the State has a deficiency of 7,473.4 tons per year (tpy) of SO2 emissions. However, Maryland has a surplus of SO2 emission reductions of 57,552 tpy resulting from the HAA. This surplus accounts for the SO2 emission reductions needed to meet the requirements of the low sulfur fuel strategy. 77 FR 11827, 11835 (Feb. 28, 2012). As EPA approved Maryland's regional haze SIP without Maryland having a low sulfur fuel strategy as a measure for its SIP, whether or not Maryland has such a strategy now implemented, and whether any sulfur fuel requirements Maryland has are less stringent than other states, are not relevant or appropriate considerations before EPA in evaluating the 2017 Progress Report. 40 CFR 51.308(g) relates to discussion of the implementation of measures approved into a state's regional haze SIP. Thus, the 2017 Progress Report did not need to address any sulfur fuel requirements as those are not part of the Maryland regional haze SIP. As EPA found Maryland addressed its progress towards meeting RPGs in Class I areas impacted by Maryland emissions and addressed visibility improvement from measures in the Maryland SIP, EPA is approving the 2017 Progress Report as addressing 40 CFR 51.308(g).

    IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving Maryland's 2017 Progress Report submitted on August 9, 2017, as meeting the applicable regional haze requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h) as well as CAA section 110 requirements for SIPs.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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

    C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 25, 2019. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action to approve Maryland's regional haze 5-year progress report SIP revision may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2))

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Cosmo Servidio, Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart V—Maryland 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding the entry for “Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1070 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation *         *         *         *         *         *         * Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report Statewide 8/09/2017 11/26/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation]
    [FR Doc. 2018-25556 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971; FRL-9977-14] Pyrifluquinazon; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of pyrifluquinazon in or on multiple commodities that are identified and discussed later in this document. Nichino America, Inc. requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective November 26, 2018. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before January 25, 2019, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before January 25, 2019. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971, by one of the following methods:

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

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

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

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

    II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerances

    In the Federal Register of December 9, 2016 (81 FR 89036) (FRL-9953-69) and September 15, 2017 (82 FR 43352) (FRL-9965-43), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide petitions (PP 6F8502 and PP 7E8578, respectively) by Nichino America, Inc., 4550 New Linden Hill Road, Suite 501, Wilmington, DE 19808. The petitions requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide pyrifluquinazon, (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-pyridinylmethyl)amino]-6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone), as follows: PP 6F8502 requested tolerances for residues in or on Almond, hulls at 0.4 parts per million (ppm); Brassica head and stem vegetables (crop group 5-16) at 0.4 ppm; Cattle, fat at 0.01 ppm; Cattle, meat at 0.01 ppm; Cattle, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Citrus fruits (crop group 10-10) at 0.5 ppm; Citrus, oil at 14 ppm; Cotton, gin byproducts at 4.0 ppm; Cotton, undelinted seed at 0.2 ppm; Cucurbit vegetables (crop group 9) at 0.06 ppm; Fruiting vegetables, tomato subgroup 8-10A at 0.20 ppm; Fruiting vegetables, pepper/eggplant subgroup 8-10B at 0.15 ppm; Goat, fat at 0.01 ppm; Goat, meat at 0.01 ppm; Goat, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Horse, fat at 0.01 ppm; Horse, meat at 0.01 ppm; Horse, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Leafy vegetables (crop group 4-16) at 5 ppm; Leaf petiole vegetables (crop subgroup 22B) at 1.5 ppm; Milk at 0.01 ppm; Pome fruits (crop group 11-10) at 0.04 ppm; Sheep, fat at 0.01 ppm; Sheep, meat at 0.01 ppm; Sheep, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Small fruit vine climbing subgroup (crop subgroup 13-07F) except fuzzy kiwifruit at 0.6 ppm; Stone fruits, cherry subgroup 12-12A at 0.2 ppm; Stone fruits, peach subgroup 12-12B at 0.03 ppm; Stone fruits, plum subgroup 12-12C at 0.015 ppm; Tree nuts (crop group 14-12) at 0.01 ppm; and Tuberous and corm vegetables (crop subgroup 1C) at 0.01 ppm and PP 7E8578 requested a tolerance for residues in or on imported tea at 20 ppm. Those documents referenced summaries of the petitions prepared by Nichino America, Inc., the registrant, which are available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received in response to the first notice of filing, and EPA's response can be found in Unit IV.C.

    Consistent with the authority in section 408(d)(4)(A)(i), EPA is establishing tolerances that vary from what the petitioner sought. The reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

    A. Toxicological Profile

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

    The effects observed following dietary exposure to pyrifluquinazon, primarily targeted the liver, thyroid, kidney, hematopoietic system, and the male and female reproductive organs. Nasal toxicity was observed following chronic oral exposures to rats, mice, and dogs, but was not observed following inhalation exposure to rats. Inhalation exposure for 28 days in rats resulted in portal-of-entry effects in the form of terminal airway inflammation in the lungs of males at an equivalent oral dose that was higher than those causing nasal effects in dogs (the most sensitive species for nasal toxicity). Systemic effects following inhalation exposure to pyrifluquinazon consisted of clinical signs including palpebral closure, splayed gait, hunched posture, ataxia, piloerection, lethargy, and ocular effects. No adverse effects were seen in rats following dermal exposure. Pyrifluquinazon showed no signs of immunotoxicity.

    Pyrifluquinazon showed signs of increased pre- and postnatal quantitative susceptibility in rats. In the rat developmental toxicity study, maternal effects (decreased body weights, and mean gravid uterine weights) were seen at a higher dose than fetal effects (decreased anogenital distances (AGD) in males, increased incidences of skeletal variations, and increased incidences of supernumerary ribs). In the two-generation reproduction study in rats, systemic parental effects were consistent with the general systemic toxic effects in rats and occurred at doses higher than those eliciting offspring and reproductive effects. Offspring effects included decreased body weights and decreased AGD in the male pups, which is also considered a reproductive effect. In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, a decreased number of live fetuses per doe was observed, which is considered a maternal and developmental adverse effect since it is unknown whether the effect occurred from toxicity to maternal animals or the fetuses. In addition, effects were observed in reproductive organs (epididymides, testes, uterus).

    Signs of neurotoxicity were observed in the acute neurotoxicity (ACN) study, and consisted of: Decreased motor activity, prostrate, ataxia, hyporeactivity, hunched posture, loss of the righting reflex, coldness to touch, lacrimation, bradyapnea, piloerection, and ptosis. Signs of neurotoxicity were also observed in the subchronic oral study and the inhalation study in rats at doses that caused portal-of-entry effects.

    Exposure to pyrifluquinazon resulted in increased incidences of testicular interstitial cell tumors (Leydig tumors) in both male rats and mice. Based on its review of the available data, EPA has concluded that pyrifluquinazon is “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at levels that do not alter rodent hormone homeostasis.” This conclusion is based on the following: (1) The Agency was only able to conclude that one type of Leydig cell tumor (in the male mice) is treatment-related because the type of rat tested has a high background rate for this tumor type; (2) the suggested mode of action is supported by the available data and indicates that the tumors are not likely to occur below doses that trigger androgen receptor degradation in sex-specific tissues leading to changes in circulating androgen related hormones; and (3) neither the parent molecule nor its metabolites showed evidence of genotoxicity or mutagenicity. For these reasons and because the level that triggers tumor development is higher than 70.1 mg/kg/day and the chronic reference dose is 0.06 mg/kg/day, EPA has determined that quantification of cancer risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., chronic reference dose) will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity that could result from exposure to pyrifluquinazon.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by pyrifluquinazon as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document “Pyrifluquinazon: Human Health Risk Assessment for the Proposed Use on Tuberous and Corm Vegetables, Leafy Vegetables (including greenhouse-grown lettuce), Brassica Head and Stem Vegetables, Fruiting Vegetables (including greenhouse-grown pepper and tomato), Cucurbit Vegetables (including greenhouse-grown cucumber), Citrus Fruits, Pome Fruits, Stone Fruits, Small Vine Climbing Fruit (excluding fuzzy kiwifruit), Tree Nuts, Leaf Petiole Vegetables, and Cotton, and for the Establishment of a Tolerance without a U.S. Registration for Residues in/on Imported Tea” on pages 16-24 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971.

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

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

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyrifluquinazon used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

    Table—Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Pyrifluquinazon for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment Exposure/scenario Point of departure and
  • uncertainty/safety factors
  • RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
  • assessment
  • Study and toxicological effects
    Acute dietary (Females 13-49 years of age) NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10X
  • UFH = 10X
  • FQPA SF = 1X
  • Acute RfD = 0.05 mg/kg/day
  • aPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day
  • Developmental Toxicity Study (rat)
  • LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on decreased AGD in males, increased incidences of skeletal variations (total), and increased incidences of supernumerary ribs.
  • Acute dietary (General population including infants and children) NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10X
  • UFH = 10X
  • FQPA SF = 1X
  • Acute RfD = 1 mg/kg/day
  • aPAD = 1 mg/kg/day
  • Acute Neurotoxicity Screening Battery
  • LOAEL = 300 mg/kg/day based on increased incidences of clinical signs and effects on functional observational parameters, dehydration, decreased motor activity, prostrate, ataxia, hyporeactivity, scant or no feces, hunched posture, lost righting reflex, decreased body temperatures, lacrimation, bradyapnea, piloerection, ptosis, and decreased grip strength), decreased body weights and body-weight gains, decreased food consumption, and decreased brain weights.
  • Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 6.25 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10X
  • UFH = 10X
  • FQPA SF = 1X
  • Chronic RfD = 0.06 mg/kg/day
  • cPAD = 0.06 mg/kg/day
  • Carcinogenicity (mouse)
  • LOAEL = 27.1/25.0 mg/kg/day (M/F) based on decreased mean body weight in males; and increased incidences of tactile hair loss in males, endometrial hyperplasia of the uterine horn in females, follicular cell hypertrophy of the thyroid in males, and subcapsular cell hyperplasia of the adrenal in males.
  • Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: “Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at levels that do not alter rodent hormone homeostasis.”

    FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population-adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).

    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to pyrifluquinazon, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from pyrifluquinazon in food as follows:

    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified for pyrifluquinazon. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16. This software uses 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues, default processing factors, and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all proposed uses.

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16 software with 2003-2008 food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues, default processing factors, and 100 PCT for all proposed and registered uses.

    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that pyrifluquinazon would not pose a cancer risk to humans at dose levels below the chronic reference dose. Therefore, a separate dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.

    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment for pyrifluquinazon. Tolerance-level residues and/or 100% CT were assumed for all food commodities.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for pyrifluquinazon in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of pyrifluquinazon. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.

    Based on the Pesticides in Water Calculator (PWC) and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of pyrifluquinazon for acute exposures are estimated to be 7.52 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 10.3 ppb for ground water; for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 3.99 ppb for surface water and 9.02 ppb for ground water.

    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 10.3 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 9.02 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Pyrifluquinazon is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure.

    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.”

    EPA has not found pyrifluquinazon to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and pyrifluquinazon does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pyrifluquinazon does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

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

    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Pyrifluquinazon showed signs of increased pre- and postnatal quantitative susceptibility in the developmental toxicity study and in the two-generation reproduction study in rats. In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, observed maternal and developmental effects were considered adverse since it is unknown whether the effects occurred from toxicity to maternal animals or the fetuses.

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

    i. The toxicity database for pyrifluquinazon is complete.

    ii. Evidence of potential neurotoxicity was observed for pyrifluquinazon; however, the concern is low since there were no neuropathological changes in any tissue, clear NOAELs were established for the observed effects, and the endpoints selected are protective. No additional UFs were required to account for neurotoxicity.

    iii. Although there is evidence of increased quantitative fetal susceptibility following in utero exposure to pyrifluquinazon in rats and quantitative postnatal susceptibility in the two-generation reproduction study, the concern for all observed effects is low because: (1) The effects are well characterized, (2) clear NOAELs were established, and (3) risk assessment endpoints used were from the developmental rat and 2-generation reproduction studies.

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to pyrifluquinazon in drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by pyrifluquinazon.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

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

    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary (food plus water) risk for the U.S. population utilizes 1.2% of the acute population-adjusted dose (aPAD) and 2.5% for children 1-2 years old, who had the highest exposure estimate. For females 13 to 49 years old, for which the Agency used a different endpoint, the acute risk utilized 23% of the aPAD.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic risk from pyrifluquinazon in food and water will utilize 13% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population subgroup receiving the greatest exposure. There are no residential uses for pyrifluquinazon.

    3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. The Agency's assessment of short- and intermediate-term risk aggregates short- and intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Short- and intermediate-term adverse effects were identified; however, pyrifluquinazon is not registered for any use patterns that would result in short- or intermediate-term residential exposure. Because there is no residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to assess short-term risk), no further assessment of short- and intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and intermediate-term risk for pyrifluquinazon.

    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the information referenced in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that exposure to pyrifluquinazon is unlikely to cause cancer effects at doses that do not alter rodent hormone homeostasis. Because the chronic reference doses is protective of those alterations and the Agency's assessment concludes that aggregate exposure to pyrifluquinazon does not pose a chronic risk, EPA has determined that aggregate exposure to pyrifluquinazon is unlikely to pose a cancer risk to the U.S. population.

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

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology, high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass-spectrometry detection (HPLC-MS/MS) is available to enforce the tolerance expression for crop commodities. For livestock commodities, the method used is a modified QuEChERS LC/MS/MS method. These methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected].

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. Section 408(b)(4) of the FFDCA specifically requires that EPA determine whether the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) has established a maximum residue level (MRL) for the commodity and to explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level when establishing tolerances at a different level. The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may also take into account MRLs established by other countries when determining what tolerance levels to set domestically.

    The Codex has not established a MRL for residues of pyrifluquinazon. EPA is establishing the tolerance for residues of pyrifluquinazon in or on tea to harmonize with Japan.

    C. Response to Comments

    EPA received two comments, only one of which was specific to the petition for pyrifluquinazon tolerances. The specific comment opposed “allowing such high residues” but did not provide any information relevant to the safety of the pesticide. The Agency recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops; however, the existing legal framework provided by section 408 of the FFDCA states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. The comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework.

    D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Almost all the tolerances being established in this rule differ from the petitioner requested in minor ways. For crop subgroups “vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C,” “stone fruits, plum subgroup 12-12C,” and crop group “nut, tree, group 14-12,” the appropriate tolerance level (0.02 ppm) is based on the sum of the LOQs for pyrifluquinazon and metabolite IV-01, rather than on the LOQ for one analyte (0.01 ppm), as requested. In addition, EPA determined that a tolerance is needed for residues in or on the processed commodity citrus dried pulp, so EPA is establishing that tolerance in accordance with 40 CFR 180.40(f)(1)(i)(A). Based on the dietary burden calculations and the residue profile in the cattle feeding study, EPA concluded that tolerances are not needed for pyrifluquinazon residues of concern in milk, livestock meat, fat, or meat byproducts as expected secondary residues are less than 1/10th the combined LOQs. However, a tolerance for livestock liver is needed at the LOQ (pyrifluquinazon, metabolite IV-01, and metabolite IV-203) corresponding to a tolerance of 0.04 ppm. The combined LOQs for pyrifluquinazon, metabolite IV-01, and metabolite IV-203 in parent equivalents corresponded to 0.035 ppm; therefore, a tolerance of 0.04 ppm is required for the liver of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep. For the remainder of tolerances being established, EPA used corrected commodity names, and adjusted tolerances levels based on available residue data, proportionality adjustments to the crop field trial data. and correcting for potential decline during frozen storage, which resulted in increased recommended tolerances. Finally, EPA notes that although the notice of filing indicated that the petition requested a tolerance for almond, hulls at 0.01 ppm, the petition itself requested a tolerance at 0.4 ppm. Nevertheless, based on available residue data, the Agency has determined that a tolerance of 0.60 ppm is necessary to cover residues from this use.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of pyrifluquinazon, (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-pyridinylmethyl)amino]-6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone), and its metabolites in or on Almond, hulls at 0.60 ppm; Cherry subgroup 12-12A at 0.30 ppm; Citrus, dried pulp at 2.0 ppm; Citrus, oil at 30 ppm; Cotton, gin byproducts at 6.0 ppm; Cotton, undelinted seed at 0.30 ppm; Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.70 ppm; Fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.07 ppm; Fruit small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 0.30 ppm; Leaf petiole vegetable, subgroup 22B at 1.5 ppm; Peach subgroup 12-12B at 0.04 ppm; Plum subgroup 12-12C at 0.02 ppm; Nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm; Tea, dried at 20 ppm; Vegetable, brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 0.60 ppm; Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.07 ppm; Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 0.30 ppm; Vegetable, leafy, group 4-16 at 5.0 ppm; Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.02 ppm; Cattle, liver at 0.04 ppm; Goat, liver at 0.04 ppm; Horse, liver at 0.04 ppm; and Sheep, liver at 0.04 ppm. For the plant commodities, compliance with the tolerance is determined by measuring residues of the parent compound and the IV-01 metabolite; for the livestock commodities, compliance is determined by measuring residues of the parent compound and the free and conjugated forms of IV-01 and IV-203 metabolites.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: November 9, 2018. Michael Goodis, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. Add § 180.701 to subpart C to read as follows:
    § 180.701 Pyrifluquinazon; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide pyrifluquinazon, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the sum of pyrifluquinazon (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-pyridinylmethyl)amino]-6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone) and its metabolite IV-01 (3-[(pyridin-3-ylmethyl)amino]-6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-3,4-dihydro-1H-quinazolin-2-one), calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of pyrifluquinazon.

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • Almond, hulls 0.60 Cherry subgroup 12-12A 0.30 Citrus, dried pulp 2.0 Citrus, oil 30 Cotton, gin byproducts 6.0 Cotton, undelinted seed 0.30 Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 0.70 Fruit, pome, group 11-10 0.07 Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F 0.30 Leaf petiole vegetable, subgroup 22B 1.5 Peach subgroup 12-12B 0.04 Plum subgroup 12-12C 0.02 Nut, tree, group 14-12 0.02 Tea, dried1 20 Vegetable, brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 0.60 Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 0.07 Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 0.30 Vegetable, leafy, group 4-16 5.0 Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C 0.02 1 There are no U.S. registrations as of November 26, 2018 for use on tea.

    (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide pyrifluquinazon, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the sum of pyrifluquinazon (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-pyridinylmethyl)amino]-6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone) and the free and conjugated forms of its metabolites IV-01 (3-[(pyridin-3-ylmethyl)amino]-6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-3,4-dihydro-1H-quinazolin-2-one) and IV-203 (6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-1H-quinazolin-2,4-dione), calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of pyrifluquinazon.

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • Cattle, liver 0.04 Goat, liver 0.04 Horse, liver 0.04 Sheep, liver 0.04

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]

    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]

    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

    [FR Doc. 2018-25690 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 170828822-70999-04] RIN 0648-XG633 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder Fishery; Quota Transfer AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; quota transfer.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the State of Maryland is transferring a portion of its 2018 commercial summer flounder quota to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This quota adjustment is necessary to comply with the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan quota transfer provisions. This announcement informs the public of the revised commercial quotas for Maryland and Massachusetts.

    DATES:

    Effective November 23, 2018, through December 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cynthia Ferrio, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9180.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations governing the summer flounder fishery are found in 50 CFR 648.100 through 648.110. These regulations require annual specification of a commercial quota that is apportioned among the coastal states from Maine through North Carolina. The process to set the annual commercial quota and the percent allocated to each state is described in § 648.102, and the initial 2018 allocations were published on December 22, 2017 (82 FR 60682), and corrected January 30, 2018 (83 FR 4165).

    The final rule implementing Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder Fishery Management Plan, as published in the Federal Register on December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65936), provided a mechanism for transferring summer flounder commercial quota from one state to another. Two or more states, under mutual agreement and with the concurrence of the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Administrator, can transfer or combine summer flounder commercial quota under § 648.102(c)(2). The Regional Administrator is required to consider the criteria in § 648.102(c)(2)(i)(A) through (C) in the evaluation of requests for quota transfers or combinations.

    Maryland is transferring 3,169 lb (1,437 kg) of summer flounder commercial quota to Massachusetts through mutual agreement of the states. This transfer was requested to repay landings by a Maryland-permitted vessel that landed in Massachusetts under a safe harbor agreement. Based on the initial quotas published in the 2018 Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Specifications and subsequent adjustments, the revised summer flounder quotas for calendar year 2018 are now: Maryland, 128,070 lb (58,092 kg); and Massachusetts, 413,361 lb (187,497 kg).

    Classification

    This action is taken under 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Karen H. Abrams, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25566 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    83 227 Monday, November 26, 2018 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 205 [Document Number AMS-NOP-18-0071-NOP-18-03] Meeting of the National Organic Standards Board AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), is announcing a meeting of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). The NOSB assists the USDA in the development of standards for substances to be used in organic production and advises the Secretary of Agriculture on any other aspects of the implementation of the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA).

    DATES:

    An in-person meeting will be held April 24-26, 2019, from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The Board will hear oral public comments via webinars on Tuesday, April 16 and Thursday, April 18, 2019, from 1:00 p.m. to approximately 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, and at the in-person meeting on Wednesday, April 24, and Thursday, April 25, 2019. The deadline to submit written comments and/or sign up for oral comment at either the webinar or in-person meeting is 11:59 p.m. ET, April 4, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    The webinars are virtual and will be accessed via the internet and/or phone. Access information will be available on the AMS website prior to the webinars. The in-person meeting will take place at the Renaissance Seattle Hotel, 515 Madison Street, Seattle, Washington 98104-1119, United States. Detailed information pertaining to the webinars and in-person meeting can be found at https://www.ams.usda.gov/event/national-organic-standards-board-nosb-meeting-seattle-wa.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Michelle Arsenault, Advisory Committee Specialist, National Organic Standards Board, USDA-AMS-NOP, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Room 2642-S, Mail Stop 0268, Washington, DC 20250-0268; Phone: (202) 720-3252; Email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NOSB makes recommendations to the USDA about whether substances should be allowed or prohibited in organic production and/or handling, assists in the development of standards for organic production, and advises the Secretary on other aspects of the implementation of the OFPA. The NOSB is holding a public meeting to discuss and vote on proposed recommendations to the USDA, to receive updates from the USDA National Organic Program (NOP) on issues pertaining to organic agriculture, and to receive comments from the organic community. The meeting and webinars are open to the public. No registration is required except to sign up for oral comments. All meeting documents and instructions for participating will be available on the AMS website at https://www.ams.usda.gov/event/national-organic-standards-board-nosb-meeting-seattle-wa. Please check the website periodically for updates. Meeting topics will encompass a wide range of issues, including substances petitioned for addition to or deletion from the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (National List), substances on the National List that are under sunset review, and guidance on organic policies. Participants and attendees may take photos and video at the meeting, but not in a manner that disturbs the proceedings.

    Public Comments: Comments should address specific topics noted on the meeting agenda.

    Written comments: Written public comments will be accepted on or before 11:59 p.m. ET on April 4, 2019, via http://www.regulations.gov: Document #AMS-NOP-18-0071. Comments submitted after this date will be provided to the NOSB, but Board members may not have adequate time to consider those comments prior to making recommendations. The NOP strongly prefers comments to be submitted electronically. However, written comments may also be submitted (i.e. postmarked) via mail to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by or before the deadline.

    Oral Comments: The NOSB is providing the public multiple dates and opportunities to provide oral comments and will accommodate as many individuals and organizations as time permits. Persons or organizations wishing to make oral comments must pre-register by 11:59 p.m. ET, April 4, 2019, and can register for only one speaking slot: either during the webinars scheduled for April 16 and 18, or at the in-person meeting, scheduled for April 24-26, 2019. Due to the limited time allotted for in-person public comments during the in-person meeting, commenters are strongly encouraged to comment during the webinar(s). Instructions for registering and participating in the webinar can be found at www.ams.usda.gov/NOSBMeetings.

    Meeting Accommodations: The meeting hotel is ADA Compliant, and the USDA provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in this public meeting, please notify the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Determinations for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Bruce Summers, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25572 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0964; Product Identifier 2018-NM-127-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports that certain fuel probes indicated misleading fuel quantities on the engine indicating and crew alerting system (EICAS). This proposed AD would require a functional check of certain fuel probes, and replacement with a serviceable part if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 10, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email [email protected]; internet http://www.saabgroup.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0964; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2018-0964; Product Identifier 2018-NM-127-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because of those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this NPRM.

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2018-0187, dated August 29, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Occurrences were reported that certain fuel probes, installed on SAAB 2000 aeroplanes, indicated misleading fuel quantities on the engine indicating and crew alerting system (EICAS). The investigation results suggest that this may be an ageing phenomenon, leading to deteriorated capacity of the fuel probes.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to incorrect fuel reading, possibly resulting in fuel starvation and uncommanded engine in-flight shut-down, with consequent reduced control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, SAAB issued the SB [service bulletin] to provide instructions for a functional check.

    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-time functional check of the fuel quantity system and the fuel low level EICAS warnings to determine whether any affected parts are out of tolerance and, depending on findings, replacement of those affected parts.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0964.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics has issued Service Bulletin 2000-28-028, dated April 19, 2018. This service information describes procedures for a functional check of the fuel indicator gauging accuracy and the low level warning, and for replacing the affected part with a serviceable part if necessary. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously.

    Difference Between MCAI and Proposed AD

    The MCAI requires corrective actions if a functional check reveals that any fuel indicator value is out of tolerance, according to the limits and conditions specified in the Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL). This proposed AD does not refer to the MMEL because operators are required by 14 CFR part 91 to have a Minimum Equipment List (MEL) to operate with inoperable equipment, and the acceptable limits and conditions for the fuel indicator values cannot be in an MEL without first being part of the MMEL. Paragraph (i) of this proposed AD therefore states that the corrective actions that would be required based on the results of the functional check would depend on the limits and conditions specified in the operator's MEL.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs for Required Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 $0 $680 $5,440

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

    Estimated Costs of On-Condition Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • 2 work-hour × $85 per hour = $170 $6,295 $6,465
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems): Docket No. FAA-2018-0964; Product Identifier 2018-NM-127-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 10, 2019.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (formerly known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Model SAAB 2000 airplanes, certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that certain fuel probes indicated misleading fuel quantities on the engine indicating and crew alerting system (EICAS). We are issuing this AD to address deteriorated capacity of the fuel probes, which could lead to incorrect fuel reading, possibly resulting in fuel starvation and uncommanded engine in-flight shutdown, and consequent reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Definitions

    (1) An affected part is a fuel probe having part number (P/N) 20136-0101, P/N 20136-0102, P/N 20136-0103, P/N 20136-0104, P/N 20136-0105, or P/N 20136-0106; with fuel low level sensors having P/N 20137-0101.

    (2) A serviceable part is an affected part that has accumulated less than 1,500 total flight hours or has reached 12 months since first installation on an airplane.

    (h) Functional Check

    Within 1,500 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, accomplish a functional check of the fuel indicator gauging accuracy and the low level warning, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-28-028, dated April 19, 2018.

    (i) Corrective Action

    If the functional check required by paragraph (h) of this AD is found to be out of tolerance, within the limits and under the applicable conditions, as specified in the operator's Minimum Equipment List, replace the affected part with a serviceable part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-28-028, dated April 19, 2018.

    (j) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on any airplane, an affected part, unless it is a serviceable part, as defined in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2018-0187, dated August 29, 2018, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0964.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email [email protected]; internet http://www.saabgroup.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on November 8, 2018. Chris Spangenberg, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25495 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0991; Product Identifier 2017-SW-050-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) Helicopters AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for MDHI Model 369A, 369D, 369E, 369FF, 369H, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters. This proposed AD would require inspecting each main rotor blade (MRB) for a crack. This proposed AD is prompted by reports of cracked MRBs. The actions of this proposed AD are intended to address an unsafe condition on these helicopters.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 25, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to the “Mail” address between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0991; 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 proposed AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket Operations (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    For Helicopter Technology Company, LLC service information identified in this proposed rule, contact Helicopter Technology Company, LLC, 12902 South Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90061; telephone (310) 523-2750; or at www.helicoptertech.com. 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.

    For MD Helicopters service information identified in this proposed rule, contact MD Helicopters, Inc., Attn: Customer Support Division, 4555 E. McDowell Rd., Mail Stop M615, Mesa, AZ 85215-9734; telephone 1-800-388-3378; fax 480-346-6813; or at http://www.mdhelicopters.com.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Galib Abumeri, Aviation Safety Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; telephone (562) 627-5374; email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should submit only one time.

    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

    Discussion

    We propose to adopt a new AD for MDHI Model 369A, 369D, 369E, 369FF, 369H, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters with a Helicopter Technology Company, LLC (HTC) MRB part number 369A1100, 369D21100, 369D21102, 369D21120, 369D21121, 369D21123, 500P2100, or 500P2300 installed. This proposed AD would require repetitively inspecting the MRB trim tab for gouges, nicks, scratches, and cracks.

    This proposed AD is prompted by reports of two operators finding cracks on an HTC-manufactured MRB. In both cases, the cracking was located on the MRB skin adjacent to the trim tab, and they were discovered following flights in which an increase in vibration levels was noticed. HTC determined the root cause of the cracking to be fatigue. HTC also stated that there was evidence of impact damage, filing, and sanding under the paint of the cracked MRBs. If not detected and corrected, this condition could result in failure of an MRB and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

    FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs.

    Related Service Information

    We reviewed HTC Mandatory Service Bulletin Notice No. 2100-9, dated May 25, 2017 (SB 2100-9), which contains procedures for inspecting each MRB for a crack in an area adjacent to the inboard edge of the MRB trim tab.

    We also reviewed MD Helicopters Service Bulletin No. SB369D-221, SB369E-119, SB369F-106, SB369H-257, SB500N-057, and SB600N-069, each dated April 2, 2018. This service information specifies inspecting the MRBs for cracks near the trim tab by following the instructions in SB 2100-9.

    Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require, within 25 hours time-in-service and thereafter at each 100-hour or annual inspection, inspecting each MRB trim tab end at the trailing edge corner where the trim tab and MRB meet for cracks, and inspecting the top and bottom surface of each MRB for a crack in the area adjacent to inboard trim tab the trim tab corner for a crack, from the trailing edge towards the leading edge. If there is a crack, this proposed AD would require replacing the MRB.

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The service information specifies procedures for inspecting each MRB for nicks, gouges, and scratches. This proposed AD does not, as the unsafe condition concerns a crack in the MRB. This proposed AD would require using a 10X magnifying glass for both inspections, while the service information only specifies this level of magnification for the inspection of the top and bottom surfaces of the MRB.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 622 helicopters of U.S. Registry.

    At an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour, we estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. Inspecting one MRB would require about 0.1 work-hour, for a cost per helicopter of $43 for MDHI Model 369-series and 500N helicopters and $51 for MDHI Model 600N helicopters, and a total cost of $25,320 to U.S. operators per inspection cycle.

    If required, replacing one MRB would require 3 work-hours, and required parts would cost $13,000, for a cost per MRB of $13,255.

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

    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:

    1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska 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.

    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): MD Helicopters Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2018-0991; Product Identifier 2017-SW-050-AD. (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to MD Helicopters Inc. Model 369A, 369D, 369E, 369FF, 369H, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters, certificated in any category, with a main rotor blade (MRB) part number 369A1100, 369D21100, 369D21102, 369D21120, 369D21121, 369D21123, 500P2100, or 500P2300, all dash numbers, installed.

    (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in an MRB. This condition could result in failure of the MRB and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

    (c) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 25, 2019.

    (d) 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.

    (e) Required Actions

    Within 25 hours time-in-service, and thereafter at each 100-hour inspection or annual inspection, whichever occurs first:

    (1) Using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass and a light, inspect each MRB trim tab end at the trailing edge corner where the trim tab and MRB meet for a crack. If there is a crack, before further flight, replace the MRB.

    (2) Using a 10X or higher power magnifying glass and a light, inspect the top and bottom surface of each MRB adjacent to the inboard trim tab corner for a crack, from the trailing edge towards the leading edge. If there is a crack, before further flight, replace the MRB.

    (f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Galib Abumeri, Aviation Safety Engineer, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; telephone (562) 627-5374; 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.

    (g) Additional Information

    (1) Helicopter Technology Company, LLC Mandatory Service Bulletin Notice No. 2100-9, dated May 25, 2017, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the subject of this AD. For Helicopter Technology Company, LLC service information identified in this AD, contact Helicopter Technology Company, LLC, 12902 South Broadway, Los Angeles, CA 90061; telephone (310) 523-2750; or at www.helicoptertech.com.

    (2) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin No. SB369D-221, SB369E-119, SB369F-106, SB369H-257, SB500N-057, and SB600N-069, each dated April 2, 2018, which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional information about the subject of this AD. For MD Helicopters service information identified in this AD, contact MD Helicopters, Inc., Attn: Customer Support Division, 4555 E. McDowell Rd., Mail Stop M615, Mesa, AZ 85215-9734; telephone 1-800-388-3378; fax 480-346-6813; or at http://www.mdhelicopters.com.

    (3) You may review a copy of information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    (h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6210 Main Rotor Blade.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 14, 2018. Lance T. Gant, Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25497 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0256; Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-11] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Amendment of Class D Airspace and Class E Airspace; Schenectady, NY, Ithaca, NY, and Albany, NY AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to amend Class D airspace, Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Schenectady County Airport, Schenectady, NY, and Albany, NY by updating the geographic coordinates of this airport, Saratoga County Airport, Hunter NDB, and Cambridge VORTAC. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport. This action also would replace the outdated term Airport/Facility Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the legal descriptions of associated Class D and E airspace of Schenectady County Airport, Schenectady, NY, and Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before January 10, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: (800) 647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify the Docket No.

    FAA-2018-0256; Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-11, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

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

    Comments Invited

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

    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-2018-0256 and Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-11) and be submitted in triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number.) You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0256; Airspace Docket No. 18-AEA-11.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

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

    Availability of NPRMs

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

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

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by:

    Amending Class D airspace, Class E airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, at Schenectady County Airport, Schenectady, NY and Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface at Albany, NY, by updating the geographic coordinates of Saratoga County Airport, Hunter NDB, and Cambridge VORTAC to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    Also, an editorial change would be made replacing the outdated term Airport/Facility Directory with the term Chart Supplement in the associated Class D and E airspace legal descriptions for Schenectady County Airport, Schenectady, NY, and Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY. These changes would enhance the safety and management of IFR operations at these airports.

    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs 5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. AEA NY D Schenectady, NY [Amended] Schenectady County Airport, NY (Lat. 42°51′9″ N, long. 73°55′44″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,900 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of Schenectady County Airport, excluding the portion that coincides with the Albany, NY, Class C airspace area. This Class D airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The specific date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    AEA NY D Ithaca, NY [Amended] Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY (Lat. 42°29′29″ N, long. 76°27′31″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,600 feet MSL within a 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The specific date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Airspace. AEA NY E2 Ithaca, NY [Amended] Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY (Lat. 42°29′29″ N, long. 76°27′31″ W) Ithaca VOR/DME (Lat. 42°29′42″ N, long. 76°27′35″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport and that airspace extending upward from the surface from the 4-mile radius of the airport to the 5.7-mile radius of the airport clockwise from the 329° bearing to the 081° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius of the airport to the 8.7-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 081° bearing to the 137° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius of the airport to the 6.6-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 137° bearing to the 170° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius to the 5.7-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 170° bearing to the 196° bearing from the airport, and that airspace within 2.7 miles each side of the Ithaca VOR/DME 305° radial extending from the 4-mile radius of the airport to 7.4 miles northwest of the Ithaca VOR/DME. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area. AEA NY E4 Schenectady, NY [Amended] Schenectady County Airport, NY (Lat. 42°51′9″ N, long. 73°55′44″ W) Hunter NDB (Lat. 42°51′15″ N, long. 73°56′01″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.5 miles each side of a 032° bearing from the Hunter NDB extending from the 4.3-mile radius of Schenectady County Airport to 7 miles northeast of the NDB. This Class E airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The specific date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

    AEA NY E4 Ithaca, NY [Amended] Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY (Lat. 42°29′29″ N, long. 76°27′31″ W) Ithaca VOR/DME (Lat. 42°29′42″ N, long. 76°27′35″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface from the 4-mile radius of the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 5.7-mile radius of the airport; clockwise from the 329° bearing to the 081° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 8.7-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 081° bearing to the 137° from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport; to the 6.6-mile radius of the airport, extending clockwise from the 137° bearing to the 170° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius to the 5.7-mile radius of the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, extending clockwise from the 170° bearing to the 196° bearing from the airport; and that airspace within 2.7 miles each side of the Ithaca VOR/DME 305° radial extending from the 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to 7.4 miles northwest of the Ithaca VOR/DME.

    Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AEA NY E5 Albany, NY [Amended] Albany VORTAC (Lat. 42°44′50″ N, long. 73°48′11″ W) Hunter NDB (Lat. 42°51′15″ N, long. 73°56′01″ W) Schenectady County Airport, NY (Lat. 42°51′9″ N, long. 73°55′44″ W) Saratoga County Airport, NY (Lat. 43°03′03″ N, long. 73°51′42″ W) Cambridge VORTAC (Lat. 42°59′39″ N, long. 73°20′38″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within the area bounded by a point on the Albany VORTAC 007° radial 20 miles north of the VORTAC, thence clockwise along the arc of a 20-mile radius circle centered on the Albany VORTAC to its point of intersection with the Albany VORTAC 037° radial, thence southwest along the Albany VORTAC 037° radial to a point 10.5 miles northeast of the VORTAC, thence clockwise along the arc of a 10.5-mile radius circle centered on the Albany VORTAC, to its point of intersection with a line 3.5 miles southeast of the Hunter NDB 207° bearing and within 3.5 miles each side of the 206° bearing from the Hunter NDB extending from the Hunter NDB to 15.3 miles southwest of the NDB and thence clockwise along the arc of the 7.9-mile radius circle centered on the Hunter NDB to its point of intersection with a line 1.8 miles south and parallel to the extended centerline of the Schenectady County Airport Runway 28, thence west along this parallel line to its point of intersection with the arc of a 11.3-mile radius circle centered on the Hunter NDB, thence clockwise along the arc of this 11.3-mile radius circle to its point of intersection with the 342° bearing from the Hunter NDB, thence north along a line bearing 356° from this point to the point of intersection of this line and the arc of a 16.6-mile radius circle centered on the Hunter NDB and thence clockwise along the arc of the 16.6-mile radius circle centered on the NDB to its point of intersection with the arc of a 20-mile radius circle centered on the Albany VORTAC and within 4.4 miles each side of the Albany VORTAC 082° radial extending from the Albany VORTAC to 16.1 miles east of the VORTAC and within a 6.4-mile radius of Saratoga County Airport and within 3.5 miles each side of the Cambridge VORTAC 279° radial extending from 37.5 miles west of the Cambridge VORTAC to the 6.4-mile radius area.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on November 14, 2018. Matthew Cathcart, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25564 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0940; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-15] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Carrizo Springs, TX AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Dimmit County Airport, Carrizo Springs, TX. The FAA is proposing this action as a result of the decommissioning of the Dimmit non-directional beacon (NDB). The geographic coordinates of the airport would also be updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before January 10, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-9826, or (800) 647-5527. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0940; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-15, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

    FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Walter Tweedy, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5900.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

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

    Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2018-0940/Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-15.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

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

    Availability of NPRMs

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

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within 6.5 mile radius (formerly 7.5 mile radius) of Dimmit County Airport, Carrizo Springs, TX. The geographic coordinates of the airport would also be updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

    This action is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Dimmit NDB.

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

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASW TX E5 Carrizo Springs, TX [Amended] Carrizo Springs, Dimmit County Airport, TX (Lat. 28°31′20″ N, long. 99°49′25″ W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Dimmit County Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 14, 2018. Anthony Schneider, Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25575 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 73 [Docket No. FAA-2018-0984; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-8] RIN 2120-AA66 Proposed Expansion of R-3803 Restricted Area Complex; Fort Polk, LA AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to expand the R-3803 restricted area complex in central Louisiana by establishing four new restricted areas, R-3803C, R-3803D, R-3803E, and R-3803F, and make minor technical amendments to the existing R-3803A and R-3803B legal descriptions for improved operational efficiency and administrative standardization. The proposed restricted area establishments and amendments support U.S. Army Joint Readiness Training Center training requirements at Fort Polk for military units preparing for overseas deployment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before January 10, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001; telephone: (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0984; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-8, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address.

    Comments on environmental and land use aspects to should be directed to: Allison M. Cedars, Chief, Environmental Branch, Department of Public Works, 1697 23rd Street, Fort Polk, LA 71459; email: [email protected]; phone: (337) 531-6725.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.

    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would establish restricted area airspace at Fort Polk, LA, to enhance aviation safety and accommodate essential U.S. Army hazardous force-on-force and force-on-target training activities.

    Comments Invited

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

    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0984; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-8) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the internet at www.regulations.gov.

    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0984; Airspace Docket No. 18-ASW-8.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

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

    Availability of NPRMs

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

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person at the Dockets Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    Background

    As one of two U.S. Army Combat Training Centers, Fort Polk has submitted a proposal to the FAA to expand the R-3803 restricted area complex in central Louisiana by establishing four new restricted areas. Two of the proposed restricted areas would be designated above the other two, similar to the way R-3803A and R-3803B exist, and the designated altitudes of the proposed restricted areas would extend upward from the surface to but not including Flight Level (FL) 350.

    The Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk has increasing and enduring requirements to conduct realistic force-on-force and force-on-target training for military units prior to overseas deployment. Additional airspace is now necessary to segregate non-participating aircraft from longer-range surface-to-surface and air-to-surface munitions currently being fielded and associated hazardous activities. Further, Fort Polk's ground infrastructure also includes laser-scoring systems that only function at non-eye safe wavelengths.

    The proposed restricted areas are required to ensure safe live artillery fire training while protecting the public from both air and ground maneuvers using advanced weapon systems as well as manned flight, electronic jamming, combat lasers, flares, smoke, powerful simulators, and high explosive activities against progressive and spontaneous enemy tactics training scenarios. Because of advances in weapon systems, modern forces are required to cover more ground in dispersed areas of operation and operate over greater distances than ever before. The increased maneuver area is necessary to satisfy the training needs of the new air-to-ground combat teaming.

    The Army recently completed acquisition of large tracks of land to the south and southeast of the existing R-3803 restricted area complex necessary to segregate the longer range munitions and non-eye safe lasers from non-participating aircraft. New firing points and impact areas located on the newly acquired land are planned to support large force multi-Service training events using weapons ranging upward to 155mm Howitzers and Hellfire missiles. However, the artillery firing points on the newly acquired land produce surface danger zones and vertical hazards that expand beyond the existing R-3803A boundary. Additionally, aircraft maneuvering within the current R-3803A boundaries is extremely limited. The proposed restricted area airspace expansion would contain the surface-to-surface fires and safety zones/areas, as well as provide participating aircraft more maneuver airspace to activate combat lasers earlier and conduct strafing and bombing runs alignment within the proposed boundaries.

    The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 73 by establishing four new restricted areas, R-3803C, R-3803D, R-3803E, and R-3803F, located south-southeast of the R-3803 complex supporting the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, LA. The new restricted areas would support the U.S. Army conducting realistic force-on-force and force-on-target training employing longer-range surface-to-surface and air-to-surface munitions currently being fielded. To effectively segregate non-participant air traffic from the hazardous activities associated with the longer-range munitions being used by the Joint Readiness Training Center, the proposed restricted areas would extend upward from the surface to but not including FL 350 and be activated by a Notice to Airman (NOTAM).

    Of the proposed restricted areas, R-3803C and R-3803D would be established extending upward from the surface to but not including FL 180. Stacked above the proposed R-3803C, the proposed R-3803E would be established extending upward from FL 180 to but not including FL 350. Similarly, stacked above the proposed R-3803D, the proposed R-3803F would be established extending upward from FL 180 to but not including FL 350. The boundaries of the proposed R-3803C and R-3803E restricted areas would match, as would the boundaries of the proposed R-3803D and R-3803F restricted areas. However, there is an airspace cutout included in the proposed R-3803D boundary description, extending upward from the surface to 1,200 feet above ground level (AGL), to allow aerial access to the land the Army does not control. The Joint Readiness Training Center subject matter experts for artillery ballistics have determined that the proposed R-3803D restricted area floor over the airspace cutout with a ceiling of 1,200 feet AGL would be adequate to contain and segregate the hazardous activities occurring above.

    The proposed restricted areas R-3803C and R-3803D would be activated by NOTAM, with an anticipated usage of 18 hours per day approximately 320 days per year. The higher strata proposed restricted areas, R-3803E and R-3803F, would be activated by NOTAM 24 hours in advance, with an anticipated usage of 8 hours per day approximately 20 days per year.

    Lastly, the FAA also proposes to make a number of minor editorial and technical amendments to the existing restricted area R-3803A and R-3803B legal descriptions. They include:

    • The designated altitudes for R-3803A would be changed from “Surface to FL 180” to “Surface to but not including FL 180” to match the designated altitudes of the lower proposed restricted areas, R-3803C and R-3803D, and correct the FL 180 designated altitude overlap with R-3803B.

    • The designated altitudes for R-3803B would be changed from “FL 180 up to but not including FL 350” to “FL 180 to but not including FL 350” to match the designated altitudes of the upper proposed restricted areas, R-3803C and R-3803D, and correct the non-standard format.

    • The time of designation for R-3803A would be changed from “Continuous” to “by NOTAM” to match the time of designation of the lower proposed restricted areas, R-3803C and R-3803D, and impose less of a burden on the flying public than the existing continuous activation.

    • The time of designation for R-3803B would be changed from “As activated by NOTAM issued at least 24 hours in advance” to “By NOTAM issued at least 24 hours in advance” to match the time of designation of the upper proposed restricted areas, R-3803E and R-3803F, for clarity and standardization.

    • The using agency designations for R-3803A and R-3803B would be changed from “Commanding General, Fort Polk, LA” to “U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA” to match the using agency designation of the proposed restricted areas for standardization.

    The FAA acknowledges that the proposed restricted areas R-3803C and R-3803D, if established, would be designated within the existing Warrior 1 Low and Warrior 1 High Military Operations Areas (MOAs). To overcome potential airspace issues and confusion created if all special use airspace (SUA) areas were active at the same time, the FAA would amend the legal descriptions of both MOAs to exclude that airspace within R-3803C and R-3803D when the restricted areas are activated.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

    The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

    PART 73—SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    § 73.38 [Amended]
    2. Section 73.38 is amended as follows: R-3803A Fort Polk, LA [Amended]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31°23′37″ N, long. 93°09′58″ W; to lat. 31°23′13″ N, long. 93°09′49″ W; to lat. 31°22′01″ N, long. 93°10′06″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°11′11″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°20′16″ W; to lat. 31°24′31″ N, long. 93°20′16″ W; to lat. 31°24′31″ N, long. 93°16′43″ W; to lat. 31°23′36″ N, long. 93°13′25″ W; to the point of beginning.

    Designated altitudes. Surface to but not including FL 180.

    Time of designation. By NOTAM.

    Controlling agency. FAA, Houston ARTCC.

    Using agency. U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA.

    R-3803B Fort Polk, LA [Amended]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31°23′37″ N, long. 93°09′58″ W; to lat. 31°23′13″ N, long. 93°09′49″ W; to lat. 31°22′01″ N, long. 93°10′06″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°11′11″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°20′16″ W; to lat. 31°24′31″ N, long. 93°20′16″ W; to lat. 31°24′31″ N, long. 93°16′43″ W; to lat. 31°23′36″ N, long. 93°13′25″ W; to the point of beginning.

    Designated altitudes. FL 180 to but not including FL 350.

    Time of designation. By NOTAM issued at least 24 hours in advance.

    Controlling agency. FAA, Houston ARTCC.

    Using agency. U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA.

    R-3803C Fort Polk, LA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°10′31″ W; to lat. 31°17′39″ N, long. 93°11′07″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°12′17″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°14′40″ W; to lat. 31°15′32″ N, long. 93°14′40″ W; to lat. 31°15′32″ N, long. 93°17′00″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°17′00″ W; to the point of beginning.

    Designated altitudes. Surface to but not including FL 180.

    Time of designation. By NOTAM.

    Controlling agency. FAA, Houston ARTCC.

    Using agency. U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA.

    R-3803D Fort Polk, LA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°03′29″ W; to lat. 31°14′53″ N, long. 93°03′30″ W; to lat. 31°14′52″ N, long. 93°08′52″ W; to lat. 31°14′51″ N, long. 93°10′07″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°10′06″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°12′17″ W; to lat. 31°17′39″ N, long. 93°11′07″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°10′31″ W; to the point of beginning, excluding the airspace area from the surface to and including 1,200 feet AGL beginning at lat. 31°14′52″ N, long. 93°08′52″ W; at lat. 31°14′51″ N, long. 93°10′07″ W; at lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°10′06″ W; at lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°12′17″ W; at lat. 31°17′39″ N, long. 93°11′07″ W; at lat. 31°17′04″ N, long. 93°10′22″ W; at lat. 31°16′11″ N, long. 93°10′22″ W; to the point of beginning of the excluded area.

    Designated altitudes. Surface to but not including FL 180.

    Time of designation. By NOTAM.

    Controlling agency. FAA, Houston ARTCC.

    Using agency. U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA.

    R-3803E Fort Polk, LA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°10′31″ W; to lat. 31°17′39″ N, long. 93°11′07″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°12′17″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°14′40″ W; to lat. 31°15′32″ N, long. 93°14′40″ W; to lat. 31°15′32″ N, long. 93°17′00″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°17′00″ W; to the point of beginning.

    Designated altitudes. FL 180 to but not including FL 350.

    Time of designation. By NOTAM issued at least 24 hours in advance.

    Controlling agency. FAA, Houston ARTCC.

    Using agency. U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA.

    R-3803F Fort Polk, LA [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°03′29″ W; to lat. 31°14′53″ N, long. 93° 03′30″ W; to lat. 31°14′52″ N, long. 93°08′52″ W; to lat. 31°14′51″ N, long. 93°10′07″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°10′06″ W; to lat. 31°14′25″ N, long. 93°12′17″ W; to lat. 31°17′39″ N, long. 93°11′07″ W; to lat. 31°19′17″ N, long. 93°10′31″ W; to the point of beginning.

    Designated altitudes. FL 180 to but not including FL 350.

    Time of designation. By NOTAM issued at least 24 hours in advance.

    Controlling agency. FAA, Houston ARTCC.

    Using agency. U.S. Army, Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, LA.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 19, 2018. Gemechu Gelgelu, Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25707 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board 37 CFR Chapter III [Docket No. 18-CRB-0012-RM] Modification and Amendment of Regulations To Conform to the MMA; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY:

    Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.

    ACTION:

    Notification of inquiry; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On November 5, 2018, the Copyright Royalty Judges solicited comments and proposals regarding necessary and appropriate modifications and amendments to agency regulations following enactment of a new law regarding the music industry. The comment period, which was set to expire on November 26, 2018, has been extended to December 10, 2018.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the notification of inquiry (83 FR 55334) is extended. Submit comments and proposals on or before December 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments and proposals, identified by docket number 18-CRB-0012-RM, by any of the following methods:

    CRB's electronic filing application: Submit comments and proposals online in eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/.

    U.S. mail: Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024-0977; or

    Overnight service (only USPS Express Mail is acceptable): Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024-0977; or

    Commercial courier: Address package to: Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building, LM-403, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559-6000. Deliver to: Congressional Courier Acceptance Site, 2nd Street NE and D Street NE, Washington, DC; or

    Hand delivery: Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building, LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559-6000.

    Instructions: Unless submitting online, commenters must submit an original, two paper copies, and an electronic version on a CD. All submissions must include a reference to the CRB and this docket number. All submissions will be posted without change to eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/ including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read submitted background documents or comments, go to eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board's electronic filing and case management system, at https://app.crb.gov/ and search for docket number 18-CRB-0012-RM.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707-7658 or email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On November, 14, 2018, The Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) received a request asking that the comment period for the notification of inquiry (NOI) be extended to December 17, 2018, to “provide the most meaningful and useful comments and proposals.” Joint Motion for Extension of Time, Docket No. 18-CRB-0012-RM. The Judges balanced that concern against the time limits established by the Music Modernization Act and granted the request in part by extending the deadline for submission of comments and proposals in response to the NOI (83 FR 55334) to December 10, 2018.

    Dated: November 15, 2018. David R. Strickler, Copyright Royalty Judge.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25579 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410-72-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 39 CFR Part 3010 [Docket No. RM2019-2; Order No. 4882] Ratemaking Procedures for Inbound Letter Post and Related Services AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is acknowledging a recent filing requesting the Commission to consider the application of the market dominant price cap to rates for Inbound Letter Post and certain other inbound international market dominant products. This document informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: December 10, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Background III. Petition IV. Invitation to Comment V. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    On November 16, 2018, the Postal Service filed a request for the Commission to consider the application of the market dominant price cap to rates for Inbound Letter Post and certain other inbound international market dominant products.1 The Postal Service requests that the Commission replace the price cap treatment with an “evaluation of whether price changes for these services promote the objectives in [39 U.S.C.] [s]ection 3622(b), taking into account the factors in [s]ection 3622(c).” Petition at 2. The Commission initiates this rulemaking to seek comments and facilitate the Commission's examination into ratemaking procedures for Inbound Letter Post and related international services.

    1 Petition of the United States Postal Service to Initiate a Rulemaking Concerning Ratemaking Procedures for Inbound Letter Post and Related Services, November 16, 2018 (Petition).

    II. Background

    At the same time it filed the instant Petition, the Postal Service filed a concurrent request seeking to transfer a portion of Inbound Letter Post (and inbound registered services associated with those items) to the competitive product list.2 The Postal Service states that it intends for the instant Petition to cover only the related products remaining on the market dominant product list upon resolution of the Transfer Request. Petition at 2, n.4.

    2 Docket No. MC2019-17, United States Postal Service Request to Transfer Inbound Letter Post Small Packets and Bulky Letters, and Inbound Registered Service Associated with Such Items, to the Competitive Product List, November 16, 2018 (Transfer Request).

    The Postal Service states that the recommendation to adopt self-declared rates for terminal dues,3 made by the Department of State and endorsed by the President, creates uncertainty regarding the rates going forward. See Petition at 1, nn.1, 2; 2-3. The Postal Service further notes that the Department of State's negotiations could result in a decision to rescind withdrawal from the Universal Postal Union (UPU), but it is impossible to predict to what extent terminal dues would be self-declared or set by the UPU. Petition at 2-3. The Postal Service suggests that although the Commission's review of the market dominant ratemaking system is pending, to the extent that a market dominant price cap currently applies or is maintained in some form, there should be an exception for generally applicable rates set by the Postal Service that are paid by foreign postal operators. Id. at 4. The Postal Service states that its requested treatment of Inbound Letter Post rates should apply whether the rates are self-declared or not. Id. at 5.

    3 Terminal dues refer to payments by foreign postal operators to the Postal Service for delivery of Inbound Letter Post in the United States.

    III. Petition

    The Postal Service requests that the Commission reconsider its decision in Order No. 43, in which it held that Inbound Letter Post must be classified as a market dominant product.4 The Postal Service states that changes in circumstances, including “a significant shift in U.S. Government policy toward Inbound Letter Post,” warrant a reconsideration of the decision to apply the market dominant price cap to inbound international products. See Petition at 5-9. The Postal Service states that the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act's intent was to protect individual domestic customers, rather than foreign postal operators.5

    4 Docket No. RM2007-1, Order Establishing Ratemaking Regulations for Market Dominant and Competitive Products, October 29, 2007 (Order No. 43).

    5Id. at 7, 8-9. Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA), Public Law 109-435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006).

    The Postal Service proposes a regulatory system for Inbound Letter Post wherein the Commission would apply the objectives and factors listed in 39 U.S.C. 3622(b) and 3622(c) as standards for review of inbound international rate adjustments. Petition at 2, 9. The Postal Service suggests that this review can occur after-the-fact, through the annual compliance review proceedings, but also proposes an alternative before-the-fact review of rate adjustments. Id. at 10. The Postal Service submits these proposed rules and alternative proposed rules in Appendix I of the Petition.

    IV. Invitation to Comment

    The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2019-2 for consideration of matters raised in the Petition. More information on the Petition may be accessed via the Commission's website at http://www.prc.gov. Interested persons may submit comments on the Petition no later than December 10, 2018.

    Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Kenneth E. Richardson is appointed to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in the above-captioned docket.

    V. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2019-2 for consideration of the matters raised by the Petition of the United States Postal Service to Initiate a Rulemaking Concerning Ratemaking Procedures for Inbound Letter Post and Related Services, filed November 16, 2018.

    2. Comments are due no later than December 10, 2018.

    3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Kenneth E. Richardson to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this docket.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Notice in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25665 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2018-0596; FRL-9986-94-Region 10] Air Plan Approval; OR: Lane County Outdoor Burning and Enforcement Procedure Rules AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve and incorporate by reference (IBR) into the Oregon State Implementation Plan (SIP) the Lane Regional Air Protection Agency's (LRAPA) revised outdoor burning rule submitted by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) on July 19, 2018. The revised rule, as it applies in Lane County, Oregon, clarifies terminology and provides additional controls of outdoor burning activities, reducing particulate emissions and strengthening the Oregon SIP. In addition, the EPA proposes to approve but not IBR the enforcement procedures and civil penalties rule for LRAPA submitted by the ODEQ on September 25, 2018. The revised rule contains revisions that bring enforcement procedures and civil penalties rule into alignment with recent changes in Oregon State regulations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2018-0596, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christi Duboiski at (360) 753-9081, or [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

    Table of Contents I. Background II. Evaluation of Revisions A. Title 47: Outdoor Burning B. Title 15: Enforcement Procedures and Civil Penalties III. Proposed Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Oregon Notice Provision VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

    Each State has a Clean Air Act (CAA) State Implementation Plan (SIP), containing the control measures and strategies used to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) established for the criteria pollutants (carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide). The SIP contains such elements as air pollution control regulations, emission inventories, attainment demonstrations, and enforcement mechanisms. The SIP is a compilation of these elements and is revised and updated by a State over time—to keep pace with Federal requirements and to address changing air quality issues in that State.

    The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) implements and enforces the Oregon SIP through rules set out in Chapter 340 of the Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), Divisions 200 to 268, apply in all areas of the State, except where the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) has designated Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) to administer rules within its area of jurisdiction.

    LRAPA has been designated by the EQC to implement and enforce State rules in Lane County, and to adopt local rules that apply within Lane County. LRAPA may promulgate a local rule in lieu of a State rule provided: (1) it is as strict as the corresponding State rule; and (2) it has been submitted to and approved by the EQC. This delegation of authority to LRAPA in the Oregon SIP is consistent with CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) requirements for State and local air agencies.

    On July 19, 2018 and September 25, 2018, the ODEQ and LRAPA submitted revisions to the Oregon SIP as it applies in Lane County. These changes update the LRAPA Title 47 outdoor burning rule providing clarification and additional controls of outdoor burning activities in Lane County and align the Title 15 enforcement procedure and civil penalties rule with recently approved State rules in OAR Chapter 340, Division12 (80 FR 64346, October 23, 2015).

    II. Evaluation of Revisions A. Title 47: Outdoor Burning

    LRAPA regulates outdoor burning throughout Lane County, Oregon, except for agricultural burning, forest slash burning permitted by the Oregon Department of Forestry or U.S. Forest Service, and fire department training burns. The LRAPA Title 47 outdoor burning rule, most recently approved by the EPA on October 23, 2015, is an element of the SIP strategy outlining how Oregon will meet Federal air quality standards to protect public health and the environment (80 FR 64346). In general, the revised LRAPA outdoor burning rule provides for additional controls of outdoor burning activities in Lane County, Oregon. In addition, the submitted revisions make clarifications, incorporate housekeeping changes that eliminate duplicative text, change the “open burning” reference to “outdoor burning”, separate the reference of Eugene-Springfield Urban Growth Boundary (ESUGB) to the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and the Springfield UGB (noting each as a separate and distinct UGB), clean up typographical errors, and format and renumber sections and paragraphs. The key substantive changes are discussed below.

    General

    LRAPA revised the general policy section of Title 47, Section 47-001 to clarify the outdoor burning rule applies in Lane County in accordance with OAR 340-264-0160(1). This State rule establishes the outdoor burning requirements in Lane County are not to be less stringent than Oregon's rule and prohibits LRAPA from regulating agricultural outdoor burning. In addition, LRAPA added “bonfires” and “ecological conversion” to the list of outdoor burning categories to provide clarification and a more complete list of what types of permits LRAPA issues for outdoor burning,

    Exemptions

    LRAPA revised the agricultural outdoor burning exemption language in Section 47-005 to align with OAR 340-264-0040 and ORS 468A.020 and made clear that this type of burning is still subject to the requirements and prohibitions of local jurisdictions and the State Fire Marshal. The exemption for recreational fires on private property or in designated recreational areas was tightened in two ways: the prohibition on recreational fires on yellow and red home wood heating advisory days now extends from at least October through May (as opposed to November through February in the current SIP) and now applies in the Oakridge Urban Growth Boundary (in addition to within the Eugene and Springfield Urban Growth Boundaries and the city limits of Oakridge). Although outdoor barbequing remains exempt, woody yard trimmings, leaves and grass clippings may no longer be burned as fuel. Religious ceremonial fires remain exempt; however, LRAPA clarified the allowable size, location, and fuel source. Larger fires are to be permitted under the “Bonfire” requirement under Section 47-020 Outdoor Burning Letter Permit. LRAPA expects religious ceremonial fires to occur infrequently and the definition requires that such fires be controlled, be “integral to a religious ceremony or ritual,” and that prohibited materials not be burned.

    Definitions

    In general, the revisions to LRAPA's definitions in Section 47-010 clarify the types of burn categories, and further define restrictions and burn boundaries. For example, the “bonfire” definition establishes the size of a controlled outdoor fire to be larger than 3 feet in diameter and 2 feet in height. This helps to distinguish between what is allowed as a bonfire, or what is considered “recreational” or “religious ceremonial”. LRAPA also clarified that a bonfire cannot serve as a disposal for prohibited materials listed in Section 47-015(1)(e). LRAPA bounded the definition of “religious ceremonial fire”, setting limits on pile size, defining materials that can and cannot be burned and defining where the burn can take place. Finally, LRAPA defined “outdoor burning letter permit”, issued pursuant to Section 47-020, to authorize burning of select materials at a defined site and under certain conditions. These updates provide clarification designed to enhance the enforceability of the rule. We propose to approve the submitted revisions to Title 47 definitions because the changes strengthen the SIP and are consistent with the CAA.

    Outdoor Burning Requirements

    LRAPA Section 47-015 contains most of the general requirements for all outdoor burning and specific requirements for the following burn types: residential, construction and demolition, commercial, industrial, and forest slash. The general outdoor burning requirements have been made more stringent in many respects. First, subsection 47-015(1)(e) regarding prohibited materials has been expanded to broadly prohibit the burning of items which, when burned, normally emit dense smoke noxious odors, or hazardous air contaminants, and specifically adds cardboard, clothing and grass clippings to the list of such items. The prohibition on the outdoor burning of cardboard and clothing was included to be at least as stringent with OAR 340-264-0160. In addition, a new provision was added, Section 47-015(1)(i), which prohibits the outdoor burning in barrels throughout Lane County.

    Residential outdoor burning is allowed only on approved burning days with the start and end times for burning set as part of the daily burning advisory issued by LRAPA. The previous start and end times, beginning at sunrise and extending until sunset, were eliminated to avoid misinterpretation of the hours set by the LRAPA outdoor burning advisory, which generally allows the burn to commence a minimum of several hours after sunrise and requires the burn to be extinguished at least several hours prior to sunset.

    LRAPA also added and expanded several provisions defining outdoor burning limits for the cities of Eugene, Springfield, Oakridge and Lowell and their associated urban growth boundaries; and the cities of Coburg, Cottage Grove, Creswell, Dunes City, Junction City, Veneta and Westfir. For example, LRAPA expanded outdoor burning limits from the Eugene city limits to the Eugene UGB, except that outdoor burning of wood yard trimmings is allowed on lots of two acres or more. The outdoor burning prohibition for Springfield was expanded to include the UGB, except that outdoor burning of woody yard trimmings is allowed on lots of one half acre or more. The Oakridge outdoor burning boundary was also expanded to include the UGB. In addition, LRAPA added that outdoor burning within Florence city limits is prohibited per Florence city ordinance. These changes strengthen the previous rule, which only restricted the burning of woody yard trimmings within the Eugene and Springfield city limits and as otherwise prohibited by some city fire codes. LRAPA's approved burn days are still from March 1 through June 15 and October 1 through October 31. LRAPA also formalized the prohibition of the outdoor burning of grass clippings throughout Lane County; however, the outdoor burning of fallen leaves and woody yard trimmings is still allowed, subject to restrictions based on time and location.

    In general, these revisions impose more stringent requirements on additional geographic areas, increasing the overall stringency of the restrictions on outdoor burning, and the EPA proposes to approve them as consistent with CAA requirements.

    Letter Permits

    Section 47-020 authorizes certain types of outdoor burning under letter permits issued by LRAPA. Section 47-020(2) has been amended, increasing the fees for letter permits issued for outdoor burning of standing vegetation from $100 to $1,000. A new provision in Section 47-020(2) authorizes the Director to compromise on the permit fee, on a case by case basis, based on set factors. In addition, Subsection 47-020(4) was amended to increase the permit fee for outdoor burning from $4 per cubic year to $10 per cubic yard, with a minimum fee of $100. The fee applies to all outdoor burning except for prescribed burning of standing vegetation, which is addressed in Section 47-010(2).

    The EPA proposes to find the revised LRAPA Title 47 outdoor burning rule provides for additional controls on outdoor burning which are designed to reduce particulate emissions in Lane County and strengthen Oregon's SIP. Based on the EPA's review and analysis of the revised rule, the EPA is proposing to approve the submitted Title 47 revisions to the Oregon SIP for Lane County as meeting the requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

    Rules not Appropriate for SIP Approval

    Title 47 contains several provisions that are not appropriate for SIP approval, including but not limited to nuisance, fire safety, and Title V. The EPA's authority to approve SIPs extends to provisions related to attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and carrying out other specific requirements of section 110 of the CAA. In this action, the EPA is not approving into the SIP the following provisions of Title 47 because they are inappropriate for SIP approval: LRAPA 47-010—definition of “nuisance”; LRAPA 47-015(1)(d); LRAPA 47-015(1)(h); LRAPA 47-020(3); LRAPA 47-020(9)(i); and LRAPA 47-020(10) (80 FR 64346, October 23, 2015).

    B. Title 15: Enforcement Procedure and Civil Penalties

    Title 15 outlines enforcement procedures and civil penalty provisions that apply to air quality regulations implemented by LRAPA and approved by the EPA into the SIP. Title 15 provides the authority and procedures under which LRAPA notifies regulated entities of violations, determines the appropriate penalties for violations, and assesses penalties for such violations.

    LRAPA updated Title 15 to correspond to the State enforcement rule in OAR Chapter 340, Division 12, approved by the EPA on October 23, 2015 (80 FR 64346). LRAPA revisions implement legislative increases in statutory maximum penalties, align violation classifications and magnitudes with program priorities, and provide greater mitigating credit for correcting violations. In addition, the rules incorporate housekeeping changes that include eliminating duplicative text, changing references from “the Agency” to “LRAPA” and “open burning” to “outdoor burning”, formatting and renumbering the sections and paragraphs, and cleaning up typographical errors. The key substantive changes are discussed below.

    Overall, LRAPA aligned its definitions with those in the corresponding State rule recently reviewed and approved by the EPA on October 23, 2015 (80 FR 64346). Key definition changes include adding definitions for “alleged violation”, “conduct”, “notice of civil penalty assessment”, “residential owner-occupant” and “willful” and removing the term “risk of harm”. To mirror the State's definition, LRAPA revised the term “magnitude of the violation” by removing language that is procedural in nature. Detailed procedures are centralized in Section 15-030 Civil Penalty Determination Procedure (Mitigating and Aggravating Factors). LRAPA also simplified the definition of “violation” to remove redundant language defining the three classes of violation (class I, II and III).

    The submitted revisions also include several rule sections revised to be consistent with OAR Chapter 340, Division 12. LRAPA revised Section 15.018 Notice of Permit Violations and Exceptions to align with OAR 340-012-0038 by including language requiring no advance notice prior to assessment of a civil penalty if the permittee has an Air Contaminant Discharge Permit (ACDP) condition that implements the SIP under the CAA and the permit violation would disqualify a State program from Federal approval or delegation.

    Section 15.025 Civil Penalty Matrices was revised to align with State civil penalties in OAR 340-012-0140. The LRAPA penalty matrices and applications were updated to directly reflect Oregon's SIP-approved penalty amounts. LRAPA also amended Section 15.030 Civil Penalty Determination to provide the director the discretion to increase the penalty amount to $25,000 per violation per day of violation to correspond with OAR 340-012-0160(4). In addition, the civil penalty formulation factors were updated to mirror language in OAR 340-012-0045 and OAR 340-012-0145. The submitted revisions increase the additional civil penalties for violations that pose an extreme hazard to public health or cause extensive environmental damage to mirror those in OAR 340-200-012-0155. As stated in Section 15-045, nothing in Title 15 is intended to preclude LRAPA from assessing a penalty of up to the maximum allowed for the violation by Oregon Revised Statutes 468 (ORS 468).

    LRAPA also aligned Section 15.060 Selected Magnitude Categories with the State SIP-approved language in OAR 340-012-0135 by removing a duplicative table defining significant emission rate amounts for selected air pollutant magnitude determinations. This information can now be found in LRAPA's Title 12, Tables 2 and 3.

    The EPA has reviewed the revisions to the LRAPA Title 15 enforcement procedures and civil penalties rule and finds the rule continues to provide LRAPA with adequate authority to enforce the SIP as required by section 110 of the Clean Air Act. The EPA therefore proposes to approve into the SIP the revisions to Title 15 to the extent the provisions relate to section 110 of the CAA and determining compliance with and for purposes of implementation of SIP-approved requirements. We note that we are not incorporating Title 15 by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). These types of rules are generally not incorporated by reference into the CFR because they may conflict with the EPA's independent administrative and enforcement procedures under the CAA.

    III. Proposed Action

    We propose to approve and incorporate by reference into the Oregon SIP the submitted revisions to the LRAPA Title 47 outdoor burning rule, Sections 001, 005, 010 (except the definition of “nuisance”), 015 (except (1)(d) and (1)(h)), and 020 (except (3), (9)(i), and (10)). These rules were State effective July 13, 2018 and submitted to the EPA by the ODEQ and LRAPA on July 19, 2018.

