Federal Register Vol. 83, No.99,

Title: DPRS-2809.

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Number: 0505-0024.

Expiration Date of Approval: April 30, 2018.

Type of Request: Extension/Revision of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: Form DPRS-2809, is for spouse equity/temporary continuation of coverage (TCC) enrollees and direct pay annuitants who are eligible to elect, cancel, or change health benefits enrollment during the open season each year.

Estimated Time per Respondent: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 45 minutes per response.

Respondents: Individuals who are under the Spouse Equity Act, TCC and direct pay annuitants who are eligible to make Federal Employees Health Benefits plan changes during open season.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 25,000.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1 (one).

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 18,750.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection. Comments may be sent to DPRS via email to [email protected]. All comments received will be available for public inspection during regular business hours at the same address. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

The Census Bureau conducts the Business and Professional Classification Report survey to collect information from new businesses to obtain proper industry classification for use in economic surveys and the Economic Census. The survey, conducted quarterly, samples businesses with newly assigned Employer Identification Numbers (EINs) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Businesses can only be selected once for the survey. The survey collects data about a business in such areas as: primary business activity, company structure, size, and business operations. This information is used to update the sampling frame for current business surveys, which ensures high quality economic estimates. Additionally, by ensuring proper industry classification, this survey reduces burden for the businesses in the five-year Economic Census, as the questions in the census are tailored to the industry in which the business operates. There are no major changes to this collection. Minimal changes will be made to the wording and organization of existing questions and instructions.

We will collect this information over the internet and by telephone follow-up. Respondents will receive a letter directing them to the internet to report their information. After three weeks, respondents will receive a reminder letter about the survey. After the due date, the Census Bureau will conduct a telephone follow-up operation for nonresponse. Throughout the survey, telephone assistance is available for respondents with questions and for those that cannot report over the internet.

OMB Control Number: 0607-0189.

Form Number(s): SQ-CLASS.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Business or other for profit and not-for-profit institutions.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 57,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 13 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 12,350 hours.

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

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: Title 13, United States Code, Sections 131, 182, and 193.

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

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

I. Abstract

The Annual Survey of U.S. Direct Investment Abroad (BE-11) obtains sample data on the financial structure and operations of U.S. parents and their foreign affiliates. The data are needed to provide reliable, useful, and timely measures of U.S. direct investment abroad to assess its impact on the U.S. and foreign economies. The sample data are used to derive universe estimates in nonbenchmark years from similar data reported in the BE-10, Benchmark Survey of U.S. Direct Investment Abroad, which is conducted every five years. The data collected include balance sheets; income statements; property, plant, and equipment; employment and employee compensation; merchandise trade; sales of goods and services; taxes; and research and development activity.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) proposes to add one question to the BE-11 survey asking whether a recent Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) update on the treatment of leases affects the statistics collected on the survey.

BEA contacts potential respondents by mail in March of each year; responses covering a reporting company's fiscal year ending during the previous calendar year are due by May 31. Reports are required from each U.S. person that has a direct and/or indirect ownership interest of at least 10 percent of the voting stock in an incorporated foreign business enterprise, or an equivalent interest in an unincorporated foreign business enterprise, and that meets the additional conditions detailed in the BE-11 forms and instructions. Entities required to report will be contacted individually by BEA. Entities not contacted by BEA have no reporting responsibilities.

BEA offers electronic filing through its eFile system for use in reporting on the BE-11 annual survey forms. In addition, BEA posts all its survey forms and reporting instructions on its website (www.bea.gov/dia). These may be downloaded, completed, printed, and submitted via fax or mail.

Potential respondents of the BE-11 are selected from those U.S. parents that reported owning foreign business enterprises in the 2014 BE-10, Benchmark Survey of U.S. Direct Investment Abroad, along with entities that subsequently entered the direct investment universe. The BE-11 is a sample survey; universe estimates are developed from the reported sample data.

OMB Control Number: 0608-0053.