    We also propose to approve, but not incorporate by reference, the submitted revisions to the LRAPA Title 15 enforcement procedures and civil penalty rule, Sections 001, 005, 015, 018, 020, 025, 030, 035, 040, 045, 055, 057, 060, and 065. These rules were State effective on September 14, 2018, and submitted by the ODEQ and LRAPA on September 25, 2018. They align LRAPA's Title 15 rule with the ODEQ's Division 12 and provide LRAPA with authority needed for SIP approval.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, we are proposing to include in a final rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by reference the provisions described above in Section III. Proposed Action. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Oregon Notice Provision

    Oregon Revised Statute 468.126 prohibits the ODEQ from imposing a penalty for violation of an air, water or solid waste permit unless the source has been provided five days' advanced written notice of the violation and has not come into compliance or submitted a compliance schedule within that five-day period. By its terms, the statute does not apply to Oregon's title V program or to any program if application of the notice provision would disqualify the program from Federal delegation. Oregon has previously confirmed that, because application of the notice provision would preclude EPA approval of the Oregon SIP, no advance notice is required for violation of SIP requirements.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 proposed action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and

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

    The proposed SIP would not be approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the 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, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: November 9, 2018. Chris Hladick, Regional Administrator, Region 10.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25679 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 158 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0668; FRL-9984-47] RIN 2070-AK41 Notification of Submission to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services; Pesticides; Technical Amendment to Data Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notification of submission to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services.

    SUMMARY:

    This document notifies the public as required by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) that the EPA Administrator has forwarded to the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) a draft regulatory document concerning Pesticides; Technical Amendment to Data Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides. The draft regulatory document is not available to the public until after it has been signed and made available by EPA.

    DATES:

    On October 29, 2018, the EPA Administrator forwarded to the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) a draft regulatory document concerning Pesticides; Technical Amendment to Data Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0668, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg. Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cameo Smoot, Field and External Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-5454; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What action is EPA taking?

    Section 25(a)(2)(B) of FIFRA requires the EPA Administrator to provide the Secretary of USDA with a copy of any draft final rule at least 30 days before signing it in final form for publication in the Federal Register. Similarly, FIFRA section 21(b) requires the EPA Administrator to provide the Secretary of HHS with a copy of any draft final rule pertaining to a public health pesticide at least 30 days before publishing it in the Federal Register. The draft final rule is not available to the public until after it has been signed by EPA. If either Secretary comments in writing regarding the draft final rule within 15 days after receiving it, the EPA Administrator shall include the comments of the Secretary, if requested by the Secretary, and the EPA Administrator's response to those comments with the final rule that publishes in the Federal Register. If either Secretary does not comment in writing within 15 days after receiving the draft final rule, the EPA Administrator may sign the final rule for publication in the Federal Register any time after the 15-day period.

    II. Do any statutory and executive order reviews apply to this notification?

    No. This document is merely a notification of submission to the Secretaries of USDA and HHS. As such, none of the regulatory assessment requirements apply to this document.

    List of Subjects in Part 40 CFR 158

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

    Dated: October 25, 2018. Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25554 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    83 227 Monday, November 26, 2018 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 20, 2018.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by December 26, 2018 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

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

    Economic Research Service

    Title: Food Security Supplement to the Current Population Survey.

    OMB Control Number: 0536-0043.

    Summary of Collection: The Food Security Supplement is sponsored by USDA as research and evaluation activity authorized under 7 U.S.C. 2204(a). This section outlines duties of the Secretary of Agriculture related to research and development including authorizing the collection of statistics. The Administrator of the Economic Research Service is authorized to conduct economic and social science research and analyses related to the U.S. food system and consumers under 7 CFR 2.67. The data to be collected will be used to address multiple programmatic and policy development needs of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) and other Federal agencies. The U.S. Census Bureau has the right to conduct the data collection on USDA's behalf under Title 13, Section 8(b).

    Need and Use of the Information: The data collected by the food security supplement will be used to obtain reliable data from a large, representative national sample as a basis for monitoring the prevalence of food security, food insecurity, and very low food security within the U.S. population as a whole and in selected population subgroups; conducting research on causes of food insecurity and the role of Federal food and nutrition programs in ameliorating food insecurity; and continuing development and improvement of methods for measuring these conditions. Information will be collected on food spending, use of Federal and community food and nutrition assistance programs, difficulties in obtaining adequate food during the previous 12 months and 30 days due to constrained resources, and conditions that result from inadequate access to food.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals or Households.

    Number of Respondents: 53,802.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 6,465.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25615 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 20, 2018.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by December 26, 2018 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

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

    Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service

    Title: Importation of Fresh Peppers from Peru Into the Continental United States and the Territories.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0434.

    Summary of Collection: The Plant Protection Act (PPA, 7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to restrict the importation, entry, or interstate movement of plants, plant products, and other articles to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States. Regulations authorized by the PPA concerning the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world are contained in “Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-83).

    Need and Use of the Information: The regulations in §  319.56-73 allow the importation of fresh peppers into the continental United States and the Territories from Peru. As a condition of entry, the peppers must be produced in accordance with a systems approach that includes requirements for operational workplans, quality control programs, fruit fly trapping, pre-harvest production site inspections, production site and packinghouse registration, emergency action notifications, notices of arrival for imports, and packinghouse procedures designed to exclude quarantine pests. The peppers are also required to be imported in commercial consignments and accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the national plant protection organization (NPPO) of Peru with an additional declaration stating that the consignment was produced in accordance with the systems approach outlined in the regulations. These actions allow for the importation of fresh peppers from Peru while continuing to provide protection against the introduction of plant pests into the United States and the Territories.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other for-profit; Federal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 15.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 294.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25625 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request November 20, 2018.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques and other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by December 26, 2018 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20503. Commentors are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8681.

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

    Forest Service

    Title: Public Lands Corps Participant Tracking Sheet.

    OMB Control Number: 0596-NEW.

    Summary of Collection: The Public Lands Corps (PLC) is a work and education program involving the nation's land management agencies, conservation and service corps, and environmental organizations that contribute to the rehabilitation, restoration, and repair of public lands resources and infrastructure. PLC provides opportunities for community and national service, work experience, and training to young people who are unemployed or underemployed. The law authorizing this program is 16 U.S.C. 1721-1726, Chapter 37—Public Lands Corps and Resources Assistants Program (Public Lands Corps Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2005 [Pub. L. 109-154]) as amended in 1993, hereafter referred to as “the Act.”

    Need and use of the Information: This information collection request establishes policies and procedures for the implementation of the Public Lands Corps Participant Tracking Sheet to ensure uniform collection of information regarding tracking and monitoring participant engagement to determine the completion of requirements for non-competitive hiring eligibility as defined in the Act. Data collected through the Public Lands Corps Participant Tracking Sheet will allow the Forest Service (FS) and other Federal Land Management Agencies who sponsor PLC programs to support collaborating partners who manage eligible participants and their participation in PLC projects. If the FS is unable to collect data regarding PLC participants, it and other Federal Land Management Agencies would be unable to participate in a legally mandated program as outlined in the Act.

    Description of Respondents: Non-profit Organizations and Non-Federal Government entities.

    Number of Respondents: 350.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting; Quarterly.

    Total Burden Hours: 8,400.

    Kimble Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25623 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meetings of the New York Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the New York Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 12 p.m. (EST) on: Friday, December 14, 2018. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss topics of study.

    DATES:

    Friday, December 14, 2018 at 12 p.m. EST.

    PUBLIC CALL-IN INFORMATION:

    Conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference ID# 5953601.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Barreras, at [email protected] or by phone at 312-353-8311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference ID# 5953601. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-877-260-1479 and conference ID# 5953601.

    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meetings or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwest Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S. Dearborn Street, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604, faxed to (312) 353-8324, or emailed to David Barreras at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwest Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=265; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Midwest Regional Office at the above phone numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda Friday, December 14, 2018

    • Open—Roll Call

    • Discussion of Study Topics

    • Open Comment

    • Adjourn

    Dated: November 20, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25644 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Correction: Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Correction: Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission on Civil Rights published a document November 20, 2018, announcing an upcoming Connecticut Advisory Committee meeting. The document contained an incorrect date of the meeting.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara de La Viez, DFO, at [email protected] or 202-376-7533.

    CORRECTION:

    In the Federal Register of November 20, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-25258, on page 58527 in the second columns, delete “December 7, 2018” in the DATES Replace the date of the meeting to read December 12, 2018.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25651 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Procedures for Participating in User Testing of the New Commerce 232 Exclusion Process Portal AGENCY:

    Bureau of Industry and Security, Office of Technology Evaluation, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice on procedures for requesting participation in user testing phase.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce has developed an online portal that will replace the use of the Federal rulemaking portal (http://www.regulations.gov) for persons submitting exclusion requests, objections to exclusion requests, rebuttals, and surrebuttals in connection with duties or quotas imposed pursuant to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (“232”). In order to improve the 232 exclusion process, the Department of Commerce plans to transition to the new Commerce 232 portal sometime in late 2018 to early 2019. This notice describes the process for the public to submit requests to participate in the public testing phase of the new Commerce 232 portal, and the procedures for attending the public testing.

    DATES:

    The public testing will be held on December 6 and 7, 2018 at the U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6872A, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. Each public testing day will be broken into a morning session from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. and an afternoon session from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kevin Coyne, System & Application Support Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, [email protected] For more information about the section 232 program, including the regulations and the text of previous investigations, see www.bis.doc.gov/232.

    For questions regarding the December 6 and 7 public testing, please contact [email protected], (202) 482-5642, or (202) 482-4757.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Two components of the Department of Commerce, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) and the International Trade Administration (ITA), have developed a new Commerce 232 portal to facilitate parties' ability to make 232 exclusion-related submissions, and the Department of Commerce's management of the 232 exclusion process. The new Commerce 232 portal will replace the use of the Federal rulemaking portal (http://www.regulations.gov) for parties submitting exclusion requests, objections to exclusions requests, rebuttals, and surrebuttals under the 232 exclusion process. The new portal will streamline the exclusion process for external parties, including importers and domestic manufacturers, by replacing the data collection point with web-based forms, which will enhance data integrity and quality controls. In addition, this new system will allow parties to more easily view all exclusion request, objection, rebuttal, and surrebuttal documents in one, web-based system. Finally, parties will be able to track submission deadlines in this same system. The new portal will also allow for better collaboration between government agencies processing 232 exclusion requests.

    The Department of Commerce plans to transition to the new Commerce 232 portal sometime in late 2018 to early 2019, once testing is completed and any final updates are made. This notice describes the process for the public to submit requests to participate in the public testing phase of the new Commerce 232 portal, and the procedures for attending the public testing.

    Once the Commerce 232 portal is ready to be implemented, the Department of Commerce will publish a rule making changes to the 232 exclusion process in Supplements No. 1 (for steel exclusion requests) and 2 (for aluminum exclusion requests) to Part 705. The public will have an opportunity to submit comments on the new portal once the rule is published. As much as possible, the Department of Commerce seeks input from the public on the new Commerce 232 portal prior to it going live, and believes allowing parties that will use the new portal to test it and provide feedback to the development team prior to implementation will be beneficial to both the Department and the public users of the system.

    Location for public testing. The public testing will occur in Washington, DC. See the ADDRESSES section for the physical address. There will be no remote testing available, so parties who wish to participate must attend the public testing in person.

    Dates and times. The public testing will occur on December 6 and 7, 2018. Each public testing day will be broken into a morning session from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and an afternoon session from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Each party will be allowed to test the system for one hour and testing during each window will be limited to three parties at a time. For example, during the 10:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m. window, up to three parties can test the system at the same time.

    Facilities and items to bring. The public testing will be done on government provided computers. Parties selected to participate are encouraged to bring examples of past exclusions, objections to exclusions, rebuttals, or surrebuttals they may have submitted or intend to submit in the near future to use in the testing environment. However, this is not required in order to participate in the public testing.

    Foreign persons are not eligible to participate in the testing. People selected to participate in the testing of the Commerce 232 portal will be limited to citizens of the United States, lawful permanent residents of the United States, or any other protected individuals as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3).

    Costs to participate. There is no fee to participate in the public testing and participants will not be compensated for their time. In addition, participants will be responsible for all travel-related costs to attend the public testing.

    Limit on number of participants. The public testing will be limited to thirty-six people because of the size limitations of the testing room and to provide sufficient opportunities for the development team to interact with those testing the Commerce 232 portal and providing feedback. Organizations may request more than one person from their organization to attend the public testing, but such requests will only be accommodated if there is space available.

    Procedures To Request Participation in the Public Testing

    Email requesting approval. Parties who wish to attend the public testing must send an email to [email protected] to request approval to participate. Anyone wishing to attend this public testing must submit the email request no later than 5:00 p.m. (EST), November 29, 2018. The subject line of the email should be “Request to attend public testing of Commerce 232 portal.”

    Information to include in email request: The following information must be included in the text of the email: (1) Full name of the person that wishes to attend the public testing and a telephone number and email for this person; (2) name of the person's organization, or state “individual” if not affiliated with an organization; (3) if applicable, identify the number of employees in the organization and the type of organization, e.g., manufacturer or distributor; (4) indicate whether the organization or individual has submitted any exclusions, objections to exclusions, rebuttals, or surrebuttals either for their own organization or on behalf of another organization; (5) if applicable, provide an estimate for the number of each type of 232 submission, including specifying whether the submissions were for steel and/or aluminum, (6) if applicable, identify any special accommodations that may be needed (see below under Special Accommodations); and (7) identify any other factors that you believe make you a good candidate to participate in the public testing of the Commerce 232 portal.

    Selection Process

    The Department of Commerce will accommodate as many parties as possible, space permitting. If thirty-six or fewer people submit requests to participate, the Department will likely approve all requesters, unless there is some reason why a requester may not be suitable. If more than thirty-six people request to participate, the Department will put greater weight on those that have submitted 232 submissions and will seek to have as representative a sample of public testers as possible (e.g., small and mid-size enterprises, as well as large organizations, and those from the steel and aluminum industries). If there are two equally situated individuals or organizations, the Department will generally use the date of the request to determine the organization or individual to be approved, favoring the requester whose request was submitted earlier.

    Each person selected to participate in the public testing will be notified by the Department of Commerce no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on Friday, November 30, 2018.

    Procedures for Attending the Public Testing

    Visitor Access Requirement: For participants attending the training, please note that federal agencies can only accept a state-issued driver's license or identification card for access to federal facilities if such license or identification card is issued by a state that is compliant with the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-13), or by a state that has an extension for REAL ID compliance. The main entrance of the Department of Commerce is on 14th Street, NW between Pennsylvania Avenue and Constitution Avenue, across from the Ronald Reagan Building. Upon entering the building, please go through security and check in at the guard's desk. BIS and ITA staff will meet and escort visitors to the public testing room. Admittance to the room for the public testing will be available beginning at 8:30 a.m. (EST) on December 6 and 7, 2018 and the public testing will start promptly at 9:00 a.m. (EST) on December 6 and 7, 2018.

    Acknowledgement for Participation in Testing Environment: Because the individuals and organizations selected to participate in the public testing of the Commerce 232 portal will be participating in a testing environment, all selected participants on the first day of the testing will be required to acknowledge that their suggestions and comments may not be incorporated into the final version for technical or other reasons.

    Special Accommodations

    This public testing is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be received by the Department of Commerce no later than November 29, 2018 and should be included in the email requesting participation in the public testing referenced above.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Matthew S. Borman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25680 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Order Denying Export Privileges

    In the Matter of: Gregory Allen Justice, Inmate Number: 73792-112, FCI Safford, P.O. Box 9000, Safford, AZ 85548.

    On September 19, 2017, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Gregory Allen Justice (“Justice”) was convicted of violating Section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778 (2012)) (“AECA”), among other crimes. Justice was convicted of violating Section 38 of the AECA by knowingly and willfully attempting to export, cause others to export, and aid and abet the export to Russia, for the intended benefit of the Russian Government, of defense articles designated on the United States Munitions List (“USML”), without the required U.S. Department of State licenses. Justice, an engineer who worked for a defense contractor, knowingly and willfully sold and provided USML-controlled technical data relating to U.S. military satellite programs to a person he believed to be an agent of a Russian intelligence service, but who was in fact an undercover Federal Bureau of Investigation employee. Justice was sentenced to 60 months in prison, three years of supervised release, and a $200 special assessment.

    The Export Administration Regulations (“EAR” or “Regulations”) are administered and enforced by the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”).1 Section 766.25 of the Regulations provides, in pertinent part, that the “Director of [BIS's] Office of Exporter Services, in consultation with the Director of [BIS's] Office of Export Enforcement, may deny the export privileges of any person who has been convicted of a violation of . . . section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).” 15 CFR 766.25(a). The denial of export privileges under this provision may be for a period of up to 10 years from the date of the conviction. 15 CFR 766.25(d).1 In addition, pursuant to Section 750.8 of the Regulations, BIS's Office of Exporter Services may revoke any BIS-issued licenses in which the person had an interest at the time of his/her conviction.2

    1 The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730-774 (2018). The Regulations originally issued under the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, 50 U.S.C. 4601-4623 (Supp. III 2015) (“EAA”), which lapsed on August 21, 2001. The President, through Executive Order 13,222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), which has been extended by successive Presidential Notices, the most recent being that of August 8, 2018 (83 FR 39,871 (Aug. 13, 2018)), continued the Regulations in full force and effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2012) (“IEEPA”). On August 13, 2018, the President signed into law the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, which includes the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, Title XVII, Subtitle B of Pub. L. No. 115-232, 132 Stat. 2208 (“ECRA”). While Section 1766 of ECRA repeals the provisions of the EAA (except for three sections which are inapplicable here), Section 1768 of ECRA provides, in pertinent part, that all rules and regulations that were made or issued under the EAA, including as continued in effect pursuant to IEEPA, and were in effect as of ECRA's date of enactment (August 13, 2018), shall continue in effect until modified, superseded, set aside, or revoked through action undertaken pursuant to the authority provided under ECRA.

    1See also Section 11(h) of the EAA, 50 U.S.C. 4610(h) (Supp. III 2015); Sections 1760(e) and 1768 of ECRA, Title XVII, Subtitle B of Pub. L. No. 115-232, 132 Stat. 2208, 2225 and 2233 (Aug. 13, 2018); and note 1, supra.

    2See note 2, supra.

    BIS has received notice of Justice's conviction for violating Section 38 of the AECA, and has provided notice and an opportunity for Justice to make a written submission to BIS, as provided in Section 766.25 of the Regulations. BIS has not received a submission from Justice.

    Based upon my review and consultations with BIS's Office of Export Enforcement, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I have decided to deny Justice's export privileges under the Regulations for a period of 10 years from the date of Justice's conviction. I have also decided to revoke all BIS-issued licenses in which Justice had an interest at the time of his conviction.

    Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:

    First, from the date of this Order until September 19, 2027, Gregory Allen Justice, with a last known address of Inmate Number: 73792-112, FCI Safford, P.O. Box 9000, Safford, AZ 85548, and when acting for or on his behalf, his successors, assigns, employees, agents or representatives (“the Denied Person”), may not, directly or indirectly, participate in any way in any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter collectively referred to as “item”) exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, including, but not limited to:

    A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, license exception, or export control document;

    B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or engaging in any other activity subject to the Regulations; or

    C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or from any other activity subject to the Regulations.

    Second, no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following:

    A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item subject to the Regulations;

    B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control;

    C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to the Regulations that has been exported from the United States;

    D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the Regulations with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or

    E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing.

    Third, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in Section 766.23 of the Regulations, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to Justice by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order in order to prevent evasion of this Order.

    Fourth, in accordance with Part 756 of the Regulations, Justice may file an appeal of this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security. The appeal must be filed within 45 days from the date of this Order and must comply with the provisions of Part 756 of the Regulations.

    Fifth, a copy of this Order shall be delivered to Justice and shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Sixth, this Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until September 19, 2027.

    Issued this 15th day of November, 2018. Karen H. Nies-Vogel, Director, Office of Exporter Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25619 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-068] Forged Steel Fittings From the People's Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing a countervailing duty order on forged steel fittings from the People's Republic of China (China).

    DATES:

    Applicable November 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Smith or Janae Martin, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1766 or (202) 482-0238, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On October 5, 2018, Commerce published its final determination in the countervailing duty investigation of forged steel fittings from China.1 On November 19, 2018, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination, pursuant to section 705(d) of the Act, that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, by reason of subsidized imports of forged steel fittings from China.2

    1See Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 83 FR 50342 (October 5, 2018) (Final Determination).

    2See ITC Notification Letter to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, referencing ITC Investigation Nos. 701-TA-589 and 731-TA-1394-95, dated November 19, 2018 (ITC Notification).

    Scope of the Order 3

    3See Memorandum to the File, “Placing Carbon Steel Butt Weld Pipe Fitting Scope Ruling on the Record, dated September 19, 2018.

    The products covered by this order are forged steel fittings from China. For a complete description of the scope of this order, see the Appendix to this notice.

    Countervailing Duty Order

    On November 19, 2018, in accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that imports of forged steel fittings are materially injuring a U.S. industry.4 Therefore, in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act, we are publishing this countervailing duty order.

    4See ITC Notification; see also Forged Steel Fittings from China and Italy (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-589 and 731-TA-1394-1395 (Final), USITC Publication 4850, November 2018).

    As a result of the ITC's final determination, in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 14, 2018, the date on which Commerce published its preliminary countervailing duty determination in the Federal Register,5 and before July 11, 2018, the effective date on which Commerce instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation in accordance with section 703(d) of the Act. Section 703(d) of the Act states that the suspension of liquidation pursuant to a preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. Therefore, entries of subject merchandise from China made on or after July 11, 2018, and prior to the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register are not liable for the assessment of countervailing duties due to Commerce's discontinuation of the suspension of liquidation.

    5See Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 83 FR 11170 (March 14, 2018).

    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 706 of the Act, Commerce will direct CBP to reinstitute the suspension of liquidation of subject merchandise from China, effective the date of publication of the ITC's notice of final determination in the Federal Register, and to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, countervailing duties for each entry of the subject merchandise in an amount based on the net countervailable subsidy rates for the subject merchandise. On or after the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register, we will instruct CBP to require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this merchandise, cash deposits for each entry of subject merchandise equal to the rates noted below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. The all others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed, as appropriate.

    Company Subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings, Co., Ltd 13.41 All-Others 13.41
    Notifications to Interested Parties

    This notice constitutes the countervailing duty order with respect to forged steel fittings from China pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of countervailing duty orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastatsl.html.

    This order is issued and published in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order is carbon and alloy forged steel fittings, whether unfinished (commonly known as blanks or rough forgings) or finished. Such fittings are made in a variety of shapes including, but not limited to, elbows, tees, crosses, laterals, couplings, reducers, caps, plugs, bushings, unions, and outlets. Forged steel fittings are covered regardless of end finish, whether threaded, socket-weld or other end connections.

    While these fittings are generally manufactured to specifications ASME B16.11, MSS SP-79, MSS SP-83, MSS SP-97, ASTM A105, ASTM A350, and ASTM A182, the scope is not limited to fittings made to these specifications.

    The term forged is an industry term used to describe a class of products included in applicable standards and does not reference an exclusive manufacturing process. Forged steel fittings are not manufactured from casting. Pursuant to the applicable specifications, subject fittings may also be machined from bar stock or machined from seamless pipe and tube.

    All types of fittings are included in the scope regardless of nominal pipe size (which may or may not be expressed in inches of nominal pipe size), pressure rating (usually, but not necessarily expressed in pounds of pressure/PSI, e.g., 2,000 or 2M; 3,000 or 3M; 6,000 or 6M; 9,000 or 9M), wall thickness, and whether or not heat treated.

    Excluded from this scope are all fittings entirely made of stainless steel. Also excluded are flanges, butt weld fittings, butt weld outlets, nipples, and all fittings that have a maximum pressure rating of 300 pounds of pressure/PSI or less.

    Also excluded are fittings certified or made to the following standards, so long as the fittings are not also manufactured to the specifications of ASME B16.11, MSS SP-79, MSS SP-83, MSS SP-97, ASTM A105, ASTM A350, and ASTM A182:

    • American Petroleum Institute (API) API 5CT, API 5L, or API 11B • Society of Automotive Engineering (SAE) SAE J476, SAE J514, SAE J516, SAE J517, SAE J518, SAE J1026, SAE J1231, SAE J1453, SAE J1926, J2044 or SAE AS 35411 • Underwriter's Laboratories (UL) certified electrical conduit fittings • ASTM A153, A536, A576, or A865 • Casing Conductor Connectors 16-42 inches in diameter made to proprietary specifications • Military Specification (MIL) MIL-C-4109F and MIL-F-3541 • International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO6150-B

    To be excluded from the scope, products must have the appropriate standard or pressure markings and/or accompanied by documentation showing product compliance to the applicable standard or pressure, e.g., “API 5CT” mark and/or a mill certification report.

    Subject carbon and alloy forged steel fittings are normally entered under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 7307.99.1000, 7307.99.3000, 7307.99.5045, and 7307.99.5060. They also may be entered under HTSUS 7307.92.3010, 7307.92.3030, 7307.92.9000, and 7326.19.0010. The HTSUS subheadings and specifications are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-25704 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-475-839, A-570-067] Forged Steel Fittings From Italy and the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Orders AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce is issuing antidumping duty orders on forged steel fittings from Italy and the People's Republic of China (China).

    DATES:

    Applicable November 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Bowen at (202) 482-0768 (Italy) or Kate Johnson at (202) 482-4929 (China), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on October 5, 2018, Commerce published its final determinations in the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigations of forged steel fittings from Italy and China.1 On November 19, 2018, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determinations, pursuant to section 735(d) of the Act, that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of LTFV imports of forged steel fittings from Italy and China.2

    1See Forged Steel Fittings from Italy: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 50345 (October 5, 2018); and Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 50339 (October 5, 2018).

    2See ITC Notification Letter to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, referencing ITC Investigation Nos. 701-TA-589 and 731-TA-1394-95, dated November 19, 2018 (ITC Notification).

    Scope of the Orders 3

    3See Memorandum, “Placing Carbon Steel Butt Weld Pipe Fitting Scope Ruling on the Record,” dated September 19, 2018.

    The products covered by these orders are forged steel fittings from Italy and China. For a complete description of the scope of these orders, see the Appendix to this notice.

    Antidumping Duty Orders

    On November 19, 2018, in accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determinations in these investigations, in which it found that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of forged steel fittings from Italy and China.4 Therefore, in accordance with section 735(c)(2) of the Act, Commerce is issuing these antidumping duty orders. Because the ITC determined that imports of forged steel fittings from Italy and China are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from Italy and China, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to the assessment of antidumping duties.

    4See ITC Notification; see also Forged Steel Fittings from China and Italy (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-589 and 731-TA-1394-1395 (Final), USITC Publication 4850, November 2018).

    Therefore, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds the export price (or constructed export price) of the merchandise, for all relevant entries of forged steel fittings from Italy and China. With the exception of entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, as further described below, antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of forged steel fittings from Italy and China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May 17, 2018, the date of publication of the preliminary determinations.5

    5See Forged Steel Fittings from Italy: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures, 83 FR 22954 (May 17, 2018) (Italy Preliminary Determination); and Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures, 83 FR 22948 (May 17, 2018) (China Preliminary Determination).

    Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on all relevant entries of forged steel fittings from Italy and China. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

    Commerce will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins indicated in the tables below. Accordingly, effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register of the notice of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins listed in the tables below.6 For forged steel fittings from Italy, the all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed. For forged steel fittings from China, the China-wide entity rate applies to all Chinese exporter-producer combinations not specifically listed.

    6See section 736(a)(3) of the Act.

    Provisional Measures

    Section 733(d) of the Act states that suspension of liquidation pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months, except where exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise request that Commerce extend the four-month period to no more than six months. At the request of exporters that account for a significant proportion of forged steel fittings from Italy and China, Commerce extended the four-month period to six months in each of these investigations. Commerce published the preliminary determinations in these investigations on May 17, 2018.7 The extended provisional measures period, beginning on the date of publication of the preliminary determinations, ended on November 12, 2018. Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and our practice,8 Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of forged steel fittings from Italy and China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after November 12, 2018, the final day on which the provisional measures were in effect, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations in the Federal Register. Suspension of liquidation and the collection of cash deposits will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determinations in the Federal Register.

    7See Italy Preliminary Determination and China Preliminary Determination.

    8See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Determination for India and Taiwan, and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 48390, 48392 (July 25, 2016).

    Estimated Weighted-Average Dumping Margins

    The estimated weighted-average antidumping duty margin percentages are as follows:

    Italy Exporter/producer Estimated
  • weighted-
  • average dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • M.E.G.A. S.p.A 80.20 I.M.L. Industria Meccanica Ligure S.p.A 80.20 All-Others 49.43
    China Exporter Producer Estimated
  • weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co., Ltd Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Dalian Guangming Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd Yancheng Jiuwei Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Dalian Guangming Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd Yancheng Manda Pipe Industry Co., Ltd 8.00 Dalian Guangming Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd Yancheng Haohui Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Dalian Guangming Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd Jiangsu Haida Pipe Fittings Group Co., Ltd 8.00 Eaton Hydraulics (Ningbo) Co., Ltd Eaton Hydraulics (Ningbo) Co., Ltd 8.00 Eaton Hydraulics (Luzhou) Co., Ltd Eaton Hydraulics (Luzhou) Co., Ltd 8.00 Eaton Hydraulics (Luzhou) Co., Ltd Luzhou City Chengrun Mechanics Co., Ltd 8.00 Eaton Hydraulics (Luzhou) Co., Ltd Eaton Hydraulics (Ningbo) Co., Ltd 8.00 Jiangsu Forged Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd Jiangsu Forged Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Jinan Mech Piping Technology Co., Ltd Jinan Mech Piping Technology Co., Ltd 8.00 Jining Dingguan Precision Parts Manufacturing Co., Ltd Jining Dingguan Precision Parts Manufacturing Co., Ltd 8.00 Lianfa Stainless Steel Pipes & Valves (Qingyun) Co., Ltd Lianfa Stainless Steel Pipes & Valves (Qingyun) Co., Ltd 8.00 Ningbo Long Teng Metal Manufacturing Co., Ltd Ningbo Long Teng Metal Manufacturing Co., Ltd 8.00 Ningbo Save Technology Co., Ltd Ningbo Save Technology Co., Ltd 8.00 Q.C. Witness International Co., Ltd Ningbo HongTe Industrial Co., Ltd 8.00 Q.C. Witness International Co., Ltd Cixi Baicheng Hardware Tools, Ltd 8.00 Qingdao Bestflow Industrial Co., Ltd Yancheng Boyue Tube Co., Ltd 8.00 Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited Yancheng Jiuwei Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited Yancheng Manda Pipe Industry Co., Ltd 8.00 Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited Yancheng Haohui Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited Jiangsu Haida Pipe Fittings Group Co., Ltd 8.00 Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd 8.00 Xin Yi International Trade Co., Limited Shanghai Lon Au Stainless Steel Materials Co., Ltd 8.00 Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd 8.00 Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd Yancheng Jiuwei Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd Yancheng Manda Pipe Industry Co., Ltd 8.00 Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd Yancheng Haohui Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd 8.00 Yingkou Guangming Pipeline Industry Co., Ltd Jiangsu Haida Pipe Fittings Group Co., Ltd 8.00 Yuyao Wanlei Pipe Fitting Manufacturing Co., Ltd Yuyao Wanlei Pipe Fitting Manufacturing Co., Ltd 8.00 China-Wide Entity 9 142.72

    This notice constitutes the antidumping duty orders with respect to forged steel fittings from Italy and China, pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of antidumping duty orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastatsl.html.

    9 The China-wide entity includes: (1) Beijing Better Products International Ltd.; (2) Dalian Newshow Pipeline Industry Co.; (3) G&T Industry Holding Ltd.; (4) Shanxi Baolongda Forging Company Ltd.; (5) Shaanxi Fenry Flanges and Fittings Co., Ltd.; (6) Shenzhen Front Valve Co., Ltd.; (7) Qingdao Eathu Casting and Forging Co., Ltd.; (8) Gaoyou Huaxing Petroleum Pipe Manufacture Co., Ltd.; and (9) the single entity comprising Jiangsu Haida Pipe Fittings Group Company Ltd., its affiliated producer Haida Pipe Co., Ltd., and its affiliated reseller Yancheng L&W International Co., Ltd.

    These orders are published in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Orders

    The merchandise covered by these orders is carbon and alloy forged steel fittings, whether unfinished (commonly known as blanks or rough forgings) or finished. Such fittings are made in a variety of shapes including, but not limited to, elbows, tees, crosses, laterals, couplings, reducers, caps, plugs, bushings, unions, and outlets. Forged steel fittings are covered regardless of end finish, whether threaded, socket-weld or other end connections.

    While these fittings are generally manufactured to specifications ASME B16.11, MSS SP- 79, MSS SP-83, MSS SP-97, ASTM A105, ASTM A350 and ASTM A182, the scope is not limited to fittings made to these specifications.

    The term forged is an industry term used to describe a class of products included in applicable standards, and does not reference an exclusive manufacturing process. Forged steel fittings are not manufactured from casting. Pursuant to the applicable specifications, subject fittings may also be machined from bar stock or machined from seamless pipe and tube.

    All types of fittings are included in the scope regardless of nominal pipe size (which may or may not be expressed in inches of nominal pipe size), pressure rating (usually, but not necessarily expressed in pounds of pressure/PSI, e.g., 2,000 or 2M; 3,000 or 3M; 6,000 or 6M; 9,000 or 9M), wall thickness, and whether or not heat treated.

    Excluded from this scope are all fittings entirely made of stainless steel. Also excluded are flanges, butt weld fittings, butt weld outlets, nipples, and all fittings that have a maximum pressure rating of 300 pounds of pressure/PSI or less.

    Also excluded are fittings certified or made to the following standards, so long as the fittings are not also manufactured to the specifications of ASME B16.11, MSS SP-79, MSS SP-83, MSS SP-97, ASTM A105, ASTM A350 and ASTM A182:

    • American Petroleum Institute (API) 5CT, API 5L, or API 11B • Society of Automotive Engineering (SAE) J476, SAE J514, SAE J516, SAE J517, SAE J518, SAE J1026, SAE J1231, SAE J1453, SAE J1926, J2044 or SAE AS 35411 • Underwriter's Laboratories (UL) certified electrical conduit fittings • ASTM A153, A536, A576, or A865 • Casing Conductor Connectors 16-42 inches in diameter made to proprietary specifications • Military Specification (MIL) MIL-C-4109F and MIL-F-3541 • International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO6150-B

    To be excluded from the scope, products must have the appropriate standard or pressure markings and/or be accompanied by documentation showing product compliance to the applicable standard or pressure, e.g., “API 5CT” mark and/or a mill certification report.

    Subject carbon and alloy forged steel fittings are normally entered under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 7307.99.1000, 7307.99.3000, 7307.99.5045, and 7307.99.5060. They also may be entered under HTSUS 7307.92.3010, 7307.92.3030, 7307.92.9000, and 7326.19.0010. The HTSUS subheadings and specifications are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    [FR Doc. 2018-25703 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-552-818] Certain Steel Nails From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is rescinding its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel nails from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam) for the period of review (POR) July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018.

    DATES:

    Applicable November 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Flessner, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6312.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On July 3, 2018, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order 1 on certain steel nails from Vietnam for the POR.2 Commerce received a timely request from Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. (the petitioner), in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), to conduct an administrative review of this antidumping duty order.3 No other party requested an administrative review.

    1See Certain Steel Nails from the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, the Sultinate of Oman, Taiwan, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Antidumping Duty Orders, 80 FR 39994 (July 13, 2015).

    2See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 83 FR 31121 (July 3, 2018).

    3See Petitioner Letter re: Certain Steel Nails from Vietnam: Request for Administrative Reviews, dated July 31, 2018.

    On September 10, 2018, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation with respect to 12 companies: (1) Airlift Trans Oceanic PVT LTD.; (2) CS Song Thuy; (3) Jinhai Hardware Co., Ltd.; (4) Le Phuong Trading Import Export; (5) Long Nguyen Trading & Service Co., Ltd.; (6) Orient Express Container Co., Ltd.; (7) Region Industries Co., Ltd.; (8) Rich State Inc.; (9) Sam Hwan Vina Co., Ltd.; (10) Thai Bao Im-Ex Corporation Company; (11) Truong Vinh Ltd.; and (12) United Nail Products Co. Ltd.4 On November 5, 2018, the petitioner timely withdrew its request for an administrative review for all 12 companies.5

    4See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 45596 (September 10, 2018).

    5See Petitioner Letter re: Certain Steel Nails from Vietnam: Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Reviews, dated November 5, 2018.

    Rescission of Administrative Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The petitioner withdrew its request for review for all companies by the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of this order. Therefore, we are rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel nails from the Vietnam covering the period July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018, in its entirety.

    Assessment

    Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as the only reminder to importers of their responsibility, under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2), to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    This notice is published in accordance with section 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: November 19, 2018. James Maeder, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25636 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG560 International Affairs; U.S. Fishing Opportunities in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Regulatory Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notification of U.S. fishing opportunities.

    SUMMARY:

    We are announcing 2019 fishing opportunities in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) Regulatory Area. This action is necessary to make fishing privileges in the NAFO Regulatory Area available on an equitable basis to the greatest extent possible. The intended effect of this notice is to alert U.S. fishing vessels of the NAFO fishing opportunities, to relay the available quotas available to U.S. participants, and to outline the process and requirements for vessels to apply to participate in the 2019 NAFO fishery.

    DATES:

    Effective January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. Expressions of interest regarding fishing opportunities in NAFO will be accepted through December 11, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Expressions of interest regarding U.S. fishing opportunities in NAFO should be made in writing to Michael Pentony, U.S. Commissioner to NAFO, NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office at 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930 (phone: 978-281-9315, email: [email protected]).

    Information relating to chartering vessels of another NAFO Contracting Party, transferring NAFO fishing opportunities to or from another NAFO Contracting Party, or U.S. participation in NAFO is available from Patrick E. Moran in the NMFS Office of International Affairs and Seafood Inspection at 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (phone: 301-427-8370, fax: 301-713-2313, email: [email protected]).

    Additional information about NAFO fishing opportunities, NAFO Conservation and Enforcement Measures (CEM), and the High Seas Fishing Compliance Act (HSFCA) Permit required for NAFO participation is available from Shannah Jaburek, in the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office at 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930 (phone: 978-282-8456, fax: 978-281-9135, email: [email protected]) and online from NAFO at https://www.nafo.int.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shannah Jaburek, 978-282-8456.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: General NAFO Background

    The United States is a Contracting Party to the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization or NAFO. NAFO is an intergovernmental fisheries science and management body whose convention applies to most fishery resources in international waters of the Northwest Atlantic, except salmon, tunas/marlins, whales, and sedentary species such as shellfish. Currently, NAFO has 12 contracting parties from North America, Europe, Asia, and the Caribbean. NAFO's Commission is responsible for the management and conservation of the fishery resources in the Regulatory Area (waters outside the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ)). Figure 1 shows the NAFO Regulatory Area.

    EN26NO18.000

    As a Contracting Party within NAFO, the United States may be allocated catch quotas or effort allocations for certain species in specific areas within the NAFO Regulatory Area and may participate in fisheries for other species for which we have not received a specific quota. For most stocks for which the United States does not receive a specific allocation, an open allocation, known as the “Others” allocation under the Convention, is shared access between all NAFO Contracting Parties.

    Additional information on NAFO can be found online at https://www.nafo.int/About-us. The 2019 NAFO Conservation and Enforcement Measures (CEM) that specify the fishery regulations, Total Allowable Catches (TAC or “quotas”) and other information about the fishery program will be available online at: https://www.nafo.int/Fisheries/Conservation when completed. Information from the 2018 Annual Meeting of NAFO, at which changes to the TACs and other management measures is available on the NAFO website.

    This notice announces the fishing opportunities available to U.S. vessels in NAFO regulatory waters, including specific 2019 stocks for which the United States has an allocation under NAFO, and fishing opportunities under the `Other' NAFO allocations. This notice also outlines the application process and other requirements for U.S. vessels that wish to participate in the 2019 NAFO fisheries.

    NAFO Fishing Opportunities Available to U.S. Fishing Vessels

    The principal species managed by NAFO are Atlantic cod, yellowtail and witch flounders, Acadian redfish, American plaice, Greenland halibut, white hake, capelin, shrimp, skates, and Illex squid. NAFO specifies conservation measures for fisheries on these species occurring in its Regulatory Area, including TACs for these managed species that are allocated among NAFO Contracting Parties. The United States received quota allocations at the 2018 NAFO Annual Meeting for two stocks to be fished during 2019. The species, location by NAFO subarea, and allocation (in metric tons (mt)) of these 2019 U.S. fishing opportunities are as follows: Redfish in Division 3M, 69 mt; and Illex Squid in Subareas 3 & 4, 453 mt. In addition, the United States expects a transfer of at least 1,000 mt of NAFO Division 3LNO yellowtail flounder from Canada's 2019 quota allocation consistent with the continuation of a 2008 bilateral arrangement between the two countries.

    The TACs that may be available to U.S. vessels for stocks where the United States has not been allocated quota (i.e., the “Others” allocation in Annex I.A of the CEM) are as follows:

    Table 1—2019 NAFO “Others” Allocations Species NAFO division Others quota Cod 3M 70 Redfish 3LN 109 3M 124 3O 100 Yellowtail Flounder 3LNO 85 Witch Flounder 3NO 12 White Hake 3NO 59 Skates 3LNO 258 Illex squid Squid 3_4 (Sub-Areas 3+4) 794

    Note that the United States shares these allocations with other NAFO Contracting Parties, and access is on a first come, first served basis. Directed fishing is prohibited by NAFO when the “Others” quota for a particular stock has been fully harvested.

    Additional directed quota for these and other stocks managed within the NAFO Regulatory Area could be made available to U.S. vessels through industry-initiated chartering arrangements or government-to-government transfers of quota from other NAFO Contracting Parties.

    U.S. vessels participating in NAFO may also retain bycatch of NAFO managed species to the following maximum amounts as outlined in Article 6 of the CEM. The percentage, by weight, is calculated as a percent of each stock of the total catch of species listed in Annex I.A (i.e., the NAFO managed stocks previously listed) retained onboard from the applicable division at the time of inspection, based on logbook information:

    1. Cod, Division 3M: 1,250 kg or 5 percent, whichever is more;

    2. Witch Flounder, Division 3M: 1,250 kg or 5 percent, whichever is more;

    3. Redfish, Division 3LN: 1,250 kg or 5 percent, whichever is more;

    4. Cod, Division 3NO: 1,000 kg or 4 percent, whichever is more;

    5. American plaice: While conducting a directed fishery for yellowtail flounder in Divisions 3LNO—15 percent of American plaice; otherwise, 1,250 kg or 5 percent, whichever is greater; and

    6. For all other Annex I.A stocks where the U.S. has no specific quota the bycatch limit is, 2,500 kg or 10 percent unless a ban on fishing applies or the quota for the stock has been fully utilized. If the fishery for the stock is closed or a retention ban applies, the permitted bycatch limit is 1,250 kg or 5 percent.

    Opportunities to fish for species not listed above (i.e., species listed in Annex I.A of the NAFO CEM and non-allocated on non-regulated species), but occurring within the NAFO Regulatory Area, may also be available. U.S. fishermen interested in fishing for these other species should contact the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (see ADDRESSES) for additional information. Authorization to fish for such species will include permit-related conditions or restrictions, including but not limited to, minimum size requirements, bycatch-related measures, and catch limits. Any such conditions or restrictions will be designed to ensure the optimum utilization, long-term sustainability, and rational management and conservation of fishery resources in the NAFO Regulatory Area, consistent with the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries as well as the Amendment to the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, which has been adopted by all NAFO Contracting Parties.

    Applying for These Fishing Opportunities

    Expressions of interest to fish for any or all of the 2019 U.S. fishing opportunities in NAFO described above will be considered from all U.S. fishing interests (e.g., vessel owners, processors, agents, others). Applicants are urged to carefully review and thoroughly address the application requirements and selection criteria as detailed below. Expressions of interest should be directed in writing to Regional Administrator John Bullard (see ADDRESSES).

    Information Required in an Application Letter

    Expressions of interest should include a detailed description of anticipated fishing operations in 2019. Descriptions should include, at a minimum:

    • Intended target species;

    • Proposed dates of fishing operations;

    • Vessel(s) to be used to harvest fish, including the name, registration, and home port of the intended harvesting vessel(s);

    • The number of fishing personnel and their nationality involved in vessel operations;

    • Intended landing port or ports; including for ports outside of the United States, whether or not the product will be shipped to the United States for processing;

    • Processing facilities to be used;

    • Target market for harvested fish; and,

    • Evidence demonstrating the ability of the applicant to successfully prosecute fishing operations in the NAFO Regulatory Area, in accordance with NAFO management measures. This may include descriptions of previously successful NAFO or domestic fisheries participation.

    Note that applicant U.S. vessels must possess or be eligible to receive a valid High Seas Fishing Compliance Act (HSFCA) permit. HSFCA permits are available from the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office. Information regarding other requirements for fishing in the NAFO Regulatory Area is detailed below and is also available from the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (see ADDRESSES).

    U.S. applicants wishing to harvest U.S. allocations using a vessel from another NAFO Contracting Party, or hoping to enter a chartering arrangement with a vessel from another NAFO Contracting Party, should see below for details on U.S. and NAFO requirements for such activities. If you have further questions regarding what information is required in an expression of interest, please contact Patrick Moran (see ADDRESSES).

    Criteria Used in Identifying Successful Applicants

    Applicants demonstrating the greatest benefits to the United States through their intended operations will be most successful. Such benefits may include:

    • The use of U.S vessels and crew to harvest fish in the NAFO Regulatory Area;

    • Detailed, positive impacts on U.S. employment as a result of the fishing, transport, or processing operations;

    • Use of U.S. processing facilities;

    • Transport, marketing, and sales of product within the United States;

    • Other ancillary, demonstrable benefits to U.S. businesses as a result of the fishing operation; and

    • Documentation of the physical characteristics and economics of the fishery for future use by the U.S. fishing industry.

    Other factors we may consider include but are not limited to: A documented history of successful fishing operations in NAFO or other similar fisheries; the history of compliance by the vessel with the NAFO CEM or other domestic and international regulatory requirements, including potential disqualification of an applicant with repeated compliance issues; and, for those applicants without NAFO or other international fishery history, a description of demonstrated harvest, processing, marketing, and regulatory compliance within domestic fisheries.

    To ensure equitable access by U.S. fishing interests, we may provide additional guidance or procedures, or we may issue regulations designed to allocate fishing interests to one or more U.S. applicants from among qualified applicants. After reviewing all requests for allocations submitted, we may also decide not to grant any allocations if it is determined that no requests adequately meet the criteria described in this notice.

    Notification of Selected Vessels in the 2019 NAFO Fisheries

    We will provide written responses to all applicants notifying them of their application status and, as needed for successful applicants, allocation awards will be made as quickly as possible so that we may notify NAFO and take other necessary actions to facilitate operations in the regulatory area by U.S. fishing interests. Successful applicants will receive additional information from us on permit conditions and applicable regulations before starting 2019 fishing operations.

    Mid-Season Allocation Adjustments

    In the event that an approved U.S. entity does not, is not able to, or is not expected to fish an allocation, or part thereof, awarded to them, NMFS may reallocate to other approved U.S. entities. If requested, approved U.S. entities must provide updated fishing plans and/or schedules. A U.S. entity may not consolidate or transfer allocations without prior approval from NMFS.

    Chartering a Vessel To Fish Available U.S. Allocations

    Under the bilateral arrangement with Canada, the United States may enter into a chartering (or other) arrangement with a Canadian vessel to harvest the transferred yellowtail flounder. For other NAFO-regulated species listed in Annexes I.A and I.B, the United States may enter into a chartering arrangement with a vessel from any other NAFO Contracting Party. Additionally, any U.S. vessel or fishing operation may enter into a chartering arrangement with any other vessel or business from a NAFO Contracting Party. The United States and the other Contracting Party involved in a chartering arrangement must agree to the charter, and the NAFO Executive Secretary must be advised of the chartering arrangement before the commencement of any charter fishing operations. Any U.S. vessel or fishing operation interested in making use of the chartering provisions of NAFO must provide at least the following information: The name and registration number of the U.S. vessel; a copy of the charter agreement; a detailed fishing plan; a written letter of consent from the applicable NAFO Contracting Party; the date from which the vessel is authorized to commence fishing; and the duration of the charter (not to exceed six months).

    Expressions of interest using another NAFO Contracting Party vessel under charter should be accompanied by a detailed description of anticipated benefits to the United States, as described above. Additional detail on chartering arrangements can be found in Article 26 of the CEM (https://www.nafo.int/Fisheries/Conservation).

    Any vessel from another Contracting Party wishing to enter into a chartering arrangement with the United States must be in full current compliance with the requirements outlined in the NAFO Convention and CEM. These requirements include, but are not limited to, submission of the following reports to the NAFO Executive Secretary:

    • Notification that the vessel is authorized by its flag state to fish within the NAFO Regulatory Area during 2019;

    • Provisional monthly catch reports for all vessels of that NAFO Contracting Party operating in the NAFO Regulatory Area;

    • Daily catch reports for each day fished by the subject vessel within the Regulatory Area;

    • Observer reports within 30 days following the completion of a fishing trip; and

    • An annual statement of actions taken by its flag state to comply with the NAFO Convention.

    The United States may also consider the vessel's previous compliance with NAFO bycatch, reporting, and other provisions, as outlined in the NAFO CEM, before authorizing the chartering arrangement.

    Transfer of U.S. Quota Allocations to Another NAFO Party

    Under NAFO rules in effect for 2019, the United States may transfer fishing opportunities by mutual agreement with another NAFO Contracting Party and with prior notification to the NAFO Executive Secretary. An applicant may request to arrange for any of the previously described U.S. opportunities to be transferred to another NAFO party, although such applications will likely be given lesser priority than those that involve more direct harvesting or processing by U.S. entities. Applications to arrange for a transfer of U.S. fishing opportunities should contain a letter of consent from the receiving NAFO Contracting Party, and should also be accompanied by a detailed description of anticipated benefits to the United States. As in the case of chartering operations, the United States may also consider a NAFO Contracting Party's previous compliance with NAFO bycatch, reporting, and other provisions, as outlined in the NAFO CEM, before entering agreeing to a transfer.

    Receiving a Transfer of NAFO Quota Allocations From Another NAFO Party

    Under NAFO rules in effect for 2019, the United States may receive transfers of additional fishing opportunities from other NAFO Contracting Parties. We are required to provide a letter consenting to such a transfer and must provide notice to the NAFO Executive Secretary. In the event that an applicant is able to arrange for the transfer of additional fishing opportunities from another NAFO Contracting Party to the United States, the U.S. may agree to facilitate such a transfer. However, there is no guarantee that if an applicant has facilitated the transfer of quota from another Contracting Party to the United States, such applicant will receive authorization to fish for such quota. If quota is transferred to the United States, we may need to solicit new applications for the use of such quota. All applicable NAFO requirements for transfers must be met. As in the case of chartering operations, the United States may also consider a NAFO Contracting Party's previous compliance with NAFO bycatch, reporting, and other provisions, as outlined in the NAFO CEM, before agreeing to accept a transfer. Any fishing quota or other harvesting opportunities received via this type of transfer are subject to all U.S and NAFO rules as detailed below.

    For more details on NAFO requirements for chartering and transferring NAFO allocations, contact Patrick Moran (see ADDRESSES).

    Fishing in the NAFO Regulatory Area

    U.S. applicant vessels must be in possession of, or obtain, a valid HSFCA permit, which is available from the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office. All permitted vessels must comply with any conditions of this permit and all applicable provisions of the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries and the CEM. We reserve the right to impose additional permit conditions that ensure compliance with the NAFO Convention and the CEM, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and any other applicable law.

    The CEM provisions include, but are not limited to:

    • Maintaining a fishing logbook with NAFO-designated entries (Annex II.A and Article 28);

    • Adhering to NAFO hail system requirements (Annexes II.D and II.F; Article 28; Article 30 part B);

    • Carrying an approved onboard observer for each trip consistent with requirements of Article 30 part A;

    • Maintaining and using a functioning, autonomous vessel monitoring system authorized by issuance of the HSFCA permit as required by Articles 29 and 30; and

    • Complying with all relevant NAFO CEM requirements, including minimum fish sizes, gear, bycatch retention, and per-tow move on provisions for exceeding bycatch limits in any one haul/set.

    Further details regarding U.S. and NAFO requirements are available from the NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, and can also be found in the NAFO CEM on the internet (https://www.nafo.int/Fisheries/Conservation).

    Vessels issued valid HSFCA permits under 50 CFR part 300 are exempt from certain domestic fisheries regulations governing fisheries in the Northeast United States found in 50 CFR 648. Specifically, vessels are exempt from the Northeast multispecies and monkfish permit, mesh size, effort-control, and possession limit restrictions (§§ 648.4, 648.80, 648.82, 648.86, 648.87, 648.91, 648.92, and 648.94), while transiting the U.S. EEZ with multispecies and/or monkfish on board the vessel, or landing multispecies and/or monkfish in U.S. ports that were caught while fishing in the NAFO Regulatory Area. These exemptions are conditional on the following requirements: The vessel operator has a letter of authorization issued by the Regional Administrator on board the vessel; for the duration of the trip, the vessel fishes, except for transiting purposes, exclusively in the NAFO Regulatory Area and does not harvest fish in, or possess fish harvested in, or from, the U.S. EEZ; when transiting the U.S. EEZ, all gear is properly stowed and not available for immediate use as defined under § 648.2; and the vessel operator complies with the provisions, conditions, and restrictions specified on the HSFCA permit and all NAFO CEM while fishing in the NAFO Regulatory Area.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Christopher Rogers, Acting Director, Office of International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25591 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG645 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold public meetings of the Council and its Committees.

    DATES:

    The meetings will be held Monday, December 10, 2018 through Thursday, December 13, 2018. For agenda details, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Westin Annapolis, 100 Westgate Circle, Annapolis, MD 21401 telephone: (410) 972-4300.

    Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N State St., Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D. Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council; telephone: (302) 526-5255. The Council's website, www.mafmc.org also has details on the meeting location, proposed agenda, webinar listen-in access, and briefing materials.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following items are on the agenda, though agenda items may be addressed out of order (changes will be noted on the Council's website when possible.)

    Monday, December 10, 2018 Executive Committee—CLOSED MEETING Ricks E Savage Award Risk Policy Framework

    Final results of the Summer Flounder Economic Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) and discuss next steps.

    Law Enforcement Workshop Report

    Report on Law Enforcement/For-Hire Workshop (November 13-14, 2018) and review workshop summary and develop recommendations on further actions.

    Tuesday, December 11, 2018 Discussion of Potential 2019 Mid-Year Revisions for Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass

    Discuss timeline for revising 2019 summer flounder specifications and discuss potential for mid-year revisions to the 2019 black sea bass and scup specifications, including timing of the 2019 operational assessment.

    Black Sea Bass 2019 Recreational Specifications

    Review recent fishery performance, Monitoring Committee and Advisory Panel recommendations and adopt recommendations for 2019 federal waters recreational management measures.

    Scup 2019 Recreational Specifications

    Review recent fishery performance, Monitoring Committee and Advisory Panel recommendations and adopt recommendations for 2019 federal waters recreational management measures.

    Summer Flounder 2019 Recreational Specifications

    Review recent fishery performance, Monitoring Committee and Advisory Panel recommendations and discuss timeline for developing 2019 recreational measures in early 2019 based on benchmark assessment results.

    Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Framework and Addendum XXXI on Conservation Equivalency, Block Island Sound Transit, and Slot Limits

    Take final action.

    Board-Only Meeting on Addendum XXXII for Summer Flounder and Black Sea Bass Recreational Management

    Take final action.

    Wednesday, December 12, 2018 Summer Flounder Commercial Issues and Goals and Objectives Amendment

    Take final action.

    Revised Stock Assessment Process Presentation on Summer Flounder F-Based Management MSE

    Review preliminary results of MSE to explore F-based recreational management.

    Black Sea Bass Amendment and Review of Progress on Commission's Strategic Plan for Black Sea Bass

    Discuss initiation of an amendment including identification of issues to consider.

    Research Steering Committee Report

    Report on Research Steering Committee Webinar (November 27, 2018) and discuss recommendations from the meeting.

    Thursday, December 13, 2018 Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team Report 2019 Implementation Plan

    Review and approve 2019 Implementation Plan.

    Business Session

    Committee Reports (SSC and Executive Committee); Executive Director's Report; Organization Reports; and, Liaison Reports.

    Continuing and New Business

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Actions 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 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 sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Rey Israel Marquez, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25670 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG638 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of a public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council will hold a one-day meeting of its Ad Hoc Red Snapper Charter For-Hire Advisory Panel.

    DATES:

    The meeting will convene on Wednesday, December 12, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will take place at the Gulf Council office.

    Council address: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 4107 West Spruce Street, Suite 200, Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Matt Freeman, Economist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; [email protected], telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Wednesday, December 12, 2018; 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., EDT: 1. Adoption of Agenda 2. Presentation of Allocation Decision Tools 3. Summary and Discussion of Actions in Reef Fish Amendment 41 and Options in Referendum Eligibility 4. Presentation on Reef Fish Amendment 50 (State Management) 5. Presentation on Historical Captain Permits Framework Action 6. Other Business —Meeting Adjourns

    The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on www.gulfcouncil.org as they become available.

    The meeting will be webcast over the internet. A link to the webcast will be available on the Council's website, http://www.gulfcouncil.org.

    Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before the Advisory Panel for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions of the Advisory Panel will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in the agenda 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 action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kathy Pereira at the Gulf Council Office (see ADDRESSES), at least 5 working days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Rey Israel Marquez, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25669 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration XRIN 0648-XG463 Endangered and Threatened Species; Take of Anadromous Fish AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of one permit application for enhancement and monitoring purposes, including an associated Hatchery and Genetic Management Plan (HGMP), and notice of availability of a draft Environmental Assessment.

    SUMMARY:

    We, NMFS, announce receipt of a permit application (21501) to enhance the propagation and survival of species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Under permit application 21501, CDFW and the Corps is requesting to continue, for the next 10 years, the ongoing broodstock hatchery program in the Russian River and tributaries, and in other target streams in coastal Sonoma and Marin Counties. The permit application is expected to advance recovery of the Central California Coast (CCC) coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU).

    DATES:

    Comments or requests for a public hearing on the application must be received at the appropriate address or fax number (see ADDRESSES) no later than 5 p.m. Pacific standard time on December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments on the application should be submitted to the California Coastal Office, NMFS, 777 Sonoma Ave., Room 325, Santa Rosa, CA 95404. Comments may also be submitted via fax to 707-578-3435, or by email to [email protected] (include the permit number in the subject line of the fax or email).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bob Coey, Santa Rosa, CA (ph.: 707-575-6090; Fax: 707-578-3435; email: [email protected]). Permit application instructions are available from the address above, or online at https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Species Covered in This Notice

    The following ESA-listed species are covered in this notice:

    • Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch): Endangered Central California Coast (CCC) evolutionarily significant unit (ESU)

    • Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytcha): Threatened California Coastal (CC) ESU

    • Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Threatened CCC Distinct Population Segment (DPS), and threatened Northern California (NC) DPS.

    Authority

    Enhancement permits are issued in accordance with Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(A)) and regulations governing listed fish and wildlife permits (50 CFR part 222, subpart C). NMFS issues permits based on findings that such permits: (1) Are applied for in good faith; (2) if granted and exercised, would not operate to the disadvantage of the listed species that are the subject of the permit; (3) are consistent with the purposes and policies of Section 2 of the ESA; (4) whether the permit would further a bona fide and necessary or desirable scientific purpose or enhance the propagation or survival of the endangered species, taking into account the benefits anticipated to be derived on behalf of the endangered species; and additional issuance criteria (as listed at 50 CFR § 222.308(c)(5-12)). The authority to take listed species is subject to conditions set forth in the permit.

    Anyone requesting a hearing on an application listed in this notice should set out the specific reasons why a hearing on that application would be appropriate (see ADDRESSES). Such hearings are held at the discretion of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS.

    Permit Application Received Permit 21051

    CDFW and the Corps have applied for an enhancement permit under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA for a period of 10 years that would allow take, associated with activities conducted through the broodstock program, of multiple life stages of CCC coho, CC Chinook salmon, CCC and NC steelhead. The permit would authorize these activities described in the permit application, which is accompanied by an HGMP. The HGMP describes fish hatchery operations, capture/release activities and monitoring activities conducted through the broodstock program which would be permitted pursuant to the final HGMP. Fish hatchery operations included in the permit application such as spawning and rearing conducted by the Corps would result in take of CCC cohoonly. Capture and release activities in the permit application include capture of endangered CCC coho broodstock by CDFW from various streams within Sonoma, Marin, and Mendocino counties; and release of endangered CCC coho broodstock, offspring and post-spawn individuals into various streams within Sonoma, Marin, and Mendocino counties. Broodstock capture and release, and monitoring and in-river research activities, also described in the application, could result in take of CCC coho, CC Chinook salmon, CCC and NC steelhead. Some of these activities are covered under separate research permits as discussed below.

    Since the initiation of the broodstock program in 2001, CDFW and the Corps have collected captive broodstock from streams in the Russian River and Lagunitas/Olema Creek watersheds and artificially propagated them at the DCFH. The broodstock is derived from hatchery-reared CCC coho juveniles retained from artificial propagation at DCFH, and the capture of natural-origin young-of-year (YOY) CCC coho from various tributaries within the Russian River and the Lagunitas/Olema Creek basins (used primarily for outbreeding), and the very few CCC coho returning to the DCFH as adults. Currently, surplus broodstock from the broodstock program are used to supplement populations in the Russian River as well as salmon, Walker and Redwood creeks. In addition, the broodstock program holds and rears CCC coho from Scott Creek,1 without propagation. Through the broodstock program, CDFW and the Corps conducted these activities under ESA 10(a)(1)(A) permits 1067 and 10094. Permit 1067 was issued September 26, 2001, and authorized the collection of CCC coho from streams located in the Russian River and Marin County watersheds for developing captive broodstock and rescue rearing at DCFH. Permit 10094 was issued September 23, 2008, and authorized scientific research and monitoring of ESA-listed anadromous salmonids in California including CCC coho. Under the proposed HGMP these activities would continue.

    1 The DCFH rears CCC coho salmon and returns them to Kingfisher Flat Hatchery (KFH) where they then are released to Scott Creek. KFH operates under permit 1112.

    CDFW and the Corps' proposed HGMP for the broodstock program also includes new provisions that would authorize collection, captive rearing, broodstock spawning, and release in focus and supplemental CCC coho populations identified in the HGMP and NMFS' recovery plan for CCC coho (see https://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/protected_species/salmon_steelhead/recovery_planning_and_implementation/north_central_california_coast/central_california_coast_coho_recovery_plan.html).

    Prospective populations of CCC coho identified in the HGMP that permit 21501 would also include are the Garcia, Navarro, Gualala River CCC coho populations, and other focus or supplemental populations identified in the NMFS Recovery Plan for CCC coho. CDFW and the Corps propose to conduct these new activities in order to achieve the goals of the broodstock program, which are to: (1) Prevent extirpation of CCC coho in the Russian River; (2) preserve genetic, ecological, and behavioral attributes of CCC coho in the Russian River; and (3) build self-sustaining CCC coho populations in the Russian River and throughout the CCC coho ESU.

    CDFW and the Corps' proposed HGMP for the broodstock program includes provisions for a monitoring program. The proposed monitoring program is designed to determine the success of the broodstock program and has been in existence since the first release of program CCC coho in 2004. The proposed monitoring program is composed of two elements, hatchery and field monitoring.

    Hatchery monitoring is associated with hatchery rearing and spawning activities and is conducted by Corps' hatchery staff. During spawning, hatchery staff record data on individual spawner performance (i.e. fecundity and fertility rates). During hatchery rearing, which is after spawning through release, hatchery staff collects data on life stage-specific survival. The hatchery staff retain two randomly chosen juvenile CCC coho from each family group (up to 1,500 fish) for potential use as broodstock in the event sufficient natural-origin fish from the same brood year are not available. All CCC coho collected and intended for use as broodstock at DCFH (including Scott Creek fish) are physically segregated at all times. Mortalities that occur during the routine operation of the program are removed from their respective rearing containers on a daily basis, and hatchery staff records and evaluates these daily mortalities to ensure that the number of mortalities among fry and more advanced life stages does not exceed 0.2 percent of any program production over any 24-hour period. Compliance with all applicable hatchery operations and health guidelines, as well as required specific effluent testing, is monitored and recorded by hatchery staff year-round. In addition, hatchery staff performs, monitors, and records all marking and tagging of CCC coho including: Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tagging of all fish collected from the natural environment; disk-tagging of all adults used for artificial spawning; coded-wire tagging of all broodstock program progeny to facilitate distinguishing between hatchery-origin and natural-origin fish; PIT tagging of ≥15 percent (minimum 30,000) of broodstock program progeny released to allow smolt-to-adult-return (SAR) calculations; and floy tagging of all adults that are released to allow identification of hatchery-reared adult CCC coho during spawner surveys.

    Field monitoring is associated with the post-release performance of the broodstock program and has been conducted annually in a minimum of four index streams in the Russian River basin since 2004. This ongoing field monitoring, conducted by California Sea Grant under contract to the Corps, is a substantial complimentary monitoring element that is described in the HGMP, and helps to inform management of the broodstock program, but is operating independently under separate permits. The HGMP describes future monitoring efforts in out-of-basin streams to include at a minimum presence/absence surveys following release of fish of an appropriate life stage (e.g., summer juvenile surveys following YOY spring release, redd surveys following adult release), appropriate genetic analysis, or other evaluation of success as funding is available.

    Under the application for Permit 21501, proposed take activities for CCC coho include monitoring; collecting broodstock and non-broodstock CCC coho; conducting routine hatchery activities including artificial propagation, rearing, tissue sampling, and marking; transporting and releasing of early life stage progeny (eyed eggs and/or unfed fry), juveniles (broodstock surplus), and adult (captive rearing and broodstock surplus) CCC coho into Russian River tributaries and other target streams.

    Public Comments Solicited

    NMFS invites the public to comment, including any written data, views, or arguments, on the permit application and associated HGMP during a 30-day public comment period beginning on the date of this notice. This notice is provided pursuant to Section 10(c) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1539(c)), 50 CFR 222.303. All comments and materials received, including names and addresses, will become part of the administrative record and may be released to the public. We provide this notice in order to allow the public, agencies, or other organizations to review and comment on these documents.

    Next Steps

    NMFS will evaluate the applications, associated documents, and comments submitted to determine whether the applications meet the requirements of Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA and Federal regulations. The final permit decisions will not be made until after the end of the 30-day public comment period and after NMFS has fully considered all relevant comments received. NMFS will also meet other legal requirements prior to taking final action, including preparation of a biological opinion. NMFS will publish notice of its final action in the Federal Register.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Angela Somma, Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25693 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

    Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

    Title: International Fisheries Trade to Include Shrimp and Abalone.

    OMB Control Number: 0648-xxxx.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Request: Regular (request for a temporary new information collection).

    Number of Respondents: 651.

    Average Hours Per Response: International Fisheries Trade Permit, 5 minutes; data entry, 1 hour.

    Burden Hours: 70,054.

    Needs and Uses: The Seafood Traceability Program (see 50 CFR 300.320-300.325) is the first phase of a risk-based traceability program, which establishes permit, reporting and recordkeeping requirements needed to prevent illegally harvested and misrepresented seafood from entering into U.S. Commerce. In the development of the Seafood Traceability Program rule, 13 “priority” species were identified as being most at risk for Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing and misrepresentation, and are the only species currently subject to this program. For two of those species (abalone and shrimp), NMFS stayed program requirements indefinitely (50 CFR 300.324(a)(3)). See 81 FR 88975 (December 9, 2016). A final rule was published on April 24, 2018 (83 FR 17762) which lifted the stay and established a compliance date of December 31, 2018 for shrimp and abalone.

    NMFS had stayed requirements for abalone and shrimp because gaps existed in the collection of traceability information for domestic aquaculture-raised shrimp and abalone, which is currently largely regulated at the state level. During development of the Seafood Traceability Program, NMFS explored the possibility of working with its state partners to establish reporting and recordkeeping requirements for aquaculture traceability information that could be shared with NMFS. However, this did not prove to be a viable approach. See 81 FR at 88977-78. In the Seafood Import Monitoring Program final rule, NMFS explained that “[A]t such time that the domestic reporting and recordkeeping gaps have been closed, NMFS will then publish an action in the Federal Register to lift the stay of the effective date for § 300.324(a)(3) of the rule pertaining to shrimp and abalone. Adequate advance notice to the trade community would be provided” to ensure all affected parties have sufficient time to come into compliance.

    On March 23, 2018, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-141) was signed by the President and became law. Section 539 of Division B of the Act directed the Secretary of Commerce to, within 30 days, “lift the stay on the effective date of the final rule for the Seafood Traceability Program published by the Secretary on December 9, 2016, (81 FR 88975 et seq.) for the species described in § 300.324(a)(3) of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations: provided that the compliance date for the species described in § 300.324(a)(3) of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, shall occur not later than December 31, 2018.” A final rule was issued to implement the Act (83 FR 17762, April 24, 2018) and provides that shrimp and abalone will be subject to the requirements of the Seafood Traceability Program under 50 CFR 300.324(a)(3), with a compliance date December 31, 2018.

    The Program consists of two components: (1) Reporting of harvest events at the time of entry; and (2) permitting and recordkeeping requirements with respect to both harvest events and chain of custody information. See 50 CFR 300.324 and id. §§ 300.320-300.323 and 300.325. Application of the program's reporting and recordkeeping requirements to shrimp and abalone will enable audits of imports to be conducted to determine the origin of the products and confirm that they were lawfully acquired.

    The final rule to lift the stay on shrimp and abalone contains a collection-of-information requirement subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). OMB had previously approved the information collection requirements for the Seafood Traceability Program under Control Number 0648-0739, but the burden estimates did not include the requirements for shrimp and abalone given the stay. The requirements for permitting, reporting and recordkeeping for imports of shrimp and abalone will be submitted to OMB for approval.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Frequency: One time and on occasion.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    This information collection request may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB.

    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25613 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG557 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Application for an Exempted Fishing Permit AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application for exempted fishing permit.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces receipt of an exempted fishing permit (EFP) application from Mr. Cory Lescher and Dr. Bradley Harris, Alaska Pacific University. If granted, this EFP would allow up to five Amendment 80 vessels in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) management area yellowfin and rock sole fisheries to retain red king crab (RKC; Paralithodes camtschaticus) bycatch on board for periods of no more than 72 hours during the 2019 BSAI flatfish fisheries' “A” season. Two concurrent studies would be conducted under this EFP. A whole-haul RKC census study would provide a comparison of whole-haul census of RKC to haul-level estimates of RKC generated from NMFS-certified observer (observer) sampling to determine the ability of current prohibited species catch (PSC) rate estimations to accurately account for RKC PSC in these fisheries. Then, an at-sea viability study would examine factors that influence RKC PSC mortality and survival. The objective of the EFP application is to provide improved understanding of RKC PSC mortality, such as shell crushing, and variables that affect it. This proposed project has the potential to promote the objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

    DATES:

    Comments on this EFP application must be submitted to NMFS on or before December 11, 2018. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will consider the application at its meeting from December 3, 2018, through December 11, 2018, in Anchorage, AK.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Council meeting will be held at the Anchorage Hilton Hotel, 500 W 3rd Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501. The agenda for the Council meeting is available at http://www.npfmc.org. In addition to submitting comments at the Council meeting, you may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2018-0120, by any of the following methods:

    Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0120, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

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

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered. 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 (e.g., name, address) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

    Electronic copies of the EFP application and the basis for a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act are available from the Alaska Region, NMFS website at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bridget Mansfield, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the domestic groundfish fisheries in the BSAI under the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the BSAI Management Area (FMP), which the Council prepared under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing the BSAI groundfish fisheries appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679. The FMP and the EFP implementing regulations at § 600.745(b) and § 679.6 allow the NMFS Regional Administrator to authorize, for limited experimental purposes, fishing that would otherwise be prohibited. Procedures for issuing EFPs are contained in the implementing regulations.

    Background

    PSC in the North Pacific groundfish trawl gear fisheries is managed under limits that can trigger closures of management areas or target fisheries. Catch, including non-target species and PSC, is estimated in part by extrapolating fishery observer samples from individual hauls up to the trip level. Non-pollock fisheries—that is, vessels not engaged in directed pollock fishing—managed under fishing cooperatives use estimates derived from observer sampling to account for PSC, by number rather than weight for crab species or by weight only for other PSC, such as halibut or salmon. Amendment 80, implemented in 2008, allocates BSAI yellowfin sole, flathead sole, rock sole, Atka mackerel, and Aleutian Islands Pacific ocean perch to the head and gut trawl catcher processor sector, and allows qualified vessels to form cooperatives. Amendment 80 cooperatives track individual vessel catch against cooperative-determined, vessel-specific limits. Cooperatives are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the bycatch allowances they administer, but set by NMFS, are not exceeded. Individual accountability is enforced by cooperatives at the vessel and company level through legal contracts and bycatch agreements among members. In this context, understanding the degree to which current observer sampling practices provide accurate data for accounting of actual bycatch quantities for a fishing haul or trip can help improve cooperative management and support conservation and fishery management objectives overall.

    Fishing under this EFP would provide data to investigate the accuracy of current PSC estimation methods for individual hauls, including the degree to which high catch-per-unit-effort groundfish fishing impacts RKC PSC rates. Data from this EFP would also help industry collaborators understand and improve vessel-specific bycatch performance tracking.

    Exempted Fishing Permit

    On September 20, 2018, Mr. Cory Lescher submitted an application for an EFP to conduct two concurrent studies on incidentally caught RKC on select Amendment 80 trawl vessels targeting yellowfin and rock sole in the BSAI in 2019. The first study (whole-haul census study) would be conducted on up to five vessels and would consist of a series of whole-haul censuses of RKC (census of all RKC in an entire haul) in conjunction with observer sub-sampling of the same haul. Biological samples would also be collected from the RKC, with a handling time of one to two minutes per RKC, before the RKC is released back to the sea. The objectives of this study under the proposed EFP are to:

    • Assess the accuracy of current sampling methods,

    • collect basic biological data from RKC PSC to resolve data gaps in key characteristics associated with RKC encountered in the yellowfin and rock sole fisheries in the first part of the year, and

    • examine how RKC PSC rates are influenced by haul characteristics and environmental variables.

    The second study (viability study) conducted under this proposed EFP would require two vessels to hold up to a total of 384 RKC for up to 72 hours each in on-deck, saltwater flow-through tanks to monitor survival of deck-sorted RKC compared to factory-sorted RKC. This study has three objectives under the proposed EFP: First, to examine factors affecting RKC PSC mortality and survival; second, the ability to predict discard mortality using vitality assessments, and third, to assess the feasibility of collecting data on such vitality metrics.

    Whole-Haul Census Study

    The applicant proposes to conduct the whole-haul census study on up to five vessels in the Amendment 80 yellowfin and rock sole trawl fishery in the Bering Sea from January 20 through April 15, 2019. The participating vessels would be selected on a voluntary basis and would carry an observer as required by regulation. All stages of the whole-haul sampling process would be conducted by a trained “sea sampler” on each participating EFP vessel, who would be required to be a NMFS-certified observer, but who would not act as a NMFS observer during an EFP trip. The sea sampler data collection duties would be separate from those duties of the vessel's NMFS observer and their work would not interfere with or constrain the work of the NMFS observer.

    The applicant's proposed sampling for the whole-haul census would consist of the following protocols. Sea samplers would conduct a whole-haul count for RKC for every haul during a trip. To achieve this, for each haul the sea sampler would instruct designated crew to remove all RKC from the sorting belt downstream of the observer sampling station. The designated crew would place such RKC in a designated tote labeled with the vessel haul number, keeping all haul-specific RKC together. The EFP sampling would occur after observer sampling and would not interfere with the observer's sampling duties or vessel operations. The sea sampler would sort the RKC from the tote, returning all non-RKC to the discard belt for immediate discard, and would collect and record RKC-specific biological data from each RKC and return it immediately to the discard belt for immediate discard to the sea. Biological data collected would include sex, carapace length, shell condition, externally visible physical injuries, vitality metrics, and for females, clutch fullness and egg condition. Vitality metrics include presence and absence of pre-determined injuries, and reflex and behavior responses, including leg flare, leg retraction, chela closure, eye retraction, and mouth closure. The sampling process would be expected to require less than 2 minutes and would have no impact on the probability of survival of the sampled RKC. The sampling protocol outlined above follow established Donaldson and Byersdorfer methods as described in the EFP application (see ADDRESSES).

    Viability Study

    The applicant proposes to conduct the RKC viability study on two vessels in the Amendment 80 yellowfin and rock sole trawl fisheries in the Bering Sea from January 20 through April 15, 2019. As with the whole-haul study proposed under this EFP application, the participating vessels in the RKC viability study would be selected on a voluntary basis and would carry a NMFS-certified fishery observer as required by regulation.

    The applicant's proposed sampling for the RKC viability study would consist of the following general protocols. For further details, please consult the EFP application available at (see ADDRESSES). The viability study would commence at the beginning of a fishing trip. During a predetermined haul, up to 32 incidentally caught RKC would be selected from the catch on deck or in the factory. The on-deck RKC collection would coincide with halibut deck sorting authorized under the halibut deck sorting EFP #2018-01 to allow the assessment of RKC collected from both on-deck and the factory point of discard without impeding fishing operations. On-deck collection would be conducted independent of, and would not impact, halibut deck sorting activities or observer data collections under the halibut deck sorting EFP. RKC collected on deck would be removed from the catch prior to observer sampling. The RKC EFP sea sampler would collect RKC counts and weights from pre-sorted RKC from selected hauls and provide that data to the vessel's NMFS observer. RKC collected in the factory for this viability study would be removed from the conveyor belt downstream of the observer sampling station following the protocols described for the whole-haul study.

    A vitality test, as described above under the heading Whole-Haul Census Study, would be used to select only live RKC, including RKCs with a range of initial impairments and levels of vitality for the holding trials. Each RKC would be labeled with a uniquely numbered tag. Carapace length, sex shell condition, and vitality would be collected and recorded for each RKC at the time of collection. Each assessment would last approximately 1 to 2 minutes per RKC, after which they would immediately be placed in one of several flow-through seawater tanks on deck. Each tank would be divided into four separate sections that would hold two RKC each. The sea sampler would record water temperature and dissolved oxygen from each of the seawater tanks daily and continue monitoring individual RKC vitality every 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours. RKC would be monitored following methods described in the EFP application (see ADDRESSES). Details of any mortality would be recorded, and dead RKC would be removed and discarded. Live RKC would be released 72 hours after collection. Once all RKC are released, the tank would be flushed with seawater and refilled with eight new RKC from a subsequent tow. The 72-hour period for holding RKC would provide a short window to observe for discard mortality, yet allow for adequate sample size. Metrics that may be used to predict RKC mortality would be collected for future analysis. Such metrics include, but are not limited to, fishing effort information (e.g., length of tow, tow depth, bottom temperature, and total catch size), and RKC time out of water.

    Exemptions

    RKC is a prohibited species in the groundfish fishery, requiring immediate return to the sea with a minimum of injury. This proposed action would exempt the participating vessel, for RKC only, from the requirement, at § 679.21(b)(2)(ii), to return all prohibited species, or parts thereof, to the sea immediately, with a minimum of injury, regardless of its condition. Because some RKC would be pre-sorted before observer sampling under this proposed action, permit holders, vessel owners, and operators fishing under this permit would be exempt from § 679.7(g)(2) that otherwise prohibits biasing the observer's sampling procedure by pre-sorting RKC catch. The participating vessels would be allowed to account for the number of RKC caught through sampling methods described above. All other § 679.7(g)(2) provisions would continue to apply to all other fishing during an EFP trip.

    Sorting of PSC species other than RKC before observers sample the catch onboard the vessels would continue to be prohibited.

    Further, owners and operators of Amendment 80 vessels participating in this EFP are exempt from the requirement at § 679.93(c)(1), which requires that (1) all catch by vessels participating in the Amendment 80 program are weighed on a NMFS-approved scale, (2) each haul must be weighed separately, (3) all catch must be made available for sampling by a NMFS-certified observer, and (4) no sorting of catch may take place prior to weighing. Owners and operators of all other vessels participating in this EFP are exempt from regulations at § 679.28(b) that require that all catch of RKC must be weighed on a NMFS-approved scale and made available at a single location. This exemption is necessary to allow sea samplers to account for RKC sorted on deck and transferred to tanks on deck for the viability study prior to observer sampling.

    Permit Conditions, Review, and Effects

    Under the EFP, participating vessels would be limited to the Amendment 80 groundfish allocations under the 2019 harvest specifications (available from the Alaska Region, NMFS website at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/). No additional target or PSC amounts beyond those authorized through regulation would be needed for this EFP; all groundfish catch will accrue against the Amendment 80 sector's yellowfin and rock sole catch and PSC allowances. EFP-authorized fishing activities would not be expected to change the nature or duration of the flatfish trawl fishery or the amount or species of fish caught by the participating vessels.

    In 2019, Mr. Lescher would be required to submit to NMFS a report of the EFP results after EFP experimental fishing has ended in 2019. For each study, the report would include: Sampling design and methods, number of RKC sampled, fishing and environmental variables collected, RKC handling and mortalities, analytical results, and the total catch of each groundfish species and RKC in metric tons. The report would be made available to the public.

    The fieldwork that would be conducted under this EFP is not expected to have a significant impact on the human environment as detailed in the categorical exclusion prepared for this action (see ADDRESSES).

    In accordance with § 679.6, NMFS has determined that the application warrants further consideration and has forwarded the application to the Council to initiate consultation. The Council is scheduled to consider the EFP application during its December 2018 meeting, which will be held at the Hilton Hotel, Anchorage, AK. The EFP application will also be provided to the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee for review at the December Council meeting. The applicant has been invited to appear in support of the application.

    Public Comments

    Interested persons may comment on the application at the December 2018 Council meeting during public testimony or until December 11, 2018. Information regarding the meeting is available at the Council's website at http://www.npfmc.org. Copies of the application and categorical exclusion are available for review from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).

    Comments also may be submitted directly to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) by the end of the comment period (see DATES).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Karen H. Abrams, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25416 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2018-OS-0060] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    30-Day information collection notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra, DoD Desk Officer, at [email protected] Please identify the proposed information collection by DoD Desk Officer, Docket ID number, and title of the information collection.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Licari, 571-372-0493, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: National Language Service Corps; DD Form 2934; OMB Control Number 0704-0449.

    Type of Request: Extension.

    Number of Respondents: 1,600.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 1,600.

    Average Burden per Response: 36 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 960.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to identify individuals with language and special skills who potentially qualify for employment or service opportunities in the public section during periods of national need or emergency.

    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

    You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

    Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at [email protected]

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Aaron T. Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25441 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Charter Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees AGENCY:

    Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of Federal Advisory Committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce that it is renewing the charter for the Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Board of Actuaries (“the Board”).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jim Freeman, Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, 703-692-5952.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Board's charter is being renewed in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., App) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(d). The Board's charter and contact information for the Board's Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be found at https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/apex/FACAPublicAgencyNavigation.

    The Board provides the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense, through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)), independent advice and recommendations related on actuarial matters associated with the Department of Defense (DoD) Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (“the Fund”) and other related matters. Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 1114(c), the Board shall report to the Secretary of Defense and/or the Deputy Secretary of Defense annually on the actuarial status of the Fund and shall furnish its advice and opinion on matters referred to it by the Secretary of Defense. The Board shall review valuations of the Fund under 10 U.S.C. 1115(c) and shall report periodically, not less than once every four years, to the President and Congress on the status of the Fund. The Board shall include in such reports recommendations for such changes as in the Board's judgment are necessary to protect the public interest and maintain the Fund on a sound actuarial basis.

    Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 1114(a)(1) and (2), the Board consists of three members from among qualified professional actuaries who are members of the Society of Actuaries. Board members will serve for a term of 15-years, except that a Board member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the end of the term for which the predecessor was appointed shall serve only until the end of such term. A Board member may serve after the end of the term until a successor has taken office. The Board membership appointments are staggered so that a new member is appointed every five years. A Board member may be removed by the Secretary of Defense for misconduct or failure to perform functions vested in the Board and for no other reason.

    Board members are entitled, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 1114(a)(3), to receive pay at the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay of the highest rate of basic pay under the General Schedule of subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, for each day the member is engaged in the performance of duties vested in the Board, and is entitled to travel expenses, including a per diem allowance, in accordance with section 5703 of title 5.

    The public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the Board. All written statements shall be submitted to the DFO for the Board, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Shelly Finke, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25702 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Availability of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study—Brandon Road Integrated Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement—Will County, Illinois AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Rock Island and Chicago Districts, have developed “The Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study (GLMRIS)—Brandon Road Integrated Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)—Will County, Illinois,” (Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS). The Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS presents a plan that could prevent aquatic nuisance species (ANS) transfer from the Mississippi River Basin to the Great Lakes Basin through an aquatic connection in the Chicago Area Waterway System. The purpose of this Study was to evaluate structural and nonstructural options and technologies near the Brandon Road Lock and Dam to prevent the upstream transfer of ANS while minimizing impacts to existing waterways uses and users. USACE analyzed and evaluated available controls to address ANS of concern and formulated alternatives specifically for the Brandon Road site.

    DATES:

    The Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS is available for review beginning on Friday, November 23, 2018, ending December 24, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS will be posted at https://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/GLMRIS-BR.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District, ATTN: GLMRIS-Brandon Road EIS, Clock Tower Building, P.O. Box 2004, Rock Island, IL 61204-2004; or contact online at https://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/GLMRIS-BR.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The USACE is issuing this notice pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332 et seq.) and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (43 CFR parts 1500 through 1508). This notice announces the availability of the final GLMRIS-Brandon Road EIS. The Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS, its appendices, and other supporting documents can be accessed at: https://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/GLMRIS-BR.

    Background Information

    The Draft GLMRIS-Brandon Road EIS was released on August 18, 2017, and included a 112-day public comment period that ended on December 8, 2017. During that time, USACE held four meetings to solicit comments from the public. USACE analyzed the comments received from the public (Appendix K) and considered them in preparation of the Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road EIS. This EIS provided the necessary information for the public to fully evaluate a range of alternatives designed to meet the purpose and need of the Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS and to provide thoughtful and meaningful comment for the Agency's consideration.

    The Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS identifies six alternatives including no new action (continuing current efforts); the nonstructural alternative; and three technology alternatives using an electric barrier and/or acoustic fish deterrent and lock closure. The effectiveness of these alternatives was considered against the three different modes of ANS transport, swimming, floating, and hitchhiking. Selection of a Recommended Plan required careful evaluation of each alternative's (1) reduction in the probability of establishment in the Great Lakes Basin, (2) relative life safety risk, (3) system performance robustness and (4) costs, which include construction; mitigation; operation and maintenance, repair, replacement and rehabilitation; and navigation impacts. Evaluation also included careful consideration of cost effectiveness and incremental cost analyses, significance of the Great Lakes Basin's ecosystem, acceptability, completeness, efficiency, and effectiveness. Based on the results of the evaluation and comparison of the alternatives, the Recommended Plan is the Technology Alternative—Acoustic Fish Deterrent with Electric Barrier, which includes the following measures: nonstructural measures, acoustic fish deterrent, bubble curtain, engineered channel, electric barrier, flushing lock, and boat ramps. The Final GLMRIS-Brandon Road Report & EIS identifies potential significant adverse impacts that alternatives may have on existing uses and users of the waterways.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Dennis W. Hamilton, Chief, Programs and Project Management Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25647 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    1 p.m., December 12, 2018.

    PLACE:

    Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004.

    STATUS:

    Closed. During the closed meeting, the Board Members will discuss issues dealing with potential Recommendations to the Secretary of Energy. The Board is invoking the exemptions to close a meeting described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3) and (9)(B) and 10 CFR 1704.4(c) and (h). The Board has determined that it is necessary to close the meeting since conducting an open meeting is likely to disclose matters that are specifically exempted from disclosure by statute, and/or be likely to significantly frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action. In this case, the deliberations will pertain to potential Board Recommendations which, under 42 U.S.C. 2286d(b) and (h)(3), may not be made publicly available until after they have been received by the Secretary of Energy or the President, respectively.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    The meeting will proceed in accordance with the closed meeting agenda which is posted on the Board's public website at www.dnfsb.gov. Technical staff may present information to the Board. The Board Members are expected to conduct deliberations regarding potential Recommendations to the Secretary of Energy.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Glenn Sklar, General Manager, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2901, (800) 788-4016. This is a toll-free number.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Joyce L. Connery, Acting Chairman.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25832 Filed 11-21-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
    DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    1 p.m.-4 p.m., December 20, 2018.

    PLACE:

    Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW, Room 7019, Washington, DC 20004.

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    The implicit and explicit recommendations captured in the National Academy of Public Administration's Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Organizational Assessment and recent Inspector General recommendations concerning the effectiveness of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The Organizational Assessment and other related documents are available on the Board's public website at www.dnfsb.gov.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Glenn Sklar, General Manager, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2901, (800) 788-4016. This is a toll-free number.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Joyce L. Connery, Acting Chairman.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25831 Filed 11-21-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
    DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD Sunshine Act Meetings; Correction AGENCY:

    Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board published a document in the Federal Register of November 7, 2018, providing notice of an upcoming public hearing on November 28, 2018. The document contained an incorrect date in the “matters to be considered” section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Glenn Sklar, General Manager, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2901, (800) 788-4016. This is a toll-free number.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Correction

    In the Federal Register of November 7, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-24438, on page 55702, in the third column, correct “August 28” to read “November 28”.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Joyce L. Connery, Acting Chairman.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25830 Filed 11-21-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2018-ICCD-0099] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Borrower Defenses Against Loan Repayment AGENCY:

    Federal Student Aid (FSA), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2018-ICCD-0099. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, Washington, DC 20202-0023.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Beth Grebeldinger, 202-377-4018.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Borrower Defenses Against Loan Repayment.

    OMB Control Number: 1845-0132.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 150,000.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 150,000.

    Abstract: This is a request for an extension of the current information collection for Form 1845-0132. The U.S. Department of Education continues to require the collection of this information from borrowers who believe they have cause to invoke the borrower defense to loan repayment forgiveness of a student loan. There is no change to statutory or regulatory requirements. This collection continues to be necessary to ensure Heald, Everest and/or WyoTech College borrowers who wish to invoke the borrower defense against repayment of federal student loans can do so in a uniform and informed manner. It will also allow for the uniform and directed collection of minimum borrower defense information from other federal student loan borrowers that attended the school who believe they can provide evidence of such an application for loan forgiveness.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25617 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Advisory Board Meeting AGENCY:

    Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a teleconference of the Environmental Management Advisory Board (EMAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Tuesday, December 11, 2018, 12:30 p.m.-2:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    WebEx Conference Call, US Toll: +1-415-527-5035, Attendee Access Code: 15519183.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer McCloskey, Federal Coordinator, EMAB (EM-4.3), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. Phone (301) 903-7427; fax (202) 586-0293 or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of EMAB is to provide the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM) with advice and recommendations on corporate issues confronting the EM program. EMAB contributes to the effective operation of the program by providing individual citizens and representatives of interested groups an opportunity to present their views on issues facing EM and by helping to secure consensus recommendations on those issues.

    Tentative Agenda:The topic to be discussed at this meeting is the CRESP Hanford Risk Review Analysis.

    Public Participation: EMAB welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Jennifer McCloskey at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number or email address listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the agenda should contact Jennifer McCloskey at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Jennifer McCloskey at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: http://energy.gov/em/services/communication-engagement/environmental-management-advisory-board-emab.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on November 20, 2018. LaTanya Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25650 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP17-41-000] Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Jacksonville Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) has prepared a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Jacksonville Project, proposed by Eagle LNG Partners Jacksonville, LLC (Eagle LNG) in the above-referenced docket. Eagle LNG requests authorization to construct and operate a liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility on the north bank of the St. Johns River in Jacksonville, Florida. Eagle LNG's Jacksonville Project would consist of an LNG terminal on about 81.1 acres of a 193.4-acre parcel of land and would produce a nominal capacity of about 1.0 million (metric) tonnes per annum (MTPA) of LNG. The LNG terminal would receive natural gas from a new 120-foot-long non-jurisdictional natural gas pipeline constructed by Peoples Gas' (a subsidiary of TECO Energy, Inc.), connected to its existing local gas distribution transmission pipeline, which is immediately adjacent to the proposed terminal site.

    The draft EIS assesses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the Jacksonville Project in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the Jacksonville Project would result in some limited adverse environmental impacts; however, these impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the implementation of Eagle LNG's proposed mitigation and the additional measures recommended in the draft EIS.

    The U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Department of Transportation participated as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EIS. Cooperating agencies have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to resources potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the NEPA analysis. Although the cooperating agencies provided input to the conclusions and recommendations presented in the draft EIS, the agencies will present their own conclusions and recommendations in their respective Records of Decision or determinations for the project.

    The draft EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the following project facilities:

    • Three LNG trains, each with a nominal capacity of 0.33 MTPA of LNG for export, resulting in a total nominal capacity of 1.0 MTPA;

    • one LNG storage tank with a net capacity of 45,000 m3;

    • marine facilities with a concrete access trestle and loading platform, and two liquid loading arms capable of docking and mooring a range of LNG vessels with an LNG cargo capacity of up to 45,000 m3;

    • LNG truck loading facilities with a dual bay capable of loading 260 to 520 LNG trucks per year;

    • a boil-off gas compression system;

    • on-site refrigerant storage;

    • ground flare and cold vent systems; and

    • utilities and support facilities (e.g., administration, control, and workshop buildings; roads and parking areas; power and communications; water, air, septic, and stormwater systems).

    The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability to federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and groups; and newspapers and libraries in the project area. The draft EIS is only available in electronic format. It may be viewed and downloaded from the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the Environmental Documents page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis.asp). In addition, the draft EIS may be accessed by using the eLibrary link on the FERC's website. Click on the eLibrary link (https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp), click on General Search, and enter the docket number in the “Docket Number” field, excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP17-41). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Any person wishing to comment on the draft EIS may do so. Your comments should focus on draft EIS's disclosure and discussion of potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. To ensure consideration of your comments on the proposal in the final EIS, it is important that the Commission receive your comments on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 7, 2019.

    For your convenience, there are four methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. The Commission will provide equal consideration to all comments received, whether filed in written form or provided verbally. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-3676 or [email protected] Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.

    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;

    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on “eRegister.” If you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select “Comment on a Filing” as the filing type; or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number (CP17-41-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    (4) In lieu of sending written or electronic comments, the Commission invites you to attend the public comment session its staff will conduct in the project area to receive comments on the draft EIS, scheduled as follows:

    Date and time Location Wednesday, December 12, 2018
  • 4:00-8:00 p.m. EST
  • Jacksonville Public Library (Main), 303 North Laura Street, Jacksonville, FL 32202, (904) 630-2665.

    The primary goal of this comment session is to have you identify the specific environmental issues and concerns with the draft EIS. Individual verbal comments will be taken on a one-on-one basis with a court reporter. This format is designed to receive the maximum amount of verbal comments, in a convenient way during the timeframe allotted.

    The scoping session is scheduled from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. local time. You may arrive at any time after 4:00 p.m. There will not be a formal presentation by Commission staff when the session opens. If you wish to speak, the Commission staff will hand out numbers in the order of your arrival. Comments will be taken until the closing hour for the comment session. However, if no additional numbers have been handed out and all individuals who wish to provide comments have had an opportunity to do so, staff may conclude the session 30 minutes before the closing hour. Please see appendix 1 for additional information on the session format and conduct.1

    1 The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in the Federal Register. Copies of the appendices are available at www.ferc.gov using the link called “eLibrary” or from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, or call (202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to page 2 of this notice.

    Your verbal comments will be recorded by the court reporter (with FERC staff or representative present) and become part of the public record for this proceeding. Transcripts will be publicly available on FERC's eLibrary system (see below for instructions on using eLibrary). If a significant number of people are interested in providing verbal comments in the one-on-one settings, a time limit of 5 minutes may be implemented for each commenter.

    It is important to note that verbal comments hold the same weight as written or electronically submitted comments. Although there will not be a formal presentation, Commission staff will be available throughout the comment session to answer your questions about the environmental review process.

    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR part 385.214). Motions to intervene are more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing or judicial review of the Commission's decision. The Commission grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.

    Questions?

    Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.

    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25581 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 14890-000] Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On August 27, 2018, Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation, filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Pushmataha County Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project (Pushmataha Project or project) to be located on the Kiamichi River, near the town of Talihina, in Pushmataha County, Oklahoma. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

    The Pushmataha Project permit application describes two adjacent, alternative developments that the applicant proposes to choose between.

    Alternative 1 would consist of the following: (1) An 886-foot-long, 282-foot-high concrete-faced rockfill upper dam with a 196.85-foot-long, 17-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel to Long Creek; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 488.52 acres and a storage capacity of 43,633 acre-feet; (3) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete upper intake/outlet structure; (4) a 7,030-foot-long, 32.8-foot-diameter steel and concrete headrace tunnel; (5) a 550-foot-long, 93-foot-wide, 188.5-foot-high underground concrete pumping station/powerhouse containing four pump/generating units with a total capacity of 1,200 megawatts; (6) an 8,243-foot-long, 32.8-foot-diameter tailrace tunnel; (7) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete lower intake/outlet structure; (8) a 13,615-foot-long, 68.9-foot-high earthen lower dam with a 33-foot-long, 13-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel that becomes a tunnel to the Kiamichi River; (9) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 727 acres and a storage capacity of 37,965 acre-feet; (10) two 20-inch-diameter, 1,085-foot-long pipes with 110 kilowatt pumps to move water from a regulating reservoir to the lower reservoir; (11) a regulating reservoir with a surface area of 40 acres and a storage capacity of 1,216 acre-feet; (12) two 20-inch-diameter, 886-foot-long pipes with two 110 kilowatt pumps to move water from the Kiamichi River to a regulating reservoir; (13) a 40-foot-long, 40-foot-wide funnel-shaped intake structure on the Kiamichi River located 1.5-feet above the bottom of the Kiamichi River tapering down to 10-foot-long, 10-foot-wide section where it connects to the two withdrawal pipes; and (14) a 124-mile-long transmission line to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas grid.

    Alternative 2 would consist of the following: (1) A 1,529-foot-long, 233-foot-high concrete-faced rockfill upper dam with a 196.85-foot-long, 17-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel to a creek; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 366.07 acres, and a storage capacity of 27,462 acre-feet; (3) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete upper intake/outlet structure; (4) a 3,979-foot-long, 32.8-foot-diameter steel and concrete headrace tunnel; (5) a 545-foot-long, 90-foot-wide, 185.4-foot-high underground concrete pumping station/powerhouse containing four pump/generating units with a total capacity of 1,200 megawatts; (6) a 5,831-foot-long, 32.8-foot-diameter tailrace tunnel; (7) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete lower intake/outlet structure; (8) a 13,911-foot-long, 52.5-foot-high earthen lower dam with a 33-foot-long, 13-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel that becomes a tunnel to the Kiamichi River; (9) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 972.71 acres and a storage capacity of 31,223 acre-feet; (10) two 20-inch-diameter, 1,532-foot-long pipes with 110 kilowatt pumps to move water from a regulating reservoir to the lower reservoir; (11) a regulating reservoir with a surface area of 40 acres and a storage capacity of 1,216 acre-feet; (12) two 20-inch-diameter, 886-foot-long pipes with two 110 kilowatt pumps to move water from the Kiamichi River to the a regulating reservoir; (13) a 40-foot-long, 40-foot-wide funnel-shaped intake structure on the Kiamichi River located 1.5-feet above the bottom of the Kiamichi River tapering down to 10-foot-long, 10-foot-wide section where it connects to the two withdrawal pipes; and (14) a 124-mile-long transmission line to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas grid.

    For either alternative, the proposed project would have an estimated average annual generation of 4,368,000 megawatt-hours.

    Applicant Contact: Mr. John Bobenic, Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation, c/o Daytona Power Corp, 1800, 421-7 Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 4K9; phone: (578) 433-4933.

    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer, (202) 502-6093, [email protected]

    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-14890-000.

    More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-14890) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25587 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. NJ19-3-000] Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on November 7, 2018, Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC submitted its tariff filing: Oncor TFO Tariff Rate Changes to be effective 10/10/2018.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 28, 2018.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25582 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. NJ19-1-000] Notice of Supplement Filing; City of Vernon, California

    Take notice that on November 15, 2018, the City of Vernon, California submitted a Letter Supplementing October 31, 2018 City of Vernon, California tariff filing (Error in Transmission Revenue Balancing Account Adjustment).

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 6, 2018.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25640 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2689-040] Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Protests and Motions To Intervene; N.E.W. Hydro, LLC

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Proceeding: Extension of License Term.

    b. Project No.: P-2689-040.

    c. Date Filed: November 2, 2018.

    d. Licensee: N.E.W. Hydro, LLC.

    e. Name and Location of Project: Oconto Falls (Lower) Hydroelectric Project, located on the Oconto River, in the City of Oconto Falls, Oconto County, Wisconsin.

    f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.

    g. Licensee Contact Information: Mr. Michael Scarzello, Regulatory Director, Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, LLC, 116 N State Street, P.O. Box 167, Neshkoro, Wisconsin 54960, (973) 998-8400, [email protected]

    h. FERC Contact: Mr. Ashish Desai, (202) 502-8370, [email protected]

    i. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene and protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests, comments, and recommendations, using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2689-040.

    j. Description of Proceeding: N.E.W. Hydro, LLC, licensee for the Oconto Falls (Lower) Project No. 2689, filed a request with the Commission to extend the term of the project license, from April 30, 2024 to October 31, 2027, which would align its modified expiration date with that of the licensee's Oconto Falls (Upper) Project No. 2523, located approximately 2,000 feet upstream. The licensee requests the license term extension to coordinate and streamline relicensing efforts, including developing and implementing study plans and consultation with resource agencies for both projects.

    k. This notice is available for review and reproduction at the Commission in the Public Reference Room, Room 2A, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the Docket number (P-2689-040) excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the notice. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or email [email protected] For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to the request to extend the license term. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25638 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2837-033] Notice of Application Ready for Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions: Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P.

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.

    a. Type of Application: New Major License.

    b. Project No.: 2837-033.

    c. Date filed: March 29, 2018.

    d. Applicant: Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P. (Erie).

    e. Name of Project: Granby Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: On the Oswego River in the town of Fulton in Oswego County, New York. The project does not affect federal lands.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Steven P. Murphy, Director, U.S. Licensing, Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P., 33 West 1st Street South, Fulton, NY 13069; (315) 598-6130.

    i. FERC Contact: Allyson Conner, (202) 502-6082 or [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2837-033.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.

    k. This application has been accepted, and is ready for environmental analysis at this time.

    l. The existing Granby Hydroelectric Project (Granby Project) consists of: (1) An 88-foot-wide reinforced concrete intake structure that includes two bays containing trashracks and fixed-roller, vertical-lift type gates; (2) a 17-foot-wide sluice opening adjacent to the intake structure; (3) a 112-foot-long, 88-foot-wide powerhouse containing two 5.04-megawatt (MW) turbine-generator units, with a total capacity of 10.08 MW; (4) a 3,000-foot-long, 100-foot-wide tailrace; (5) two 4.16-kilovolt, 120-foot-long underground generator leads; (6) a 60-foot-long by 48-foot-wide electrical switchyard; and (7) appurtenant facilities.

    The Granby Project is operated in a modified run-of-river mode. The Granby Project and the Fulton Development at Erie's Oswego River Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 2474) are located at opposite ends of the same dam and share a single bypassed reach and reservoir. The flow and impoundment elevation requirements in the Oswego Project license,1 which were based on a 2004 Offer of Settlement, affect the Granby Project. The average annual generation at the Granby Project is estimated to be 44,181 megawatt-hours.

    1 109 FERC ¶ 62, 141 (2004).

    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.

    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRESCRIPTIONS;” (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person submitting the filing; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed on the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of this notice: (1) A copy of the water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification.

    o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

    Milestone Target date Deadline for Filing Comments, Recommendations and Agency Terms and Conditions/Prescriptions January 2019. Deadline for Filing Reply Comments March 2019. Commission issues EA July 2019. Comments on EA Due August 2019. Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25580 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL18-43-000] Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company; Notice of Amended Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on November 15, 2018, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2), Southern Company Services, Inc., acting as agent for Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company (collectively, Southern Companies), submitted an amendment to its petition for declaratory order and request to hold proceedings in abeyance, filed on November 28, 2017. In the amendment, Southern Companies requests that the Commission lift the abeyance in this proceeding and seeks declarations that: (1) Those certain audit recommendations be set aside, and (2) Southern Companies' formula rate in its Open Access Transmission Tariff provide the requisite flexibility to make the ratemaking adjustment necessary to allow Southern Companies to avoid normalization violation, as more fully explained in the amended petition for declaratory order.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioners.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on December 6, 2018.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25583 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. NJ19-2-000] Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on November 7, 2018, Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC submitted its tariff filing: Oncor Tex-La Tariff Rate Changes to be effective 10/10/2018.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 28, 2018.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25586 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP19-14-000; PF18-4-000] Notice of Application; Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC

    Take notice that on November 6, 2018, Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (Mountain Valley), 625 Liberty Avenue, Suite 2000, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222, filed in Docket No. CP19-14-000 an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 157 and 284 of the Commission's regulations for authorization to construct, own and operate its Southgate Project located in Virginia and North Carolina. Specifically, Mountain Valley proposes to construct: (i) Approximately 73 miles of new 24-inch and 16-inch-diameter pipeline, (ii) the 28,915 horsepower Lambert Compressor Station in Pittsylvania County, Virginia, and (iii) associated valves, piping, pig launching and receiving facilities, and appurtenant facilities. The proposed Southgate Project facilities commence near the City of Chatham, in Pittsylvania County, Virginia and terminate at a delivery point with Public Service Company of North Carolina, Inc. (PSNC) near the City of Graham in Alamance County, North Carolina. The Project is designed to create 375,000 dekatherms per day (Dth/d). Mountain Valley estimates the cost of the Southgate Project to be $468,459,509. Mountain Valley requests a separate rate zone and initial recourse rates for the Southgate Project facilities, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.

    Commission staff has determined that this project qualifies as a Major Infrastructure Project pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding Implementing One Federal Decision Under Executive Order 13807 (MOU) signed on April 10, 2018. Major Infrastructure Projects are defined as projects for which multiple authorizations by Federal agencies will be required and the lead Federal agency has determined that it will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.

    The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to William Lavarco, NextEra Energy, Inc., 801 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 220, Washington, DC 20004, by telephone at (202) 347-7127, or by email at [email protected]

    On May 15, 2018, the Commission staff granted Mountain Valley's request to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF18-4-000 to staff activities involved in the Southgate Project. Now, as of the filing of the November 6, 2018 application, the Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP19-14-000, as noted in the caption of this Notice.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9), within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental impact statement (EIS) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final EIS for this proposal. The filing of the final EIS in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 3 copies of filings made with the Commission and must provide a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will be notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    As of the February 27, 2018 date of the Commission's order in Docket No. CP16-4-001, the Commission will apply its revised practice concerning out-of-time motions to intervene in any new Natural Gas Act section 3 or section 7 proceeding.1 Persons desiring to become a party to a certificate proceeding are to intervene in a timely manner. If seeking to intervene out-of-time, the movant is required to “show good cause why the time limitation should be waived,” and should provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule 214(d)(1) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.2

    1Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C., 162 FERC ¶61,167 at ¶50 (2018).

    2 18 CFR 385.214(d)(1).

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 3 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 10, 2018.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25637 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 14887-000] Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    1. On July 31, 2018, Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation, filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Southeast Oklahoma Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project (project) to be located on the Kiamichi River, near the town of Whitesboro, in LeFlore County, Oklahoma. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

    2. The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A 2,165-foot-long, 302-foot-high concrete-faced rockfill upper dam with a 196.85-foot-long emergency spillway with a 600-foot-long, 30-foot-wide channel; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 488.52 acres and a storage capacity of 43,633 acre-feet; (3) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete upper intake/outlet structure; (4) a 6,370-foot-long, 27.8-foot-diameter steel and concrete headrace tunnel; (5) a 545-foot-long, 90-foot-wide, 185.4-foot-high underground concrete pumping station/powerhouse containing four pump/generating units with a total capacity of 1,200 megawatts; (6) a 7,439-foot-long, 27.8-foot-diameter tailrace tunnel; (7) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete lower intake/outlet structure; (8) a 9,957-foot-long, 52.5-foot-high earthen lower dam with a 33-foot-long, 13-foot-high emergency spillway with a 1,640-foot-long tunnel to the Kiamichi River; (9) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 727 acres, and a storage capacity of 37,965 acre-feet; (10) two 20-inch-diameter, 675-foot-long pipes with 110 kilowatt pumps from the lower reservoir to the regulating reservoir; (11) a regulating reservoir with a surface area of 40 acres, and a storage capacity of 1,216 acre-feet; (12) two 20-inch-diameter, 690-foot-long pipes with two 110 kilowatt pumps from the Kiamichi River to the regulating reservoir; (13) a 40-foot-long, 40-foot-wide funnel shaped intake structure on the Kiamichi River, located 1.5-foot above the bottom of the Kiamichi River tapering down to 10-foot-long, 10-foot-wide section where it connects to the two pipes; and (14) a 124-mile-long transmission line to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas grid.

    The proposed project would relocate State Road 248 (Post Oar Road) and 583rd Street because the lower reservoir would otherwise inundate them. The proposed project would have an estimated average annual generation of 4,368,000 megawatt-hours.

    Applicant Contact: Mr. John Bobenic, Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation, c/o Daytona Power Corp, 1800, 421-7 Avenue SW, Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 4K9; phone: (578) 433-4933.

    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer, (202) 502-6093, [email protected]

    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-14887-000.

    More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-14887) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25585 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP18-525-000] Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review of the Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP—Willis Lateral Project

    On July 13, 2018, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP (Gulf South) filed an application in Docket No. CP18-525-000 requesting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act to construct and operate certain natural gas pipeline facilities. The proposed project is known as the Willis Lateral Project (Project), and would provide about 200 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to Entergy Texas, Inc.'s Montgomery County Power Station Project near Willis, Texas.

    On July 26, 2018, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project. Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the EA for the Project.

    Schedule for Environmental Review Issuance of EA—March 4, 2019 90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline—June 2, 2019

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the Project's progress.

    Project Description

    The Project would consist of the following facilities entirely within the state of Texas:

    • Construction of approximately 19 miles of 24-inch-diameter pipeline in Montgomery and San Jacinto Counties;

    • addition of a new 15,876 horsepower turbine engine to the existing Goodrich Compressor Station and construction of a new Meter and Regulator (M&R) station at the compressor station in Polk County;

    • construction of the Index 129 tie-in and pig 1 launcher facility in San Jacinto County;

    1 A “pig” is a tool that the pipeline company inserts into and pushes through the pipeline for cleaning the pipeline, conducting internal inspections, or other purposes.

    • construction of the new Willis M&R station at the terminus of the Project (including a pig receiver, filter separators with a liquid storage tank, and ancillary equipment) in Montgomery County; and

    • construction of a mainline valve facility in Montgomery County.

    Background

    On August 31, 2018, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Willis Lateral Project, And Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI). The NOI was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local government agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers.

    In response to the Notice of Application, the Commission received comments from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department regarding appropriate best management practices for construction and restoration, special status species, surface water, and impacts on vegetation and wildlife. All substantive comments will be addressed in the EA. No comments were received in response to the NOI.

    Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Additional information about the projects are available from the Commission's

    Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the “eLibrary” link, select “General Search” from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and “Docket Number” excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP18-525), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at (866) 208-3676, TTY (202) 502-8659, or at [email protected] The eLibrary link on the FERC website also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25641 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0543, FRL-9986-08-OEI] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements (HWIR) Contaminated Media (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements (HWIR) Contaminated Media (EPA ICR No. 1775.08, OMB Control No. 2050-0161), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register on August 3, 2018 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0543, to (1) EPA, either online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: RCRA Docket (2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Peggy Vyas, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 703-308-5477; fax number: 703-308-8433; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requires EPA to establish a national regulatory program to ensure that hazardous wastes are managed in a manner protective of human health and the environment. Under this program, EPA regulates newly generated hazardous wastes, as well as hazardous remediation wastes (i.e., hazardous wastes managed during cleanup). Hazardous remediation waste management sites must comply with all parts of 40 CFR part 264 except subparts B, C, and D. In place of these requirements, they need to comply with performance standards based on the general requirement goals in these sections, which are codified at 40 CFR 264.1(j).

    Under § 264.1(j), owners/operators of remediation waste management sites must develop and maintain procedures to prevent accidents. These procedures must address proper design, construction, maintenance, and operation of hazardous remediation waste management units at the site. In addition, owners/operators must develop and maintain a contingency and emergency plan to control accidents that occur. The plan must explain specifically how to treat, store, and dispose of the hazardous remediation waste in question, and must be implemented immediately whenever fire, explosion, or release of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents that could threaten human health or the environment. In addition, the Remedial Action Plan streamlines the permitting process for remediation waste management sites to allow cleanups to take place more quickly.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Private sector, as well as State, Local, or Tribal governments.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (RCRA § 3004(u)).

    Estimated number of respondents: 183.

    Frequency of response: One-time.

    Total estimated burden: 6,361 hours per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $399,803 (per year), which includes $350,307 in annualized labor and $49,496 in annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 592 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease is due to a decrease in the number of hazardous remediation waste management sites.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25675 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0652; FRL-9979-89-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Expanded Access to TSCA Confidential Business Information AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA has submitted the following information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA): “Expanded Access to TSCA Confidential Business Information” (EPA ICR No. 2570.01, OMB Control No. 2070-[new]). This is a request for approval of a new collection. EPA did not receive any comments in response to the previously provided public review opportunity issued in the Federal Register of March 12, 2018. With this submission to OMB, EPA is providing an additional 30 days for public review and comment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0652, to both EPA and OMB as follows:

    • To EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method) or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, and

    • To OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brandon Mullings, Environmental Assistance Division, 7408M, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-4826; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Docket: Supporting documents, including the ICR that explains in detail the information collection activities and the related burden and cost estimates that are summarized in this document, are available in the docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202) 566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    ICR status: This is a new ICR. Under OMB regulations, an agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. Under PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

    Abstract: This ICR addresses the content and form of the statements of need and agreements required under sections 14(d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(6) of the Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended in 2016. These activities are described in the three guidance documents that have been developed to implement the new authorities in TSCA section 14(d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(6), and include some basic logistical information on where and how to submit requests to EPA. Making a request for access to TSCA CBI is a voluntary activity, but is required in order to gain such access under TSCA section 14(d). The ICR provides burden estimates for these activities. The guidance documents are available at https://www.epa.gov/tsca-cbi/requesting-access-cbi-under-tsca.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this ICR are mainly government employees (federal, state, local, tribal), as well as medical professionals, such as doctors and nurses.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.

    Estimated number of respondents: 6 (total).

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 89 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)

    Total estimated cost: $5,204.11 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25673 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0047; FRL-9985-96-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (EPA ICR No. 1557.10, OMB Control No. 2060-0220), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register on June 29, 2017, during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0047, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) apply to MSW landfills for which construction, modification, or reconstruction commences either on or after May 30, 1991. A MSW landfill is an entire disposal facility in a contiguous geographical space where household waste is placed in or on. An MSW landfill may also receive other types of RCRA Subtitle D wastes (§ 257.2 of this title) such as commercial solid waste, nonhazardous sludge, conditionally exempt small quantity generator waste, and industrial solid waste. Portions of an MSW landfill may be separated by access roads. An MSW landfill may be publicly or privately owned, and may be a new landfill, an existing landfill, or a lateral expansion.

    On August 29, 2016 (81 FR 59332), EPA finalized a new NSPS subpart (40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX) based on its review of subpart WWW. Concurrently, EPA finalized revised Emissions Guidelines under a new subpart (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf). The new Emission Guidelines apply to existing landfills accepting waste after 1987 for which construction was commenced either on or before July 17, 2014. Subpart XXX applies to MSW landfills that are new, reconstructed, or modified after July 17, 2014. The requirements in Subpart WWW mimic most of the requirements in these new rules, except for that the control threshold in new rules require controls at additional landfills beyond what Subpart WWW requires.

    In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfills.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW).

    Estimated number of respondents: 661 (total).

    Frequency of response: Annually.

    Total estimated burden: 760 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $86,600 (per year); there are no annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease in the burden hours and the Capital/O&M costs in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. The change in burden and cost estimates occurred as a result of the 2016 NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX) and Emissions Guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf). Most of the burden previously attributed to the ICR for subpart WWW has been accounted for in the 2016 ICRs for both subparts XXX (ICR 2498.03, OMB 2060-0697) and Cf (ICR 2522.02, OMB 2060-0720) to avoid duplication of burden for identical requirements. There is an increase in number of responses compared to the previous ICR. While this ICR does not duplicate responses for the 2016 ICRs, each respondent was counted as a respondent that does not report but maintains records under subpart WWW and this resulted in an increase number of responses.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25672 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0078; FRL-9986-57-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants (EPA ICR Number 1957.08, OMB Control Number 2060-0487), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30, 2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal Register, on June 29, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0078, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at either www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Metal Coil Surface Coating Plants (40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS) apply to existing facilities and new facilities that are major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) at which a coil coating line is operated. A coil coating line is a process in which special equipment is used to apply an organic coating to the surface of metal coils; the affected source at each plant site is the collection of all coil coating lines at the site. The provisions of this Subpart do not apply to coil coating lines that are part of research or laboratory equipment or coil coating lines on which at least 85 percent of the metal coil coated, based on surface area, is less than 0.15 millimeters (0.006 inches) thick, unless the coating line is controlled by a common control device. New facilities include those that commenced construction or reconstruction after the date of proposal.

    In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities engaged in metal coil surface coating.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR 63, Subpart SSSS).

    Estimated number of respondents: 48 (total).

    Frequency of response: Initially and semiannually.

    Total estimated burden: 16,100 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $1,820,000 (per year), which includes $57,600 in annualized capital/setup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the estimates: There is a decrease in the total estimated burden and the number of responses as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This decrease is not due to any program changes. The decrease is a result of an adjustment made to the estimated number of respondents based on data from internal Agency experts. The total number of respondents is significantly reduced since the last ICR renewal based on the delisting of methyl ethyl ketone as a HAP.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25671 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [MB Docket No. 18-214; MB Docket No. 16-306; GN Docket No. 12-268; DA 18-1072] Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau Seek Comment on Catalog of Potentially Reimbursable Costs Incurred by Low Power Television, Television Translator and FM Broadcast Stations AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice; solicitation of comments.

    SUMMARY:

    This document seeks comment on a proposed catalog of potentially reimbursable costs that may be incurred by Low Power Television (LPTV), television translator, and FM broadcast stations as a result of the Federal Communications Commission's (Commission's) broadcast television spectrum incentive auction. Title V of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Reimbursement Expansion Act), requires that the Commission reimburse LPTV, television translator and FM broadcast stations for costs reasonably incurred as a result of the incentive auction.

    DATES:

    Comments are due on or before November 21, 2018. Reply comments are due on or before December 6, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may submit and reply comments, identified by MB Docket No. 18-214, by any of the following methods:

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

    Federal Communications Commission's Website: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although the Commission continues to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

    People With Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.

    For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Pamela Gallant of the Media Bureau, Video Division, (202) 418-0614.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Commission's Public Notice, DA 18-1072, released on October 22, 2018. The full text of this document is available electronically via the FCC's Electronic Document Management System (EDOCS) website at https://www.fcc.gov/document/iatfmedia-bureau-seek-comment-lptv-translator-and-fm-catalog. Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. This document is also available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, which is located in Room CY-A257 at FCC Headquarters, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554. The Reference Information Center is open to the public Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Alternative formats are available for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), by sending an email to [email protected] or calling the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    Synopsis

    1. On March 23, 2018, the President signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018, which included the Reimbursement Expansion Act (REA) of 2018. In Title V of REA of 2018, Congress provided funding for and expanded the list of entities eligible to receive reimbursement for costs reasonably incurred resulting from the incentive auction to include LPTV, television translator and FM stations. To implement the REA, the Commission released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (MB Docket No. 18-214, GN Docket No. 12-268, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, FCC 18-113) that, among other things, seeks comment on the types of costs these entities are likely to incur and instructs the Media Bureau to develop a revised Catalog of Eligible Expenses. Accordingly, this Public Notice seeks comment on a proposed LPTV/Translator/FM Cost Catalog (Appendix A to this Public Notice), which was developed by a third-party contractor engaged by the Media Bureau to identify price ranges for potential services and equipment based on a market survey of industry vendors.

    2. The LPTV/Translator/FM Cost Catalog will facilitate the reimbursement process. The LPTV/Translator/FM Cost Catalog provides predetermined costs or cost ranges for use as estimates when stations do not have vendor quotes, and establishes acceptable price ranges, thereby necessitating additional cost justification documentation only for expenses that are higher than the range in the Catalog or that are for equipment or services not covered by the LPTV/Translator/FM Cost Catalog. This Public Notice seeks comment on whether the Catalog is missing any types of expenses LPTV, translator and FM stations are likely to incur and on the price ranges in the Catalog.

    Procedural Matters

    4. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this document. All filings should refer to MB Docket No. 18-214. Comments may be filed: (1) Using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), or (2) by filing paper copies. Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).

    5. Comments and reply comments filed in response to this document will be available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554, and via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) by entering the docket number, MB Docket No. 18-214.

    6. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.

    7. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, as follows:

    • All hand-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St. SW, Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. The filing hours at this location are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

    • Commercial overnight mail (except U.S. Postal Service mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.

    • All other mail, including U.S. Postal Service Express Mail, Priority Mail, and First Class Mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.

    8. Alternate formats of this Public Notice (computer diskette, large print, audio recording, and Braille) are available to persons with disabilities by contacting the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY), or send an email to [email protected]

    Federal Communications Commission. Thomas Horan, Chief of Staff.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25571 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting TIME AND DATE:

    December 3, 2018; 10 a.m.

    PLACE:

    800 N. Capitol Street NW, Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be closed to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Closed Session

    1. Fact Finding No. 28—Final Report—Briefing by Commissioner Rebecca F. Dye.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Rachel Dickon, Secretary, (202) 523-5725.

    Rachel Dickon, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25814 Filed 11-21-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than December 20, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. Amarillo National Bancorp, Inc., Amarillo, Texas; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Commerce National Financial Services, Inc., and indirectly acquire voting shares of, Lubbock National Bank, both of Lubbock, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 20, 2018. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25674 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than December 10, 2018.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Nadine Wallman, Vice President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. The Richard F. McCready, Jr. Maximum United Credit Trust, Jane Houston McCready, Trustee, Winchester, Kentucky, Sarah McCready Boston, Trustee and Louise F. McCready Hart, Trustee, both of New York, New York; to join the McCready family group, a group acting in concert, to acquire shares of WinFirst Financial Corporation, Winchester, Kentucky, and thereby acquire shares of Winchester Federal Bank, Winchester, Kentucky.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. Arthur Haag Sherman, the Sherman 2018 Irrevocable Trust, Sherman Tectonic FLP LP, and Sherman Family Holdings LLC, all of Houston, Texas; as a group acting in concert, to acquire shares of T Acquisition, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire T Bank, National Association, both of Dallas, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 20, 2018. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25676 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 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, and the Determination of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. 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: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)-RFA-IP-19-001, Surveillance for Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) and Other Viral Respiratory Infections Among Native Americans/Alaskan Natives; RFA-IP-19-002, Increasing Influenza and Tdap Vaccination of Pregnant Women in Obstetric/Gynecologic Practices in Large Health Systems through Quality Improvement Interventions; and RFA-IP-19-003, Understanding and Improving Immunization Services Among Adult Hospital Inpatient and Observation/Clinical Decision Unit Settings.

    Date: March 19-20, 2019.

    Time: 10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., (EST).

    Place: Teleconference, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Room 1080, 8 Corporate Square Blvd., Atlanta, GA 30329.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    For Further Information Contact: Gregory Anderson, M.S., M.P.H., Scientific Review Officer, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, Mailstop E60, Atlanta, Georgia 30329, (404) 718-8833, [email protected]

    The Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Sherri Berger, Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25589 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-10286, CMS-10440 and CMS-10507] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, the accuracy of the estimated burden, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by January 25, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number__, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' website address at website address at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA-Listing.html.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    William Parham at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Contents

    This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

    CMS-10286 Notice of Research Exception under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act CMS-10440 Data Collection to Support Eligibility Determinations for Insurance Affordability Programs and Enrollment through Affordable Insurance Exchanges, Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program Agencies (CMS-10440) CMS-10507 State-based Exchange Annual Report Tool (SMART)

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

    Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Notice of Research Exception under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act; Use: Under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), a plan or issuer may request (but not require) a genetic test in connection with certain research activities so long as such activities comply with specific requirements, including: (i) The research complies with 45 CFR part 46 or equivalent federal regulations and applicable State or local law or regulations for the protection of human subjects in research; (ii) the request for the participant or beneficiary (or in the case of a minor child, the legal guardian of such beneficiary) is made in writing and clearly indicates that compliance with the request is voluntary and that non-compliance will have no effect on eligibility for benefits or premium or contribution amounts; and (iii) no genetic information collected or acquired will be used for underwriting purposes. The Secretary of Labor or the Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to be notified if a group health plan or health insurance issuer intends to claim the research exception permitted under Title I of GINA. Nonfederal governmental group health plans and issuers solely in the individual health insurance market or Medigap market will be required to file with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The Notice of Research Exception under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act is a model notice that can be completed by group health plans and health insurance issuers and filed with either the Department of Labor or CMS to comply with the notification requirement. Form Number: CMS-10286 (OMB control number 0938-1077); Frequency: Occasionally; Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Governments; Private Sector; Number of Respondents: 2; Number of Responses: 2; Total Annual Hours: 0.5. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Usree Bandyopadhyay at 410-786-6650.)

    2. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Data Collection to Support Eligibility Determinations for Insurance Affordability Programs and Enrollment through Affordable Insurance Exchanges, Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program Agencies; Use: Information collected by the Marketplace, Medicaid or CHIP agency will be used to determine eligibility for coverage through the Marketplace and insurance affordability programs (i.e., Medicaid, CHIP, and advance payment of the premium tax credits), and assist consumers in enrolling in a QHP if eligible. Applicants include anyone who may be eligible for coverage through any of these programs.

    The Marketplace verifies the information provided on the application, communicates with the applicant or his/her authorized representative and subsequently provides the information to the health plan selected by the applicant so that it can enroll him/her in a QHP. The Marketplace also uses the information provided in support of its ongoing operations, including activities such as verifying continued eligibility for all programs, processing appeals, reporting on and managing the insurance affordability programs for eligible individuals, performing oversight and quality control activities, combatting fraud, and responding to any concerns about the security or confidentiality of the information. Form Number: CMS-10440 (OMB control number: 0938-1191); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Private Sector (Business or other for-profits, Not-for-Profit Institutions); Number of Respondents: 4,662,000; Total Annual Responses: 4,662,000; Total Annual Hours: 946,386. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Anne Pesto at 410-786-3492.)

    3. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: State-based Exchange Annual Report Tool (SMART); Use: The annual report is the primary vehicle to insure comprehensive compliance with all reporting requirements contained in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). It is specifically called for in Section 1313(a)(1) of the Act which requires an State Based Exchange (SBEs) (including an Exchange using the Federal Platform) to keep an accurate accounting of all activities, receipts, and expenditures, and to submit a report annually to the Secretary concerning such accounting.

    CMS and other Federal agencies use the information collected from the SMART to determine if a state is maintaining a compliant, operational Exchange. It also provides a mechanism to collect innovative approaches to meeting challenges encountered by the SBEs during the preceding year, as well as to provide information to CMS regarding potential changes in priorities and approaches for the upcoming year. Form Number: CMS-10507 (OMB control number: 0938-1244); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal governments; Number of Respondents: 17; Total Annual Responses: 17; Total Annual Hours: 3,415. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Christy Woods at 301-492-5140.)

    Dated: November 20, 2018. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25700 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Privacy Act of 1974; Matching Program AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

    ACTION:

    Notice of a New Matching Program.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with subsection (e)(12) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is providing notice of a new matching program between CMS and the Peace Corps, “Verification of Eligibility for Minimum Essential Coverage Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Through a Peace Corps Health Benefit Plan.”

    DATES:

    The deadline for comments on this notice is December 26, 2018.The re-established matching program will commence not sooner than 30 days after publication of this notice, provided no comments are received that warrant a change to this notice. The matching program will be conducted for an initial term of 18 months (from approximately January 2019 to June 2020) and within 3 months of expiration may be renewed for one additional year if the parties make no change to the matching program and certify that the program has been conducted in compliance with the matching agreement.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments can be sent to: CMS Privacy Act Officer, Division of Security, Privacy Policy & Governance, Information Security & Privacy Group, Office of Information Technology, CMS, 7500 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21244-1870, Mailstop: N3-15-25, or by email to: [email protected] Comments received will be available for review at this location, by appointment, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about the matching program, you may contact Jack Lavelle, Senior Advisor, Marketplace Eligibility and Enrollment Group, Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, CMS, 7501 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814, (410) 786-0639, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a) provides certain protections for individuals applying for and receiving federal benefits. The law governs the use of computer matching by federal agencies when records in a system of records (meaning, federal agency records about individuals retrieved by name or other personal identifier) are matched with records of other federal or non-federal agencies. The Privacy Act requires agencies involved in a matching program to:

    1. Enter into a written agreement, which must be prepared in accordance with the Privacy Act, approved by the Data Integrity Board of each source and recipient federal agency, provided to Congress and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and made available to the public, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(o), (u)(3)(A), and (u)(4).

    2. Notify the individuals whose information will be used in the matching program that the information they provide is subject to verification through matching, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(o)(1)(D).

    3. Verify match findings before suspending, terminating, reducing, or making a final denial of an individual's benefits or payments or taking other adverse action against the individual, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(p).

    4. Report the matching program to Congress and the OMB, in advance and annually, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(o) (2)(A)(i), (r), and (u)(3)(D).

    5. Publish advance notice of the matching program in the Federal Register as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(12). This matching program meets these requirements.

    This matching program meets these requirements.

    Barbara Demopulos, CMS Privacy Advisor, Information Security and Privacy Group, Division of Security, Privacy Policy and Governance, Office of Information Technology, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Participating Agencies

    Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and the Peace Corps.

    Authority for Conducting the Matching Program

    The statutory authority for the matching program is 42 U.S.C. 18001, et seq.

    Purpose(s)

    The purpose of the matching program is to assist CMS in determining individuals' eligibility for financial assistance in paying for private health insurance coverage. In this matching program, the Peace Corps provides CMS with data identifying all Peace Corps volunteers and the dates when each volunteer was eligible for coverage under a Peace Corps health benefit plan, which CMS and state administering entities (AEs) use to verify whether an individual who is applying for or is enrolled in private health insurance coverage under a qualified health plan through a federally-facilitated or state-based health insurance exchange is eligible for coverage under a Peace Corps health benefit plan. CMS makes the data provided by the Peace Corps available to AEs through a data services hub to use in determining the applicant's or enrollee's eligibility for financial assistance (including an advance tax credit and cost sharing reduction, which are types of insurance affordability programs) in paying for private health insurance coverage. Peace Corps health benefit plans provide minimum essential coverage, and eligibility for such plans usually precludes eligibility for financial assistance in paying for private coverage. The data provided by the Peace Corps under this matching program will be used by CMS and AEs to authenticate identity, determine eligibility for financial assistance, and determine the amount of the financial assistance.

    Categories of Individuals

    The categories of individuals whose information is involved in the matching program are:

    • Active and recently separated Peace Corps volunteers, identified in data CMS receives from the Peace Corps; and

    • Consumers who apply for or are enrolled in private insurance coverage under a qualified health plan through a federally-facilitated health insurance exchange (and other relevant individuals, such as applicants' and enrollees' household members), whose records are matched against the data CMS receives from the Peace Corps.

    Categories of Records

    The categories of records which will be provided by the Peace Corps to CMS in this matching program are identity records and minimum essential coverage period records, consisting of these data elements:

    1. Record type.

    2. data record number.

    3. social security number of Peace Corps volunteer.

    4. last name of Peace Corps volunteer.

    5. middle name of Peace Corps volunteer.

    6. first name of Peace Corps volunteer.

    7. gender of Peace Corps volunteer.

    8. date of birth of Peace Corps volunteer.

    9. Peace Corps volunteer coverage begin date.

    10. Peace Corps volunteer actual end date.

    11. Peace Corps volunteer projected coverage end date. CMS will not send any data about individual applicants/enrollees to the Peace Corps in order to receive this data about Peace Corps volunteers. The Peace Corps will send CMS a bulk file each day from Tuesday through Saturday, which will contain this data for all active Peace Corps volunteers and all Peace Corps volunteers who left service within the prior three months.

    System(s) of Records

    The records used in this matching program about Peace Corps volunteers will be disclosed to CMS from the Peace Corps system of records identified below, and will be matched against applicant/enrollee records in the CMS system of records identified below:

    A. System of Records Maintained by CMS

    • MCMS Health Insurance Exchanges System (HIX), CMS System No. 09-70-0560, last published in full at 78 FR 63211 (Oct. 23, 2013), as amended at 83 FR 6591 (Feb. 14, 2018).

    B. System of Records Maintained by the Peace Corps

    • Peace Corps Manual Section 897, Attachment B, PC-17 Volunteer Applicant and Service Records System, 75 FR 53000 (Oct. 14, 2010). Routine use (i), which authorizes disclosure of records “to verify active or former Volunteer service,” authorizes the Peace Corps' disclosures to CMS.

    [FR Doc. 2018-25639 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-03-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of meetings of the AIDS Research Advisory Committee, NIAID.

    The meetings will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: AIDS Research Advisory Committee, NIAID.

    Date: January 28, 2019.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Mark A. Mueller, Executive Secretary, AIDS Research Advisory Committee, Division of AIDS, NIAID/NIH, 5601 Fishers Lane, RM 8D39, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-2308, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: AIDS Research Advisory Committee, NIAID.

    Date: June 3, 2019.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Mark A. Mueller, Executive Secretary, AIDS Research Advisory Committee, Division of AIDS, NIAID/NIH, 5601 Fishers Lane, RM 8D39 Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-2308, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: AIDS Research Advisory Committee, NIAID.

    Date: September 9, 2019.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms, E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Mark A. Mueller, Executive Secretary, AIDS Research Advisory Committee, Division of AIDS, NIAID/NIH, 5601 Fishers Lane, RM 8D39, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-2308, [email protected].

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    (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 20, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25629 Filed 11-23-18; 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; MID Independent SEP.

    Date: December 13, 2018.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 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: Robert C. Unfer, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3F40A, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5035, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; MID Independent SEP.

    Date: December 18, 2018.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 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: Robert C. Unfer, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3F40A, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5035, [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 20, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25628 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Office of the Director; Notice of Charter Renewal

    In accordance with Title 41 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Section 102-3.65(a), notice is hereby given that the Charter for the National Toxicology Program Board of Scientific Counselors was renewed for an additional two-year period on November 14, 2018.

    It is determined that the National Toxicology Program Board of Scientific Counselors is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the National Toxicology Program by law, and that these duties can best be performed through the advice and counsel of this group.

    Inquiries may be directed to Claire Harris, Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 1000, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (Mail code 4875), Telephone (301) 496-2123, or [email protected]

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25627 Filed 11-23-18; 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 Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of meetings of the National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council.

    The meetings will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The 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 Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council.

    Date: January 28, 2019.

    Open: 10:30 a.m. to 11:40 a.m.

    Agenda: Report from the Institute Director.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 11:40 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation Subcommittee.

    Date: January 28, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room D, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building Conference Room D, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Subcommittee.

    Date: January 28, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms F1/F2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms F1/F2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Subcommittee.

    Date: January 28, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room A, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Program advisory discussions and reports from division staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation Subcommittee.

    Date: June 3, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room D, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room D, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Subcommittee.

    Date: June 3, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms F1/F2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms F1/F2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council; Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Subcommittee.

    Date: June 3, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room A, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Program advisory discussions and reports from division staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms, E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council.

    Date: June 3, 2019.

    Open: 10:30 a.m. to 11:40 a.m.

    Agenda: Report from the Institute Director.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 11:40 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council; Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Subcommittee.

    Date: September 9, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms F1/F2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms F1/F2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council.

    Date: September 9, 2019.

    Open: 10:30 a.m. to 11:40 a.m.

    Agenda: Report from the Institute Director.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892,

    Closed: 11:40 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council; Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation Subcommittee.

    Date: September 9, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room D, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Reports from the Division Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room D, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council; Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Subcommittee.

    Date: September 9, 2019.

    Closed: 8:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Room A, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to adjournment.

    Agenda: Program advisory discussions and reports from division staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1/E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Matthew J. Fenton, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm 4F50, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7291, [email protected].

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: www.niaid.nih.gov/facts/facts.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (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 20, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25630 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; NIMH Pathway to Independence Awards (K99/R00).

    Date: November 28, 2018.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: David W. Miller, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6140, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-443-9734, [email protected]

    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 No. 93.242, Mental Health Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: November 19, 2018. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25570 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Approval of Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. (Donaldsonville, LA) as a Commercial Gauger AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. (Donaldsonville, LA) as a commercial gauger.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. (Donaldsonville, LA), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of May 8, 2018.

    DATES:

    Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. (Donaldsonville, LA) was approved as a commercial gauger as of May 8, 2018. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for May 2021.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melanie Glass, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 19 CFR 151.13, that Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. 2382 Highway 1 South, Donaldsonville, LA 70346, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13.

    Marine Technical Surveyors, Inc. (Donaldsonville, LA) is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 3 Tank gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 12 Calculations. 17 Maritime Measurements. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories. Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25610 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Approval of Laboratory Service Inc. (Savannah, GA) as a Commercial Gauger AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of approval of Laboratory Service Inc. (Savannah, GA) as a commercial gauger.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Laboratory Service Inc. (Savannah, GA), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of September 14, 2016.

    DATES:

    Laboratory Service Inc. (Savannah, GA) was approved as a commercial gauger and laboratory as of September 14, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for September 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melanie Glass, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 19 CFR 151.13, that Laboratory Service Inc. 1084 W. Lathrop, Savannah, GA 31415, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13.

    Laboratory Service Inc. (Savannah, GA) is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 3 Tank gauging. 7 Temperature determination. 17 Maritime measurement. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories. Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25609 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Approval of WFR Metering, Inc. (Houston, TX), as a Commercial Gauger AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of WFR Metering, Inc. (Houston, TX) as a commercial gauger.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that WFR Metering, Inc. (Houston, TX), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of July 12, 2017.

    DATES:

    WFR Metering, Inc. (Houston, TX) was approved and accredited as a commercial gauger as of July 12, 2017. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for July 2020.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melanie Glass, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 19 CFR 151.13, that WFR Metering, Inc. 450 Gears Road. Ste 105, Houston, TX 77067 has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13.

    WFR Metering, Inc. (Houston, TX) is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API Chapters Title 8 Sampling.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.

    http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25605 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of Atlantic Product Services, Inc. (Carteret, NJ), as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of Atlantic Product Services, Inc. (Carteret, NJ), as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Atlantic Product Services, Inc. (Carteret, NJ), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of May 24, 2018.

    DATES:

    Atlantic Product Services, Inc. (Carteret, NJ) was accredited and approved, as a commercial gauger and laboratory as of May 24, 2018. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for May 2021.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Justin Shey, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that Atlantic Product Services, Inc., 2 Terminal Rd., KMI Bldg. OB2, Carteret, NJ 07008 has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Atlantic Product Services, Inc. is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 1 Vocabulary. 3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 11 Physical Properties. 12 Calculations. 17 Marine Measurement. Atlantic Product Services, Inc. is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM): CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D 287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products (Hydrometer Method). 27-04 D 95 Standard Test Method for Water in Petroleum Products and Bituminous Materials by Distillation. 27-05 D 4928 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oils by Coulometric Karl Fischer Titration. 27-06 D 473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-08 D 86 Standard Test Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products at Atmospheric Pressure. 27-11 D 445 Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity). 27-13 D 4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-14 D 2622 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products by Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-46 D 5002 Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Crude Oils by Digital Density Analyzer. 27-48 D 4052 Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Liquids by Digital Density Meter. 27-50 D 93 Standard Test Methods for Flash Point by Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester. 27-53 D 2709 Standard Test Method for Water and Sediment in Middle Distillate Fuels by Centrifuge. 27-58 D 5191 Standard Test Method For Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Mini Method). N/A D 5769 Determination of Benzene, Toluene, and Total Aromatics in Finished Gasolines by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. N/A D 3606 Standard Test Method for Determination of Benzene and Toluene in Finished Motor and Aviation Gasoline by Gas Chromatography. N/A D 2700 Standard Test Method for Motor Octane Number of Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel. N/A D 2699 Standard Test Method for Research Octane Number of Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel. N/A D 130 Standard Test Method for Corrosiveness to Copper from Petroleum Products by Copper Strip Test. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories. Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25604 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation of Coastal Gulf and International (Luling, LA), as a Commercial Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation of Coastal Gulf and International (Luling, LA), as a commercial laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Coastal Gulf and International (Luling, LA), has been accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes as of July 25, 2018.

    DATES:

    Coastal Gulf and International (Luling, LA) was accredited, as a commercial laboratory as of July 25, 2018. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for July 2020.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Justin Shey, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12, that Coastal Gulf and International, 13615 River Road, Luling, LA 70070 has been accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12.

    Coastal Gulf and International is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

    CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D 287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products (Hydrometer Method). 27-02 D 1298 Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), or API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Liquid Petroleum Products by Hydrometer Method.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25611 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that SGS North America, Inc., has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of July 20, 2018.

    DATES:

    Applicable Dates: The accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on July 20, 2018. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for July 2021.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Stephen Cassata, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that SGS North America, Inc., 614 Heron Drive, Bridgeport, NJ 08014, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. SGS North America, Inc., is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API
  • chapters
  • Title
    1 Vocabulary. 3 Tank gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 12 Calculations. 17 Maritime Measurements.

    SGS North America, Inc., is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

    CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products (Hydrometer Method). 27-05 D4928 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oils by Coulometric Karl Fischer Titration. 27-06 D473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-07 D4807 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oil by Membrane Filtration. 27-08 D86 Standard Test Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products at Atmospheric Pressure. 27-11 D445 Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids. 27-13 D4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-48 D4052 Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Liquids by Digital Density Meter. 27-50 D93 Standard Test Methods for Flash-Point by Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester. 27-53 D2709 Standard Test Method for Water and Sediment in Middle Distillate Fuels by Centrifuge. 27-58 D5191 Standard Test Method For Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Mini Method). N/A D97 Standard Test Method for Pour Point of Petroleum Products. N/A D130 Standard Test Method for Corrosiveness to Copper from Petroleum Products by Copper Strip Test. N/A D381 Standard Test Method for Gum Content in Fuels by Jet Evaporation. N/A D525 Standard Test Method for Oxidation Stability of Gasoline (Induction Period Method). N/A D664 Standard Test Method for Acid Number of Petroleum Products by Potentiometric Titration. N/A D1319 Standard Test Method for Hydrocarbon Types in Liquid Petroleum Products by Fluorescent Indicator Adsorption. N/A D2699 Standard Test Method for Research Octane Number of Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel. N/A D2700 Standard Test Method for Motor Octane Number of Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel. N/A D3237 Standard Test Method for Lead in Gasoline by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy. N/A D3606 Standard Test Method for Determination of Benzene and Toluene in Finished Motor and Aviation Gasoline by Gas Chromatography. N/A D4377 Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity). N/A D5453 Standard Test Method for Determination of Total Sulfur in Light Hydrocarbons, Spark Ignition Engine Fuel, Diesel Engine Fuel, and Engine Oil by Ultraviolet Fluorescence. N/A D5599 Standard Test Method for Determination of Oxygenates in Gasoline by Gas Chromatography and Oxygen Selective Flame Ionization Detection. N/A D5708 Standard Test Methods for Determination of Nickel, Vanadium, and Iron in Crude Oils and Residual Fuels by Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Atomic Emission Spectrometry. N/A D5769 Determination of Benzene, Toluene, and Total Aromatics in Finished Gasolines by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. N/A D6377 Standard Test Method for Determination of Vapor Pressure of Crude Oil: VPCRx (Expansion Method). N/A D7346 Standard Test Method for No Flow Point and Pour Point of Petroleum Products and Liquid Fuels. N/A D7671 Standard Test Method for Corrosiveness to Silver by Automotive Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel-Silver Strip Method. N/A D7689 Standard Test Method for Cloud Point of Petroleum Products and Liquid Fuels (Mini Method).

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories: http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25603 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Approval of Coastal Gulf and International (Baton Rouge, LA), as a Commercial Gauger AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of approval of Coastal Gulf and International (Baton Rouge, LA), as a commercial gauger.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Coastal Gulf and International (Baton Rouge, LA), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of July 26, 2018.

    DATES:

    Coastal Gulf and International (Baton Rouge, LA) was approved, as a commercial gauger as of July 26, 2018. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for July 2021.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Justin Shey, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.13, that Coastal Gulf and International, 2668 Rome Dr., Baton Rouge, LA 70814 has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13. Coastal Gulf and International is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API
  • chapters
  • Title
    3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 12 Calculations. 17 Marine Measurement.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25608 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Approval of Coastal Gulf and International (Corpus Christi, TX), as a Commercial Gauger AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of approval of Coastal Gulf and International (Corpus Christi, TX), as a commercial gauger.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Coastal Gulf and International (Corpus Christi, TX), has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of August 7, 2018.

    DATES:

    Coastal Gulf and International (Corpus Christi, TX) was approved, as a commercial gauger as of August 7, 2018. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for August 2021.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Justin Shey, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.13, that Coastal Gulf and International, 4738 Neptune Dr., Corpus Christi, TX 78405 has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13. Coastal Gulf and International is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API
  • chapters
  • Title
    3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 12 Calculations. 17 Marine Measurement.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the website listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: November 13, 2018. Patricia Hawes Coleman, Acting Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25607 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-7001-N-58] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Housing Trust Fund (HTF) Program AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806, Email: OIRA [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QMAC, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-5535. This is not a toll-free number. Person with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on July 5, 2018 at 83 FR 31413.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Housing Trust Fund (HTF) Program.

    OMB Approval Number: 2506-New.

    Type of Request: New collection.

    Form Number: SF-1199A, HUD-27055, SF-424, SF-425.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The information collected through HUD's Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) (24 CFR 93.402) is used by HUD Field Offices, HUD Headquarters, and HTF Grantees. The information on program funds committed and disbursed is used by HUD to track grantee performance and to determine compliance with the statutory 24-month commitment deadline and the regulatory 5-year expenditure deadline (§ 93.400(d)). The project-specific property, tenant, owner, and financial data is used to make program management decisions about how well program participants are achieving the statutory objectives of the HTF Program. Program management reports are generated by IDIS to provide data on the status of program participants' commitment and disbursement of HTF funds. These reports are provided to HUD staff as well as to HTF grantees.

    Financial, project, tenant and owner documentation are used to determine compliance with HTF Program cost limits (§ 93.404), eligible activities (§ 93.200), and eligible costs (§ 93.201). Other information collected under Subpart H (Other Federal Requirements) is primarily intended for local program management and is only viewed by HUD during routine monitoring visits. The written agreement with the owner for long-term obligation (§ 93.404(b)) and tenant protections (§ 93.303) are required to ensure that the property owner complies with these important elements of the HTF Program and are also reviewed by HUD during monitoring visits. HUD reviews all other data collection requirements during monitoring to assure compliance with the requirements of the Act and other related laws and authorities.

    HUD tracks grantee performance and compliance with the requirements of 24 CFR parts 91 and 93. Grantees use the required information in the execution of their program, and to gauge their own performance in relation to stated goals.

    Estimated Number of Respondents/Estimated Number of Responses:

    Regulatory section Information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of
  • response
  • Responses
  • per annum
  • Burden hour
  • per
  • response
  • Annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • Hourly cost
  • per
  • response
  • Annual cost
    § 93.100(a) Notification of intent to participate 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 $39.07 $8,751.68 2 CFR 200.200 Form SF-424 Family 56.00 1.00 56.00 9.00 504.00 39.07 19,691.28 2 CFR 200.200 Form SF-425 56.00 1.00 56.00 1.50 84.00 39.07 3,281.88 31 U.S.C. 3512 HUD Form 27055 56.00 1.00 56.00 0.50 28.00 39.07 1,093.96 § 93.100(b) Submission of Consolidated Plan 56.00 0.20 11.20 40.00 448.00 39.07 17,503.36 § 91.220 Action Plan 56.00 1.00 56.00 10.00 560.00 39.07 21,879.20 § 93.101 Distribution of assistance 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.150(a) Site and Neighborhood Standards 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.150(b) New rental housing site and neighborhood requirements 56.00 1.00 56.00 5.00 280.00 39.07 10,939.60 § 93.200(b) Establishment of terms of assistance 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.200(d) Terminated projects 1.00 1.00 1.00 20.00 20.00 39.07 781.40 § 93.201(b)(2) Establish refinancing guidelines 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.300(a) Establish maximum per-unit development subsidy amount 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.300(b) Underwriting and subsidy layering 168.00 1.00 168.00 4.00 672.00 39.07 26,255.04 § 93.301(a) Property standards—New construction 56.00 1.00 56.00 3.00 168.00 39.07 6,563.76 § 93.302(b) Establish rent limitations 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.302(c) Establish utility allowance 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.302(d)(1) Establish affordability requirements 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.302(d)(3) Establish preemptive procedures before foreclosure 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.302(e)(1) Initial income determination 1,821.00 1.00 1,821.00 1.00 1,821.00 39.07 71,146.47 § 93.302(e)(1) Annual income determination 5,600.00 1.00 5,600.00 0.25 1,400.00 39.07 54,698.00 § 93.304(f) Establish resale or recapture provisions 0.00 1.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 39.07 0.00 § 93.304(m)(1) Underwriting standards for homeownership assistance 0.00 1.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 39.07 0.00 § 93.304(m)(2) Establish policies for anti-predatory lending 0.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 39.07 0.00 § 93.304(m)(3) Establish reasonable refinancing for subordinated HTF loans 0.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 39.07 0.00 § 93.305(1) Establish modest housing guidelines 0.00 1.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 39.07 0.00 § 93.350(a) Nondiscrimination and equal opportunity procedures 56.00 1.00 56.00 8.00 448.00 39.07 17,503.36 § 93.350(b)(1) Affirmative marketing procedures 56.00 1.00 56.00 10.00 560.00 39.07 21,879.20 § 93.351 Lead-based paint 56.00 1.00 56.00 1.00 56.00 39.07 2,187.92 § 93.352 Displacement, relocation, and acquisition procedures 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.353 Conflict of interest adjudication 2.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 8.00 39.07 312.56 § 93.354 Funding Accountability and Transparency Act 56.00 12.00 672.00 1.00 672.00 39.07 26,255.04 § 93.356(b) VAWA notification requirements 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.356(d) VAWA lease term/addendum 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.356(f) VAWA Emergency transfer plan 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.402(b)(1) IDIS—Project set-up 168.00 1.00 168.00 1.00 168.00 39.07 6,563.76 § 93.402(c)(1) IDIS—HTF drawdowns 168.00 1.00 168.00 1.00 168.00 39.07 6,563.76 § 93.402(d)(1) IDIS—Project completion 168.00 1.00 168.00 1.00 168.00 39.07 6,563.76 § 93.403(a) Program income administration 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.403(b)(1) Repayment for ineligible activities 2.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 10.00 39.07 390.70 § 93.404(b) Written agreement 168.00 1.00 168.00 2.00 336.00 39.07 13,127.52 § 93.404(d)(1) Project completion inspection 168.00 1.00 168.00 2.00 336.00 39.07 13,127.52 § 93.404(d)(2)(i) Onsite inspection upon completion 560.00 1.00 560.00 2.00 1,120.00 39.07 43,758.40 § 3.404(d)(2)(ii) Onsite inspections post completion 504.00 1.00 504.00 2.00 1,008.00 39.07 39,382.56 § 3.404(d)(2)(iv) Project owner annual certification 168.00 1.00 168.00 2.00 336.00 39.07 13,127.52 § 93.404(e) Annual financial oversight of 10 or more units 168.00 1.00 168.00 2.00 336.00 39.07 13,127.52 § 93.405 Uniform administrative requirements 56.00 1.00 56.00 4.00 224.00 39.07 8,751.68 § 93.406(a) Annual CFR 200 audit 56.00 1.00 56.00 10.00 560.00 39.07 21,879.20 § 93.407(a)(1) Program recordkeeping 56.00 1.00 56.00 8.00 448.00 39.07 17,503.36 § 93.407(a)(2) Project recordkeeping 560.00 1.00 560.00 2.00 1,120.00 39.07 43,758.40 § 93.407(a)(3) Financial recordkeeping 56.00 12.00 672.00 2.00 1,344.00 39.07 52,510.08 § 93.407(a)(4) Program administration records 56.00 12.00 672.00 8.00 5,376.00 39.07 210,040.32 § 93.407(a)(5) Records concerning other Federal requirements 56.00 1.00 56.00 10.00 560.00 39.07 21,879.20 § 93.408 Performance reports 56.00 12.00 672.00 2.50 1,680.00 39.07 65,637.60 § 93.451 Annual performance reviews 56.00 1.00 56.00 8.00 448.00 39.07 17,503.36 Total 12,298.00 14,717.20 26,835.00 1,048,443.45 Total cost: 26,835.00 hours * $39.07 (Hourly rate for GS12).
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

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

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    C. Authority

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Anna P. Guido, Department Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25655 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-6131-N-02] The Performance Review Board AGENCY:

    Office of the Deputy Secretary, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Amended notice of appointments.

    SUMMARY:

    On October 18, 2018, the Department of Housing and Urban Development published a notice announcing the establishment of two Performance Review Boards to make recommendations to the appointing authority on the performance of its senior executives. The notice inadvertently omitted a member included in the Deputy Secretary's September 24, 2018, memorandum appointing individuals to the Performance Review Board. Today's notice amends the October 18, 2018, notice by adding Nelson Bregon to the Departmental Performance Review Board to review career SES performance.

    For the convenience of the reader, the entire corrected list of membership on the Departmental Performance Review Boards is provided. Pamela H. Patenaude (Chair), Patricia Hoban-Moore, Felicia Purifoy, Danielle Bastarache, John Benison, Nelson Bregon, Virginia Sardone, Bryan Greene, Ivery Himes, George Tomchick, and Kurt Usowski will serve as members of the Departmental Performance Review Board to review career SES performance. Seth D. Appleton, Maren Kasper, John Bravacos, Ralph Gaines, and Joseph Grassi will serve as members of the Departmental Performance Review Board to review noncareer SES performance. The address is: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC 20410-0050.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Persons desiring any further information about the Performance Review Board and its members may contact Lynette Warren, Director, Office of Executive Resources, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC 20410. Telephone (202) 708-1381. (This is not a toll-free number).

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Pamela H. Patenaude, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25648 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-7000-N-02] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Legal Instructions Concerning Applications for Full Insurance Benefits—Assignment of Multifamily Mortgages to the Secretary AGENCY:

    Office of the General Counsel, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: January 25, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Nacheshia Foxx, Reports Liaison Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Arnette Georges, Assistant General Counsel for Multifamily Mortgage Division, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 9230, Washington, DC 20410-0500 telephone 202-402-3826. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Foxx.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Legal Instructions Concerning Applications for Full Insurance Benefits—Assignment of Multifamily Mortgage to the Secretary.

    OMB Approval Number: 2510-0006.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use: Mortgagees of FHA-insured mortgages may receive mortgage insurance benefits upon assignment of mortgages to the Secretary. In connection with the assignment, legal documents (e.g., mortgage, mortgage note, security agreement, title insurance policy) must be submitted to the Department. The instructions contained in the Legal Instructions Concerning Applications for Full Insurance Benefits—Assigment of Multifamily Mortgage describe the documents to be submitted and the procedures for submission.

    The Legal Instructions Concerning Applications for Full Insurance Benefits—Assigment of Multifamily Mortgage, in its current form and structure, can be found at https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/LEGINSTRFULLINSBEN.PDF.

    HUD proposes to revise this document to reflect changes in the multifamily rental and healthcare programs since 2011, address physical documentation requirements for electronic UCC filings, update instructions for Section 232-insured loans that were processed under LEAN and/or portfolio structures, and other clarifying changes to reflect current HUD requiments and policies, as well as current practices in real estate, title insurance and mortgage financing transactions.

    Agency Form Numbers, if Applicable: N/A.

    Members of Affected Public: FHA-approved Mortgagees who have or will have multifamily rental or healthcare loans.

    Estimation of the total numbers of hours needed to prepare the information collection including number of respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response:

    Number of respondents Burden
  • hours
  • Frequency of response Total burden
  • hours
  • 110 26 Occasion 2,860
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

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

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses or revising the physical documentions requirements for electronically filed or issued response;

    (5) Ways to reflect changes to the Security Instrument (HUD 94000M), which also serves as the Security Agreement;

    (6) Ways to reflect bonds, master lease, or condominium structures in multifamily rental projects;

    (7) Ways to update the instructions for assigning non-traditional loan documents (including LEAN-related documents) and acceptable recording/assignment criteria; and

    (8) Ways to update the instruactions to accommodate portfolio structures and other changes in FHA's Healthcare Programs.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 1701z-1 Research and Demonstrations.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Ariel Pereira, Associate General Counsel for Legislation & Regulations.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25656 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-7001-N-57] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 Reporting NSP2 AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax:202-395-5806, Email: OIRA [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QMAC, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-5535. This is not a toll-free number. Person with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on August 27, 2018 at 83 FR 43700.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 Reporting NSP2.

    OMB Approval Number: 2506-0185.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use: This information describes the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP2). The data required includes program level, project level and beneficiary level information collected and reported on by NSP2 grantees. The data identifies who benefits from the NSP2 program and how statutory requirement are satisfied. The respondents are State, local government, non-profit and consortium applicants.

    Estimated Number of Respondents/Estimated Number of Responses:

    Description of
  • information collection
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses
  • Total
  • number of
  • responses
  • Hours
  • per
  • response
  • Total
  • hours
  • Cost per
  • response
  • Total cost
    Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Year 1) Online Quarterly Reporting via DRGR 56.00 4.00 224.00 4.00 896.00 36.24 32,471.04 DRGR voucher submissions 56.00 38.00 2,128.00 0.18 383.04 36.24 13,881.37 Total Paperwork Burden 112.00 1,279.04 36.24 46,352.41 (Year 2) Online Quarterly Reporting via DRGR 42.00 4.00 168.00 4.00 672.00 36.24 24,353.28 Quarterly Voucher Submissions 42.00 38.00 1596.00 0.18 287.28 36.24 10,411.03 Annual Reporting via DRGR/IDIS 14.00 1.00 14.00 3.00 42.00 36.24 1,522.08 Annual Income Certification Reporting 14.00 1.00 14.00 3.00 42.00 36.24 1,522.08 Total Paperwork Burden 112.00 1,043.28 36.24 37,808.47 (Year 3) Online Quarterly Reporting via DRGR 22.00 4.00 88.00 4.00 352.00 36.24 12,756.48 Annual Reporting via DRGR/IDIS 34.00 1.00 34.00 4.00 136.00 36.24 4,928.64 Quarterly Voucher Submissions 22.00 4.00 88.00 0.20 17.60 36.24 637.82 Annual Income Certification Reporting 34.00 1.00 34.00 3.00 102.00 36.24 3,696.48 Total Paperwork Burden 112.00 607.60 36.24 22,019.42
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

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

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: November 16, 2018. Anna P. Guido, Department Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25654 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-7001-N-56] 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Multifamily Financial Management Template AGENCY:

    Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD submitted the proposed information collection requirement described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 30 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806, Email: OIRA [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Inez C. Downs, Reports Management Officer, QMAC, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; email [email protected], or telephone 202-402-8046. This is not a toll-free number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Downs.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on August 16, 2018 at 83 FR 40780.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Multifamily Financial Management Template.

    OMB Approved Number: 2502-0551.

    Type of Request: Reinstatement without change, of previously approved collection.

    Form Number: None.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Owners of certain HUD-insured and HUD assisted properties are required to submit annual financial statements to HUD via the internet in the HUD prescribed format and chart of accounts, and in accordance with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Most owners of Multifamily Housing (MFH) properties are required to submit annual financial statements to HUD. In accordance with the Department's Uniform Financial Reporting Standards (UFRS) regulation, 24 CFR part 5, owners of certain HUD-insured and HUD-assisted properties are required to submit annual financial statements electronically to HUD via the internet in the HUD-prescribed format and chart of accounts, and in accordance with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The Department uses this information to monitor the owner's compliance with regulatory requirements and to assess fiscal performance.

    Respondents: Business or other for profit.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 26,995.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 26,995.

    Frequency of Response: 1.

    Average Hours per Response: 14.

    Total Estimated Burden: 377,930.

    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

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

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond: Including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: November 14, 2018. Inez C. Downs, Department Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25653 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-7007-N-07] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Manufactured Housing Survey AGENCY:

    Office of Policy Development and Research, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comments from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: January 25, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-5534 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410-5000; email Anna P. Guido at [email protected] or telephone 202-402-5535 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Guido.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the proposed collection of information described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Manufactured Housing Survey.

    OMB Approval Number: 2528-0029.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Form Number: No forms.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The Manufactured Housing Survey collects data on the characteristics of newly manufactured homes placed for residential use. Key data collected includes sales price and the number of units placed and sold within 4 months of shipment. Other selected housing characteristics collected include size, location, and titling. HUD uses the statistics to respond to a Congressional mandate in the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 5424 note, which requires HUD to collect and report manufactured home sales and price information for the nation, census regions, states, and selected metropolitan areas and to monitor whether new manufactured homes are being placed on owned rather than rented lots. HUD also used these data to monitor total housing production and its affordability.

    Furthermore, the Manufactured Housing Survey serves as the basis for HUD's mandated indexing of loan limits. Section 2145(b) of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) of 2008 requires HUD to develop a method of indexing to annually adjust Title I manufactured home loan limits. This index is based on manufactured housing price data collected by this survey. Section 2145 of the HERA of 2008 also amends the maximum loan limits for manufactured home loans insured under Title I. HUD implemented the revised loan limits, as shown below, for all manufactured home loans for which applications are received on or after March 3, 2009.

    Loan type Purpose Old loan
  • limit
  • New loan
  • limit
  • MANUFACTURED HOME IMPROVEMENT LOAN For financing alterations, repairs and improvements upon or in connection with existing manufactured homes $17,500 $25,090 MANUFACTURED HOME UNIT(S) To purchase or refinance a Manufactured Home unit (s) 48,600 69,678 LOT LOAN To purchase and develop a lot on which to place a manufactured home unit 16,200 23,226 COMBINATION LOAN FOR LOT AND HOME To purchase or refinance a manufactured home and lot on which to place the home 64,800 92,904

    Method of Collection: The methodology for collecting information on new manufactured homes involves contacting dealers from a monthly sample of new manufactured homes shipped by manufacturers. The units are sampled from lists obtained from the Institute for Building Technology and Safety. Dealers that take shipment of the selected homes are mailed a survey form four months after shipment for recording the status of the manufactured home.

    Affected Public: Business firms or other for-profit institutions.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,860.

    Estimated Time per Response: 20 min.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,620.

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

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Legal Authority: Title 42 U.S.C. 5424 note, Title 13 U.S.C. Section 8(b), and Title 12, U.S.C., Section 1701z-1.

    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice solicits comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

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

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    C. Authority

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: November 9, 2018. Todd M. Richardson, General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25649 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900.253G] Notice To Acquire Land Into Trust for the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final agency determination.

    SUMMARY:

    The Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs has made a final determination to acquire 25.49 acres, more or less into trust for the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon on October 31, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Sharlene M. Round Face, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1849 C Street NW, MS-4642-MIB, Washington, DC 20240, telephone (202) 208-3615.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is published in the exercise of authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs by part 209 of the Departmental Manual, and is published to comply with the requirement of 25 CFR 151.12(c)(2)(ii) that notice of the decision to acquire land in trust be promptly published in the Federal Register.

    On October 31, 2018, the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs issued a decision to accept land in trust for Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon under the authority of The Grand Ronde Restoration Act of November 22, 1983, Public Law 98-165 and Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (48 Stat. 984).

    Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, Tillamook County, Oregon Legal Descriptions Containing 25.49 Acres, More or Less

    The land referred to as former “Kilchis Point Property” property, herein and is described as: Tax Lots 100 and 200 Township 1S, Range 10W, Section 2—Kilchis Point property

    Parcel 1: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 9, Block 5, Barview Addition to Bay City and the P.O.B. of the following described tract; thence East to the Southeast corner of said Lot 9; thence South to the Southwest corner of Lot 7, Block 10, Barview Addition to Bay City; thence East to the Southeast corner of said Lot 7; thence South to the Southwest corner of Lot 6, Block 13, Barview Addition to Bay City; thence East to the Southeast corner of said Lot 6; thence South to the Southwest corner of Lot 12, Block 13, Barview Addition to Bay City; thence East to the Southeast corner of said Lot 12; thence South along the West lines of Lots 4 and 13, Block 19, and Lots 4 and 13, Block 22 to the South line of Kelchis Street; thence West to the Southwest corner of Adams Street and Kelchis Street; thence North along the West sideline of Adams Street to a point West of the Northwest corner of Lot 8, Block 13, Barview Addition, said point being at the intersection of the West sideline and the Westerly extension of the South line of Clam Street; thence West to the line of mean low water of Tillamook Bay; thence in a Northwesterly direction along the line of mean low water of Tillamook Bay to a point that bears West of the Northwest corner of Lot 6, Block 7, Cone and McCoy's Addition; thence East to the line of mean high water of Tillamook Bay; thence in a Southerly direction along the line of mean high water of Tillamook Bay to the P.O.B.

    Parcel 2: Government Lot 1, in Section 3, Township 1 South, Range 10 West of the Willamette Meridian, Tillamook County, Oregon.

    Excepting therefrom any portion of said lot lying within the boundaries of the property conveyed to The Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon by Warranty Deed recorded September 2, 2015, Instrument No. 2015-005452, Records of Tillamook County, Oregon.

    Dated: October 31, 2018. Tara Sweeney, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25692 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary [19XD0120SW/DT10100000/DSW000000.54AB00; OMB Control Number 1035-0003] Agency Information Collection Activities; Application To Withdraw Tribal Funds From Trust Status AGENCY:

    Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of information collection; request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians (OST), we are proposing to renew an information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before January 25, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to the Jeffrey M. Parrillo, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer, Department of the Interior, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Planning and Performance Management Division, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240; or by email to [email protected] Please reference Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number 1035-0003 in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact John Montel by email to [email protected], or by telephone at (202) 208-3939.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

    We are soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the OST; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the OST enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the OST minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Abstract: This notice is for renewal of information collection under OMB regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 that implement the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. These regulations require interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8 (d)). This notice identifies an information collection activity that the OST is submitting to OMB for renewal.

    Public Law 103-412, The American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994, allows Indian tribes on a voluntary basis to take their funds out of trust status within the Department of the Interior (and the Federal Government) in order to manage such funds on their own. 25 CFR part 1200, subpart B, Sec. 1200.13, “How does a tribe apply to withdraw funds?” describes the requirements for application for withdrawal. The Act covers all tribal trust funds including judgment funds as well as some settlements funds, but excludes funds held in Individual Indian Money accounts. Both the Act and the regulations state that upon withdrawal of the funds, the Department of the Interior (and the Federal Government) have no further liability for such funds. Accompanying their application for withdrawal of trust funds, tribes are required to submit a Management Plan for managing the funds being withdrawn, to protect the funds once they are out of trust status.

    This information collection allows the OST to collect the tribes' applications for withdrawal of funds held in trust by the Department of the Interior. If OST did not collect this information, the OST would not be able to comply with the American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994, and tribes would not be able to withdraw funds held for them in trust by the Department of the Interior.

    Title of Collection: Application to Withdraw Tribal Funds from Trust Status, 25 CFR 1200.

    OMB Control Number: 1035-0003.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Tribal governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: One respondent, on average, every three years.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1.

    Estimated Completion Time per Response: 750 hours.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 750.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: Once per tribe per trust fund withdrawal application.

    Total Estimated Annual Non-hour Burden Cost: None.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Jerold Gidner, Principal Deputy Special Trustee, Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25726 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-589 and 731-TA-1394-1395 (Final)] Forged Steel Fittings From China and Italy Determinations

    On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of forged steel fittings from China and Italy that have been found by the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), and to be subsidized by the government of China.

    1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).

    Background

    The Commission instituted these investigations effective October 5, 2017, following receipt of a petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by Bonney Forge Corporation, Mount Union, Pennsylvania, and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Effective May 17, 2018, the Commission established a general schedule for the conduct of the final phase of its investigations on forged steel fittings, following notification of preliminary determinations by Commerce that imports of forged steel fittings from China, Italy, and Taiwan were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)).2 Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission's investigations and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register on June 4, 2018 (83 FR 25715). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on August 2, 2018, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission subsequently issued its final affirmative determination regarding dumped imports of forged steel fittings from Taiwan on September 14, 2018 (83 FR 47640, September 20, 2018). Following notification of final determinations by Commerce that imports of forged steel fittings from Italy and China were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 735(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(a)),3 and subsidized by the government of China within meaning of section 705(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671d(a)),4 notice of the supplemental schedule of the final phase of the Commission's antidumping and countervailing duty investigations with respect to China and Italy was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of October 22, 2018 (83 FR 53295).

    2Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures, 83 FR 22948, May 17, 2018; Forged Steel Fittings From Italy: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures, 83 FR 22954, May 17, 2018; and Forged Steel Fittings from Taiwan: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 22957, May 17, 2018; see also Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 83 FR 11170, March 14, 2018.

    3Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 50339, October 5, 2018 and Forged Steel Fittings from Italy: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 50345, October 5, 2018.

    4Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 83 FR 50342, October 5, 2018.

    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to sections 705(b) and 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on November 19, 2018. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4850 (November 2018), entitled Forged Steel Fittings from China and Italy: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-589 and 731-TA-1394-1395 (Final).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 19, 2018. Katherine Hiner, Supervisory Attorney.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25612 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division United States v. CRH plc, et al.; Response to Public Comment

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. § 16(b)-(h), that one comment was received concerning the proposed Final Judgment in this case, and that comment together with the Response of the United States to Public Comment have been filed with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in United States of America v. CRH plc, et al., Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-1473. Copies of the comment and the United States' Response are available for inspection on the Antitrust Division's website at http://www.justice.gov/atr and at the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Copies of these materials may be obtained from the Antitrust Division upon request and payment of the copying fee set by Department of Justice regulations.

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement. United States District Court for the District of Columbia

    United States of America, Plaintiff, v. CRH PLC, CRH Americas Materials, Inc., and Pounding Mill Quarry Corporation,Defendants.

    Case No. 18-cv-1473-DLF Judge: Dabney L. Friedrich
    RESPONSE OF PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED FINAL JUDGMENT

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (the “APPA” or “Tunney Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 16(b)-(h), the United States hereby responds to the public comment received regarding the proposed Final Judgment in this case. After careful consideration of the submitted comment, the United States continues to believe that the divestiture required by the proposed Final Judgment provides an effective and appropriate remedy for the antitrust violation alleged in the Complaint. In addition, the divestiture has the effect of increasing competitive choices for some customers. As a result of the divestiture, two quarries that previously did not compete—because they were under common ownership—now do. The United States will move the Court for entry of the proposed Final Judgment after the public comment and this response have been published pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 16(d).

    I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

    Defendants CRH plc and CRH Americas Materials, Inc. (collectively, “CRH”) agreed to acquire the assets of Defendant Pounding Mill Quarry Corporation (“Pounding Mill”), which primarily consisted of four aggregate quarries located in West Virginia and Virginia. The United States filed a civil antitrust Complaint on June 22, 2018, seeking to enjoin the proposed acquisition. The Complaint alleged that the likely effect of this acquisition would be to lessen competition substantially in the markets for aggregate and asphalt concrete that are used in West Virginia Department of Transportation (“WVDOT”) road projects in southern West Virginia. This loss of competition likely would result in increased prices and decreased service in these markets. Therefore, the Complaint alleged that the proposed acquisition violates Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18, and should be enjoined.

    Simultaneously with the filing of the Complaint, the United States filed a proposed Final Judgment, a Stipulation signed by Plaintiff and Defendants consenting to entry of the proposed Final Judgment after compliance with the requirements of the Tunney Act, 16 U.S.C. § 16, and a Competitive Impact Statement (“CIS”) describing the transaction and the proposed Final Judgment. The United States published the proposed Final Judgment and the CIS in the Federal Register on July 2, 2018, see 83 Fed. Reg. 30956 (July 2, 2018), and caused summaries of the proposed Final Judgment and CIS, together with directions for the submission of written comments relating to the proposed Final Judgment, to be published in the Washington Post and Bluefield Daily Telegraph from July 2, 2018, through July 10, 2018. The 60-day public comment period ended on September 10, 2018. The United States received one public comment. See Tunney Act Comments of the State of West Virginia on the Proposed Final Judgment (“WV Comment”), attached hereto as Exhibit A.

    II. STANDARD OF REVIEW UNDER THE APPA FOR THE PROPOSED FINAL JUDGMENT

    The Clayton Act, as amended by the APPA, requires that proposed consent judgments in antitrust cases brought by the United States be subject to a 60-day comment period, after which the court shall determine whether entry of the proposed Final Judgment “is in the public interest.” 15 U.S.C. § 16(e)(1). In making that determination, the court, in accordance with the statute as amended in 2004, is required to consider:

    (A) the competitive impact of such judgment, including termination of alleged violations, provisions for enforcement and modification, duration of relief sought, anticipated effects of alternative remedies actually considered, whether its terms are ambiguous, and any other competitive considerations bearing upon the adequacy of such judgment that the court deems necessary to a determination of whether the consent judgment is in the public interest; and

    (B) the impact of entry of such judgment upon competition in the relevant market or markets, upon the public generally and individuals alleging specific injury from the violations set forth in the complaint including consideration of the public benefit, if any, to be derived from a determination of the issues at trial.

    15 U.S.C. § 16(e)(1)(A) & (B). In considering these statutory factors, the court's inquiry is necessarily a limited one as the government is entitled to “broad discretion to settle with the defendant within the reaches of the public interest.” United States v. Microsoft Corp., 56 F.3d 1448, 1461 (D.C. Cir. 1995); see generally United States v. SBC Commc'ns, Inc., 489 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2007) (assessing public interest standard under the Tunney Act); United States v. U.S. Airways Group, Inc., 38 F. Supp. 3d 69, 75 (D.D.C. 2014) (explaining that the “court's inquiry is limited” in Tunney Act settlements); United States v. InBev N.V./S.A., No. 08-1965 (JR), 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84787, at *3 (D.D.C. Aug. 11, 2009) (noting that the court's review of a consent judgment is limited and only inquires “into whether the government's determination that the proposed remedies will cure the antitrust violations alleged in the complaint was reasonable, and whether the mechanisms to enforce the final judgment are clear and manageable”).

    As the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has held, under the APPA a court considers, among other things, the relationship between the remedy secured and the specific allegations in the government's complaint, whether the decree is sufficiently clear, whether its enforcement mechanisms are sufficient, and whether the decree may positively harm third parties. See Microsoft, 56 F.3d at 1458-62. With respect to the adequacy of the relief secured by the decree, a court may not “engage in an unrestricted evaluation of what relief would best serve the public.” United States v. BNS, Inc., 858 F.2d 456, 462 (9th Cir. 1988) (quoting United States v. Bechtel Corp., 648 F.2d 660, 666 (9th Cir. 1981)); see also Microsoft, 56 F.3d at 1460-62; United States v. Alcoa, Inc., 152 F. Supp. 2d 37, 40 (D.D.C. 2001); InBev, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84787, at *3. Instead:

    [t]he balancing of competing social and political interests affected by a proposed antitrust consent decree must be left, in the first instance, to the discretion of the Attorney General. The court's role in protecting the public interest is one of insuring that the government has not breached its duty to the public in consenting to the decree. The court is required to determine not whether a particular decree is the one that will best serve society, but whether the settlement is “within the reaches of the public interest.” More elaborate requirements might undermine the effectiveness of antitrust enforcement by consent decree.

    Bechtel, 648 F.2d at 666 (emphasis added) (citations omitted).1

    1See also BNS, 858 F.2d at 464 (holding that the court's “ultimate authority under the [APPA] is limited to approving or disapproving the consent decree”); United States v. Gillette Co., 406 F. Supp. 713, 716 (D. Mass. 1975) (noting that, in this way, the court is constrained to “look at the overall picture not hypercritically, nor with a microscope, but with an artist's reducing glass”).

    In determining whether a proposed settlement is in the public interest, a district court “must accord deference to the government's predictions about the efficacy of its remedies, and may not require that the remedies perfectly match the alleged violations.” SBC Commc'ns, 489 F. Supp. 2d at 17; see also U.S. Airways, 38 F. Supp. 3d at 74-75 (noting that a court should not reject the proposed remedies because it believes others are preferable and that room must be made for the government to grant concessions in the negotiation process for settlements); Microsoft, 56 F.3d at 1461 (noting the need for courts to be “deferential to the government's predictions as to the effect of the proposed remedies”); United States v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., 272 F. Supp. 2d 1, 6 (D.D.C. 2003) (noting that the court should grant “due respect to the government's prediction as to the effect of proposed remedies, its perception of the market structure, and its views of the nature of the case”). The ultimate question is whether “the remedies [obtained in the decree are] so inconsonant with the allegations charged as to fall outside of the `reaches of the public interest.' ” Microsoft, 56 F.3d at 1461 (quoting United States v. Western Elec. Co., 900 F.2d 283, 309 (D.C. Cir. 1990)). To meet this standard, the United States “need only provide a factual basis for concluding that the settlements are reasonably adequate remedies for the alleged harms.” SBC Commc'ns, 489 F. Supp. 2d at 17.

    Moreover, the court's role under the APPA is limited to reviewing the remedy in relationship to the violations that the United States has alleged in its complaint, and does not authorize the court to “construct [its] own hypothetical case and then evaluate the decree against that case.” Microsoft, 56 F.3d at 1459; see also U.S. Airways, 38 F. Supp. 3d at 75 (noting that the court must simply determine whether there is a factual foundation for the government's decisions such that its conclusions regarding the proposed settlements are reasonable); InBev, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84787, at *20 (“the `public interest' is not to be measured by comparing the violations alleged in the complaint against those the court believes could have, or even should have, been alleged”). Because the “court's authority to review the decree depends entirely on the government's exercising its prosecutorial discretion by bringing a case in the first place,” it follows that “the court is only authorized to review the decree itself,” and not to “effectively redraft the complaint” to inquire into other matters that the United States did not pursue. Microsoft, 56 F.3d at 1459-60. As a court in this district confirmed in SBC Communications, courts “cannot look beyond the complaint in making the public interest determination unless the complaint is drafted so narrowly as to make a mockery of judicial power.” SBC Commc'ns, 489 F. Supp. 2d at 15.

    In its 2004 amendments,2 Congress made clear its intent to preserve the practical benefits of utilizing consent decrees in antitrust enforcement, adding the unambiguous instruction that “[n]othing in this section shall be construed to require the court to conduct an evidentiary hearing or to require the court to permit anyone to intervene.” 15 U.S.C. § 16(e)(2); see also U.S. Airways, 38 F. Supp. 3d at 76 (indicating that a court is not required to hold an evidentiary hearing or to permit intervenors as part of its review under the Tunney Act). This language explicitly wrote into the statute what Congress intended when it first enacted the Tunney Act in 1974. As Senator Tunney explained: “[t]he court is nowhere compelled to go to trial or to engage in extended proceedings which might have the effect of vitiating the benefits of prompt and less costly settlement through the consent decree process.” 119 Cong. Rec. 24,598 (1973) (statement of Sen. Tunney). Rather, the procedure for the public interest determination is left to the discretion of the court, with the recognition that the court's “scope of review remains sharply proscribed by precedent and the nature of Tunney Act proceedings.” SBC Commc'ns, 489 F. Supp. 2d at 11. A court can make its public interest determination based on the competitive impact statement and response to public comments alone. U.S. Airways, 38 F. Supp. 3d at 76. See also United States v. Enova Corp., 107 F. Supp. 2d 10, 17 (D.D.C. 2000) (noting that the “Tunney Act expressly allows the court to make its public interest determination on the basis of the competitive impact statement and response to comments alone”); S. Rep. No. 93-298 93d Cong., 1st Sess., at 6 (1973) (“Where the public interest can be meaningfully evaluated simply on the basis of briefs and oral arguments, that is the approach that should be utilized.”).

    2 The 2004 amendments substituted “shall” for “may” in directing relevant factors for a court to consider and amended the list of factors to focus on competitive considerations and to address potentially ambiguous judgment terms. Compare 15 U.S.C. § 16(e) (2004), with 15 U.S.C. § 16(e)(1) (2006); see also SBC Commc'ns, 489 F. Supp. 2d at 11 (concluding that the 2004 amendments “effected minimal changes” to Tunney Act review).

    III. THE INVESTIGATION AND PROPOSED FINAL JUDGMENT

    The Department of Justice conducted an extensive investigation into the proposed acquisition and the proposed divestiture. The Department reviewed business documents, conducted economic analysis, and interviewed a substantial number of customers and actual and potential competitors in the aggregate and asphalt-concrete markets to ascertain whether the acquisition would be anticompetitive. The Department also worked extensively with the State of West Virginia and, in particular, the agency most familiar with the markets at issue, WVDOT, which sets quality standards for aggregate used in road construction and repair and qualifies suppliers of aggregate to bid on WVDOT road projects. Later, the Department thoroughly vetted the potential divestiture over the course of several months, a process that included re-interviewing customers, competitors, and the proposed divestiture buyer, document and data requests, and the retention of an expert geologist. Throughout this process, the Department worked in cooperation with the WVDOT to ensure it was satisfied that the divestiture would eliminate any concerns about the acquisition.3

    3 The Department's cooperation with WVDOT included seeking and obtaining comments and revisions to the proposed Final Judgment.

    In the Complaint, the United States alleged that CRH supplies aggregate in Wyoming, Raleigh, Mercer, and Summers Counties in West Virginia (these counties are referred to in the Complaint as “Southern West Virginia”). Before being acquired by CRH, Pounding Mill owned two quarries that also supplied aggregate in Southern West Virginia. Without the divestiture, the proposed acquisition would have resulted in CRH owning nearly all of the aggregate quarries that supply Southern West Virginia and would have eliminated the horizontal, head-to-head competition between CRH and Pounding Mill in the supply of aggregate.

    The Complaint also alleged that the acquisition would raise vertical competition concerns. In addition to aggregate, CRH produces and sells asphalt concrete. Aggregate is an essential input in asphalt concrete. AAA Paving and Sealing, Inc. (“AAA Paving”), a recent entrant, is the only company that competes with CRH to supply asphalt concrete in Southern West Virginia. Before the acquisition, AAA Paving relied on Pounding Mill to supply the aggregate it needs to manufacture asphalt concrete. The acquisition therefore would have put the quarries that are AAA Paving's only economically viable sources of aggregate under the ownership of CRH, its competitor in the sale of asphalt concrete. According to the Complaint, if CRH were to acquire its rival's only economically viable source of aggregate, it would have the incentive and ability to disadvantage AAA Paving by withholding this essential input or supplying it on less favorable terms, resulting in higher prices for the sale of asphalt concrete in Southern West Virginia.

    Under the proposed Final Judgment, CRH is required to divest Pounding Mill's Rocky Gap quarry located in Rocky Gap, Virginia (hereinafter, the “Rocky Gap Quarry”) and related assets to Salem Stone Corporation (“Salem Stone”). See Figure 1, below. After a thorough evaluation of Salem Stone, the United States approved Salem Stone as the buyer. Salem Stone is a strong aggregate competitor in markets near Southern West Virginia. Salem Stone has extensive experience producing and selling aggregate, and is familiar with both WVDOT's approval process and with the surrounding area. As a result, Salem Stone is well-positioned to operate the divestiture assets and provide meaningful competition.

    The divestiture required by the proposed Final Judgment therefore will preserve, and indeed in some respects increase, competition in the markets for WVDOT aggregate and WVDOT asphalt concrete by establishing a new, independent, and economically viable WVDOT aggregate supplier in Southern West Virginia. The divestiture also will ensure that AAA Paving, CRH's sole competitor in the supply of asphalt concrete, has an independent aggregate supplier to which it could economically turn.

    BILLING CODE 4410-11-P EN26NO18.001 BILLING CODE 4410-11-P IV. SUMMARY OF COMMENT AND THE UNITED STATES' RESPONSE A. Summary of WVAGO Comment

    The State of West Virginia through its Office of the Attorney General (“WVAGO”) submitted the only comment received in this matter. The comment contends that the proposed settlement will not resolve the competitive concerns the United States alleged in its Complaint because the settlement will not preserve AAA Paving's ability to compete in the sale of asphalt concrete.4 The comment contends that two companies—CRH and AAA Paving—supply asphalt concrete in the southern part of West Virginia and that if CRH were to acquire Pounding Mill's quarries, AAA Paving would not have an independent source of supply for the aggregate it needs to manufacture asphalt concrete. (WV Comment, ¶ 1.) The comment also contends that the Mercer Quarry, which CRH acquired from Pounding Mill, is the closest source of aggregate to the southern part of West Virginia.5 (Id. at ¶ 2.) The comment claims that AAA Paving's next-closest alternative, the Rocky Gap Quarry, is not a viable option for AAA Paving because that quarry is 17 miles away from AAA Paving. (Id. at ¶¶ 5, 10.) The comment further claims that purchasing from the Rocky Gap Quarry would require AAA Paving to incur higher costs for its aggregate, which would make AAA Paving's asphalt concrete less competitive. (Id. at ¶ 7.)

    4 The State of West Virginia currently is litigating an antitrust action against CRH and others in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia. That lawsuit alleged, across the entire state of West Virginia, “monopolization of the markets for aggregates, asphalt, and asphalt paving as well as unreasonable restraints of trade in those markets.” (WV Comment, p. 1.) The United States' proposed Final Judgment is not intended to resolve these much broader claims, but instead is designed to remedy the anticompetitive effects in a four-county area that would otherwise result from the combination of CRH and Pounding Mill.

    5 The comment does not define the geographic area it refers to as the “southern part of the State of West Virginia.” The geographic area described in the comment may differ from the four-county area defined in the United States' Complaint as “Southern West Virginia.”

    WVAGO's comment also expresses the following concerns. First, the comment contends that CRH has refused to supply AAA Paving with aggregate on several occasions since it acquired the Mercer Quarry. (Id. at ¶ 4.) Second, the comment claims that when CRH refused to supply AAA Paving with aggregate from the Mercer Quarry, CRH provided AAA Paving with monetary credits to account for the additional trucking costs AAA Paving would incur by having to purchase aggregate from the Rocky Gap Quarry, but that “CRH will not provide those trucking credits forever.” (Id. at ¶ 6.) Finally, the comment contends that AAA Paving's costs for aggregate have already increased since CRH acquired Pounding Mill. (Id. at ¶ 10.)

    B. The United States' Response

    The United States evaluated WVAGO's comment, investigated the basis for the claims in the comment, and continues to believe that the divestiture of the Rocky Gap Quarry completely remedies the anticompetitive harm alleged in the Complaint. The proposed Final Judgment secures a structural remedy that fully addresses both the horizontal harm alleged in the aggregate market and the vertical harm alleged in the asphalt-concrete market. The divestiture of Pounding Mill's Rocky Gap Quarry to Salem Stone creates a new competitor in Southern West Virginia and therefore preserves the competition that would have been lost absent the divestiture. Indeed, as discussed in more detail below, AAA Paving views the divestiture as leaving it with more alternative sources of aggregate than it had before the acquisition, because the Rocky Gap Quarry now is a nearby alternative to CRH's Mercer Quarry.

    Terry Parks, Vice President of AAA Paving, believes that the Rocky Gap Quarry is a viable alternative to the Mercer Quarry for AAA Paving's aggregate needs. See Declaration of Terry Parks (“Parks Decl.”), attached hereto as Exhibit B, at ¶ 6. The comment incorrectly claims that AAA Paving would need to truck aggregate 17 miles from the Rocky Gap Quarry. The Rocky Gap Quarry is 14 miles away from AAA Paving, and only 7.5 miles further away from AAA Paving than the Mercer Quarry. (Id.) Mr. Parks' declaration directly refutes WVAGO's claim that AAA Paving would not be competitive in the asphalt-concrete market if it had to purchase aggregate from the Rocky Gap Quarry. (Id. at ¶ 8 (“The Rocky Gap Quarry is a viable alternative to the Mercer Quarry for AAA Paving's aggregate requirements. To obtain aggregate from the Rocky Gap Quarry, AAA Paving would need to truck aggregate an additional 7.5 miles beyond the distance from AAA Paving's plant to the Mercer Quarry. I do not anticipate that that additional distance would significantly raise my costs.”).)

    Moreover, the allegations upon which WVAGO bases its comment are unsupported and factually incorrect. For example, the comment states that CRH refused to supply AAA Paving with aggregate on several occasions since CRH acquired the Mercer Quarry. (WV Comment, ¶ 4). Mr. Parks, however, confirmed that CRH has never refused to provide AAA Paving with aggregate. (Parks Decl., ¶ 7.) Indeed, according to Mr. Parks, AAA Paving continues to purchase aggregate from the Mercer Quarry and the prices CRH charges AAA Paving have not increased since CRH acquired the quarry. (Id.) Further, while WVAGO alleged that AAA Paving's costs for aggregate have increased since CRH acquired Pounding Mill, Mr. Parks states that AAA Paving's costs for aggregate have not in fact increased. (Id.)

    In addition, the comment states that CRH provided AAA Paving with credits when it refused to supply AAA Paving with aggregate from the Mercer Quarry to account for the additional trucking costs that AAA Paving would incur by having to purchase from the Rocky Gap Quarry, but “CRH will not provide those trucking credits forever.” (WV Comment, ¶ 6.) Mr. Parks, however, explained that while CRH has supplied AAA Paving with discounts (or credits), it was not because CRH refused to supply AAA Paving with aggregate. (Parks Decl., ¶ 10.) Rather, the discounts were a goodwill gesture by CRH, because a major road construction project near the Mercer Quarry was causing significant traffic delays. (Id.) CRH offered to supply AAA Paving from a CRH quarry that is further away and provide AAA Paving with discounts to make up for the additional trucking costs. (Id.) At this point, AAA Paving has not purchased any aggregate from the Rocky Gap Quarry. (Id. at ¶ 9.)

    Further, AAA Paving and other aggregate customers stand to benefit from the divestiture of the Rocky Gap Quarry to Salem Stone. The divestiture creates competition between the Rocky Gap Quarry and the Mercer Quarry, which previously did not compete because both were owned by Pounding Mill. Prior to the acquisition, the closest competing aggregate suppliers for customers near the Mercer Quarry were located in Lewisburg, West Virginia—over 60 miles to the northeast. Due to the high cost of trucking aggregate, prices for aggregate are often disciplined by the total cost to the purchaser of obtaining aggregate from the next closest quarry, which includes the additional trucking costs of transporting aggregate from a farther quarry. The closer quarry can price aggregate just below the amount the customer would pay to obtain aggregate from the next closest quarry. So, prior to the acquisition, the Mercer Quarry should have set its prices to AAA Paving just below what the Lewisburg, West Virginia quarries would charge, based on their likely transportation costs. After the divestiture, the next closest competitor to the Mercer Quarry is now the Rocky Gap Quarry, which is over 50 miles closer; AAA Paving will need to travel only about 7.5 additional miles to obtain aggregate from the Rocky Gap Quarry. (Id. at ¶ 6). Consequently, the price of aggregate quoted to AAA Paving and other customers from the Rocky Gap Quarry is likely to be lower following the divestiture than it would have been prior to the acquisition. In sum, the divestiture ensures that CRH's acquisition of Pounding Mill will not result in less competition or fewer alternatives for AAA Paving or other nearby customers.

    V. CONCLUSION

    After careful consideration of the public comment, the Department continues to believe that the proposed Final Judgment, as drafted, provides an effective and appropriate remedy for the antitrust violations alleged in the Complaint, and is therefore in the public interest. The Department will move this Court to enter the proposed Final Judgment after the comment and this response are published pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 16(d).

    Dated: November 16, 2018 Respectfully submitted, FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Christine A. Hill Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, Defense, Industrials, and Aerospace Section, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Suite 8700, Washington, D.C. 20530, (202) 305-2738, [email protected] BILLING CODE 4410-11-P EN26NO18.002 EN26NO18.003 EN26NO18.004 EN26NO18.005 EN26NO18.006 EN26NO18.007 EN26NO18.008 EN26NO18.009 EN26NO18.010 EN26NO18.011 EN26NO18.012 EN26NO18.013 EN26NO18.014 EN26NO18.015 EN26NO18.016 EN26NO18.017 EN26NO18.018 EN26NO18.019 EN26NO18.020 EN26NO18.021 EN26NO18.022 EN26NO18.023 EN26NO18.024 EN26NO18.025 EN26NO18.026 EN26NO18.027 EN26NO18.028 EN26NO18.029 EN26NO18.030 EN26NO18.031 EN26NO18.032 EN26NO18.033 EN26NO18.034 EN26NO18.035 EN26NO18.036 EN26NO18.037 EN26NO18.038 EN26NO18.039 EN26NO18.040 EN26NO18.041 EN26NO18.042 EN26NO18.043 EN26NO18.044 EN26NO18.045 EN26NO18.046 EN26NO18.047 EN26NO18.048 EN26NO18.049 EN26NO18.050
    [FR Doc. 2018-25593 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-C
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Executive Office for Immigration Review [OMB Number 1125-0006] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Reinstatement, With Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    Executive Office for Immigration Review, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30 Day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    The Department of Justice encourages public comment and will accept input until December 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Lauren Alder Reid, Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office of Policy, Executive Office for Immigration Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2500, Falls Church, VA 22041, telephone: (703) 305-0289. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Reinstatement, with change, of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative Before the Immigration Court.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form EOIR-28. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Attorneys and qualified representatives notifying the Immigration Court that they are representing an alien in immigration proceedings. Other: None. Abstract: This information collection is necessary to allow an attorney or representative to notify the Immigration Court that he or she is representing an alien before the Immigration Court.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 454,449 respondents will complete the form annually; each response will be completed in approximately 6 minutes.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 45,445 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25621 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Executive Office for Immigration Review [OMB Number 1125-0016] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Reinstatement, With Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    Executive Office for Immigration Review, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    The Department of Justice encourages public comment and will accept input until December 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Lauren Alder Reid, Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office of Policy, Executive Office for Immigration Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2500, Falls Church, VA 22041, telephone: (703) 305-0289. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Reinstatement, with change, of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Unfair Immigration-Related Employment Practices Complaint Form.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form EOIR-58. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO), Executive Office for Immigration Review.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Individuals who wish to file a complaint alleging unfair immigration-related employment practices under section 274B of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Other: None. Abstract: Section 274B of the INA prohibits: Employment discrimination on the basis of citizenship status or national origin; retaliation or intimidation by an employer against an individual seeking to exercise his or her right under this section; and “document abuse” or overdocumentation by the employer, which occurs when the employer asks an applicant or employee for more or different documents than required for employment eligibility verification under INA section 274A, with the intent of discriminating against the employee in violation of section 274B. Individuals who believe that they have suffered discrimination in violation of section 274B may file a charge with the Department of Justice, Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER). The IER then has 120 days to determine whether to file a complaint with OCAHO on behalf of the individual charging party. If the IER chooses not to file a complaint, the individual may then file his or her own complaint directly with OCAHO. This information collection may be used by an individual to file his or her own complaint with OCAHO. The Form EOIR-58 will elicit, in a uniform manner, all of the required information for OCAHO to assign a section 274B complaint to an Administrative Law Judge for adjudication.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 23 respondents will complete the form annually; each response will be completed in approximately 30 minutes.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 11.5 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25622 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Executive Office for Immigration Review [OMB Number 1125-0009] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Reinstatement, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    Executive Office for Immigration Review, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    The Department of Justice encourages public comment and will accept input until December 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Lauren Alder Reid, Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office of Policy, Executive Office for Immigration Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2500, Falls Church, VA 22041, telephone: (703) 305-0289. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Reinstatement, without change, of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Suspension of Deportation.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form EOIR-40. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individual aliens determined to be deportable from the United States. Other: None. Abstract: This information collection is necessary to determine the statutory eligibility of individual aliens, who have been determined to be deportable from the United States, for suspension of their deportation pursuant to former section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and 8 CFR 1240.55 (2011), as well as provide information relevant to a favorable exercise of discretion.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 133 respondents will complete the form annually; each response will be completed in approximately 5 hours and 45 minutes.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 765 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25620 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1110-0068] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Revision of a Currently Approved Collection; Records Modification Form (FD-1115) AGENCY:

    Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until December 26, 2018.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments, especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Gerry Lynn Brovey, Supervisory Information Liaison Specialist, FBI, CJIS, Resources Management Section, Administrative Unit, Module C-2, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306 (facsimile: 304-625-5093) or email [email protected] Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted via email to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Records Modification Form.

    (3) Agency form number: FD-1115.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: This form is utilized by criminal justice and affiliated judicial agencies to request appropriate modification of criminal history information from an individual's record.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 43,584 respondents are authorized to complete the form which would require approximately 10 minutes.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 19,882 total annual burden hours associated with this collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, Suite 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: November 20, 2018. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25632 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mine Safety and Health Administration [OMB Control No. 1219-0082] Proposed Extension of Information Collection; Records of Preshift and Onshift Inspections of Slope and Shaft Areas of Slope and Shaft Sinking Operations at Coal Mines AGENCY:

    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

    ACTION:

    Request for public comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is soliciting comments on the information collection for Records of Preshift and Onshift Inspections of Slope and Shaft Areas of Slope and Shaft Sinking Operations at Coal Mines.

    DATES:

    All comments must be received on or before January 25, 2019.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments concerning the information collection requirements of this notice may be sent by any of the methods listed below.

    Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments for docket number MSHA-2018-0038.

    Regular Mail: Send comments to USDOL-MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452.

    Hand Delivery: USDOL-Mine Safety and Health Administration, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 4th floor via the East elevator.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sheila McConnell, Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at [email protected] (email); (202) 693-9440 (voice); or (202) 693-9441 (facsimile).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The sinking of slopes and shafts is a particularly hazardous operation where conditions change drastically in short periods of time. Explosive methane and other harmful gases can be expected to infiltrate the work environment at any time. The working environment is typically a confined area in close proximity to moving equipment. Accordingly, 30 CFR 77.1901 requires operators to conduct examinations of slope and shaft areas for hazardous conditions, including tests for methane and oxygen deficiency, within 90 minutes before each shift, once during each shift, and before and after blasting. The surface area surrounding each slope and shaft is also required to be inspected for hazards.

    The standard also requires that a record be kept of the results of the inspections. The record includes a description of any hazardous condition found and the corrective action taken to abate it. The record is necessary to ensure that the inspections and tests are conducted in a timely fashion and that corrective action is taken when hazardous conditions are identified, thereby ensuring a safe working environment for the slope and shaft sinking employees. The record is maintained at the mine site for the duration of the operation.

    II. Desired Focus of Comments

    MSHA is soliciting comments concerning the proposed information collection related to Records of Preshift and Onshift Inspections of Slope and Shaft Areas of Slope and Shaft Sinking Operations at Coal Mines. MSHA is particularly interested in comments that:

    • Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

    • Evaluate the accuracy of MSHA's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    • Suggest methods to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    The information collection request will be available on http://www.regulations.gov. MSHA cautions the commenter against providing any information in the submission that should not be publicly disclosed. Full comments, including personal information provided, will be made available on www.regulations.gov and www.reginfo.gov.

    The public may also examine publicly available documents at USDOL-Mine Safety and Health Administration, 201 12th South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 4th floor via the East elevator.

    Questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

    III. Current Actions

    This request for collection of information contains provisions for Records of Preshift and Onshift Inspections of Slope and Shaft Areas of Slope and Shaft Sinking Operations at Coal Mines. MSHA has updated the data with respect to the number of respondents, responses, burden hours, and burden costs supporting this information collection request.

    Type of Review: Extension, without change, of a currently approved collection.

    Agency: Mine Safety and Health Administration.

    OMB Number: 1219-0082.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 19.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Number of Responses: 8,360.

    Annual Burden Hours: 10,450 hours.

    Annual Respondent or Recordkeeper Cost: $0.

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

    Roslyn B. Fontaine, Certifying Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25633 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-43-P
    OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Request for Comments on Update to Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI) AGENCY:

    Office of Management and Budget.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is seeking public comment on a draft memorandum titled “Update to Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI).”

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2018.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties should provide comments at the following link: https://datacenters.cio.gov/. The Office of Management and Budget is located at 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bill Hunt at [email protected] or the Office of the Federal Chief Information Officer at 202-395-3080.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is proposing an update to M-16-19 Data Center Optimization Initiative. The Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) passed in 2014, and required the Federal Government to consolidate and optimize agencies' data centers until October 1, 2018. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) responded by issuing M-16-19 Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI), which set priorities for data center closures and efficiency improvements through the end of Fiscal Year 2018. The FITARA Enhancement Act of 2017 extended the data center requirements of FITARA until October 1, 2020. As a result, OMB is updating and extending the Data Center Optimization Initiative for another two years.

    This Memorandum contains requirements for the consolidation and optimization of Federal data centers in accordance with FITARA. It establishes consolidation and optimization targets and metrics for Federal agencies, as well as requirements for reporting on their progress. This policy will be available for review and public comment at https://datacenters.cio.gov/.

    Suzette Kent, U.S. Federal Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25573 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3110-05-P
    MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL FOUNDATION Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    9 a.m. to 3:25 p.m., Tuesday, December 11, 2018.

    PLACE:

    The offices of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation, 130 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701.

    STATUS:

    This meeting of the Board of Trustees will be open to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    (1) Call to Order & Chair's Remarks; (2) Executive Director's Remarks; (3) Consent Agenda Approval (Minutes of the April 11, 2018, Board of Trustees Meeting; Board Reports submitted for Education Programs, Finance and Management, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy-Native Nations Institute-Udall Archives and their Workplan, and U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution; resolutions regarding Allocation of Funds to the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy and Transfer of Funds to the Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and Policy; and Board takes notice of any new and updated personnel policies and internal control methodologies); (4) U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution Project Highlight; (5) Native American Congressional Internship Program and Funding Updates; (6) Trustee Ethics Training; (7) Stephanie Zimmt-Mack Tribute; (8) Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy data science and environmental policy research project; (9) Udall Scholarship Selection Process; and (10) Finance and Internal Controls.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Philip J. Lemanski, Executive Director, 130 South Scott Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701, (520) 901-8500.

    Dated: November 21, 2018. Elizabeth E. Monroe, Executive Assistant, Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation, and Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25897 Filed 11-21-18; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6820-FN-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (18-094)] NASA Advisory Council; Meeting AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announces a meeting of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC).

    DATES:

    Monday, December 10, 2018, from 1:30-6:00 p.m.; and Tuesday, December 11, 2018, from 9-12 p.m., Eastern Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    NASA Headquarters, Program Review Center, Room 9H40, 300 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20546.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Marla King, NAC Administrative Officer, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-1148 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting will be open to the public up to the capacity of the meeting room. This meeting will also be available telephonically and by WebEx. You must use a touch-tone phone to participate in this meeting. Any interested person may dial the toll number 1-517-308-9086 or toll free number 1-888-989-0726, passcode 3899540, followed by the # sign, on both days to participate in this meeting by telephone. NOTE: If dialing in, please “mute” your phone. To join via WebEx, the link is https://nasaenterprise.webex.com/. The meeting number on Monday, December 10 is 905 980 258 and the meeting password is NACDec2018! (case sensitive). The meeting number on Tuesday, December 11 is 901 189 192 and the meeting password is NACDec2018! (case sensitive).

    The agenda for the meeting will include reports from the following:

    —Aeronautics Committee —Human Exploration and Operations Committee —Regulatory and Policy Committee —Science Committee —STEM Engagement Committee —Technology, Innovation and Engineering Committee

    Attendees will be requested to sign a register and to comply with NASA Headquarters security requirements, including the presentation of a valid picture ID to NASA Security before access to NASA Headquarters. Foreign nationals attending this meeting will be required to provide a copy of their passport and visa in addition to providing the following information no less than 10 days prior to the meeting: Full name; gender; date/place of birth; citizenship; passport information (number, country, telephone); visa information (number, type, expiration date); employer/affiliation information (name of institution, address, country, telephone); title/position of attendee. To expedite admittance, U.S. citizens and Permanent Residents (green card holders) are requested to provide full name and citizenship status no less than 3 working days prior to the meeting. Information should be sent to Ms. Marla K. King via email at [email protected] It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to the scheduling priorities of the key participants.

    Patricia Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25565 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice: (18-095)] Notice of Information Collection AGENCY:

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Information Collection.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections.

    DATES:

    All comments should be submitted within 60 calendar days from the date of this publication.

    ADDRESSES:

    All comments should be addressed to Laurette Brown, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Mail Code IT-C2, Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions should be directed to Laurette L. Brown, KSC Paperwork Reduction Act Clearance Coordinator, John F. Kennedy Space Center, Mail Code IT-C2, Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) manages and facilitates the center-specific Job Shadowing Program (JSP). The program targets high school and undergraduate students and offers an opportunity to experience the practical application of STEM, business, and other disciplines aligned to NASA's long-term workforce needs, in a NASA-unique workplace setting. Program participants receive insight into NASA and KSC's history, current activities, and other student opportunities through briefings, tours, and career panels. Each participant is then matched with a subject matter expert to gain direct exposure to the implementation of their respective fields of interest and related career paths.

    II. Methods of Collection

    The information will be collected via an electronic process.

    III. Data

    Title: Job Shadowing Program.

    OMB Number: 2700-0135.

    Type of review: Renewal of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: High school and college students, and faculty.

    Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: 4.

    Average number of Respondents per Activity: 20.

    Annual Responses: 80.

    Frequency of Responses: Quarterly.

    Average minutes per Response: 30.

    Burden Hours: 26.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of NASA, including whether the information collected has practical utility;

    (2) the accuracy of NASA's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology.

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

    Laurette Brown, KSC PRA Clearance Coordinator.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25667 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
    NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Institute of Museum and Library Services Notice of Proposed Information Collection Request: Museum Application Program (MAP) Application AGENCY:

    Institute of Museum and Library Services, National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments on this collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This pre-clearance consultation program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed.

    A copy of the proposed information collection request can be obtained by contacting the individual listed below in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the addressee section below on or before January 21, 2019.

    IMLS is particularly interested in comments that help the agency to:

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

    • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments to: Dr. Sandra Webb, Director, Office of Grants Policy and Management, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 955 L'Enfant Plaza North SW, Suite 4000, Washington, DC 20024-2135. Dr. Webb can be reached by Telephone: 202-653-4718, Fax: 202-653-4608, or by email at [email protected], or by teletype (TTY/TDD) for persons with hearing difficulty at 202-653-4614.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Paula Gangopadhyay, Deputy Director, Office of Museum Services, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 955 L'Enfant Plaza North SW, Suite 4000, Washington, DC 20024-2135. She can be reached by Telephone: 202-653-4717, Fax: 202-653-4608, or by email at [email protected], or by teletype (TTY/TDD) for persons with hearing difficulty at 202-653-4614.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Institute of Museum and Library Services is the primary source of federal support for the nation's libraries and museums. We advance, support, and empower America's museums, libraries, and related organizations through grant making, research, and policy development. Our vision is a nation where museums and libraries work together to transform the lives of individuals and communities. To learn more, visit www.imls.gov.

    II. Current Actions

    The Museum Assessment Program (MAP) is a technical assistance program that can help a museum attain excellence in operations and planning, through a confidential process of self-study and peer review. For over 30 years, MAP has helped over 5,000 small and mid-sized museums of all types through a confidential, consultative process of self-study and a site visit from an expert peer reviewer over one year. MAP helps museums strengthen operations, plan for the future and meet standards. MAP is currently administered by the American Alliance of Museums (Alliance) and supported through a cooperative agreement with the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).

    This action is to create the forms and instructions for the program application for the Museum Assessment Program for the next three years.

    Agency: Institute of Museum and Library Services.

    Title: Museum Assessment Program Application.

    OMB Number: 3137-0101.

    Frequency: Once a year.

    Affected Public: Museum staff.

    Number of Respondents: 124.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 7 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 868 hours.

    Total Annualized capital/startup costs: n/a.

    Total Annual costs: $23,784.

    Public Comments Invited: Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Kim Miller, Grants Management Specialist, Institute of Museum and Library Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25567 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7036-01-P
    NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Institute of Museum and Library Services Notice of Proposed Information Collection Request: IMLS Native American Library Basic Grant Program—Final Performance Report Form AGENCY:

    Institute of Museum and Library Services, National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments on this collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This pre-clearance consultation program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. By this notice, IMLS is soliciting comments concerning the use of the IMLS Native American Basic Library Grant Program Final Performance Report Form for the next three years.

    A copy of the proposed information collection request can be obtained by contacting the individual listed below in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the addressee section below on or before January 21, 2019.

    IMLS is particularly interested in comments that help the agency to:

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

    • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques, or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments to: Dr. Sandra Webb, Director, Office of Grants Policy and Management, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 955 L'Enfant Plaza North SW, Suite 4000, Washington, DC 20024-2135. Dr. Webb can be reached by Telephone: 202-653-4718, Fax: 202-653-4608, or by email at [email protected], or by teletype (TTY/TDD) for persons with hearing difficulty at 202-653-4614.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kelcy Shepherd, Associate Deputy Director for Discretionary Programs, Office of Library Services, Institute of Museum and Library Services, 955 L'Enfant Plaza North SW, Suite 4000, Washington, DC 20024-2135. She can be reached by Telephone: 202-653-4716 Fax: 202-653-4608, or by email at [email protected], or by teletype (TTY/TDD) for persons with hearing difficulty at 202-653-4614.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Institute of Museum and Library Services is the primary source of federal support for the nation's libraries and museums. We advance, support, and empower America's museums, libraries, and related organizations through grant making, research, and policy development. Our vision is a nation where museums and libraries work together to transform the lives of individuals and communities. To learn more, visit www.imls.gov.

    II. Current Actions

    Native American Basic Grants support existing library operations and maintain core library services, particularly as they relate to the following goals in the Museum and Library Services Act (20 U.S.C. 9141). Indian tribes are eligible to apply for funding under the Native American Library Services Enhancement Grant program. Entities such as libraries, schools, tribal colleges, or departments of education are not eligible applicants, although they may be involved in the administration of this program and their staff may serve as project directors in partnership with an eligible applicant.

    For purposes of funding under this program, “Indian tribe” means any tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community, including any Alaska native village, regional corporation, or village corporation (as defined in, or established pursuant to, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)), which is recognized by the Secretary of the Interior as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians. A list of eligible entities is available from the Bureau of Indian Affairs. To be eligible for this program you must be able to document an existing library that meets, at a minimum, three basic criteria: (1) Regularly scheduled hours, (2) staff, and (3) materials available for library users.

    This action is to create the form and instructions for the Final Performance Report Form for the grant program for the next three years.

    Agency: Institute of Museum and Library Services.

    Title: IMLS Native American Library Basic Grant Program—Final Performance Report Form.

    OMB Number: 3137-0098.

    Frequency: Once a year.

    Affected Public: Library staff.

    Number of Respondents: TBD.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: TBD.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: TBD.

    Total Annualized Capital/Startup Costs: n/a.

    Total Annual Costs: TBD.

    Public Comments Invited: Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    Dated: November 19, 2018. Kim Miller, Grants Management Specialist, Institute of Museum and Library Services.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25568 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7036-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of permit issued.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. This is the required notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; 703-292-8030; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On September 12, 2018, the National Science Foundation published a notice in the Federal Register of a permit application received. The permit was issued on October 29, 2018 to:

    Bill Davis, Permit No. 2019-005 Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
    [FR Doc. 2018-25646 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice of permits issued.

    SUMMARY:

    The Nationa