Form Number: BE-11.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,150 respondents (U.S. parents). A complete response includes a BE-11 A form for the U.S. parent's domestic operation and one or more BE-11 B, C, or D forms for its foreign affiliates that meet the BE-11 survey requirements. BEA estimates that U.S. parents will submit 3,150 A forms, 25,000 B forms, 1,500 C forms, 200 D forms, and 500 Claim for Exemption forms.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 325,750 hours. Total annual burden is calculated by multiplying the estimated number of submissions of each form by the average hourly burden per form, which is 7 hours for the A form, 12 hours for the B form, 2 hours for the C form, 1 hour for the D form, and 1 hour for the Claim for Exemption form.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 103.4 hours per respondent (325,750 hours/3,150 U.S. parents) is the average, but may vary considerably among respondents because of differences in company structure, complexity, and the number of foreign affiliates each U.S. parent must report.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

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

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

The Annual Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States (BE-15) obtains sample data on the financial structure and operations of foreign-owned U.S. business enterprises. The data are needed to provide reliable, useful, and timely measures of foreign direct investment in the United States to assess its impact on the U.S. economy. The sample data are used to derive universe estimates in nonbenchmark years from similar data reported in the BE-12 benchmark survey, which is conducted every five years. The data collected include balance sheets; income statements; property, plant, and equipment; employment and employee compensation; merchandise trade; sales of goods and services; taxes; and research and development activity for the U.S. operations. In addition to these national data, several data items are collected by state, including employment and property, plant, and equipment.

The survey, as proposed, incorporates two changes that were made to the 2017 BE-12, Benchmark Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States and seven new proposed changes. The following two questions that were added to the 2017 benchmark survey will be added to the BE-15 survey:

(1) A question on the BE-15A form asking whether a recent Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) update on the treatment of leases affected the statistics collected on the survey; the question will also collect information to measure the impact on the respondent's reported data; and

(2) a question on the BE-15C form to collect the state in which each affiliate is located, improving estimation of employment and property, plant, and equipment by location for smaller entities reporting on this abbreviated form.

Other proposed changes are:

(1) The balance sheet and income statement sections will be modified to separately collect the investment in and income from (a) “unconsolidated U.S. affiliates” and (b) “foreign entities,” which are currently collected together on the BE-15A form. This will assist in ensuring complete coverage of unconsolidated U.S. affiliates and in better aligning the BE-15 survey data with other direct investment surveys.

(2) A question will be added to collect the city of each foreign parent and ultimate beneficial owner (UBO) on all forms. This will be used to validate the countries of foreign investors and provide additional information on the location of investors.

(3) Supplements A and B, which collect identification information on business enterprises owned by the U.S. affiliate, will be modified on all BE-15 forms to offer more options in the multiple-choice question asking the reason that the U.S. business enterprises changed since the last report, such as options for “acquired” or “established” if an enterprise is being reported on a supplement for the first time. A follow-up question will be added requesting the date of the transaction for new enterprises. This information will aid in referring entities to BEA's other surveys of foreign direct investment in the United States.

(4) The commercial property column will be removed from the state schedule of the BE-15A and BE-15B forms. Respondents have been confused by this concept, which can vary by state or industry, and have indicated that the information may not be readily available from their records.

(5) The administrative office and other auxiliary employees item will be removed from the BE-15B form to ease respondent burden. Data from the BE-15A form can be used to estimate this item for BE-15B form respondents.

(6) The BE-15 Claim for Exemption form will be modified to combine items 2(a) and 2(b), which cover exemptions for U.S. business enterprises that are no longer foreign owned. The same information can be obtained from one question.

(7) The BE-15A form will be modified to combine the questions on direct ownership held by “all other U.S. persons” and “all other foreign persons.” This breakout is not used and the new combined item will be consistent with the BE-15B form.

The exemption level for reporting on the proposed survey is unchanged from the 2016 BE-15 survey.

BEA contacts potential respondents by mail in March of each year; responses covering a reporting company's fiscal year ending during the previous calendar year are due by May 31 (or by June 30 for respondents that file using BEA's eFile system). Reports are required from each U.S. business enterprise in which a foreign person has at least 10 percent of the voting stock in an incorporated business enterprise, or an equivalent interest in an unincorporated business enterprise, and that meets the additional conditions detailed in the BE-15 forms and instructions. Entities required to report will be contacted individually by BEA. Entities not contacted by BEA have no reporting responsibilities.

BEA offers electronic filing through its eFile system for use in reporting on the BE-15 annual survey forms. In addition, BEA posts all its survey forms and reporting instructions on its website (www.bea.gov/fdi). These may be downloaded, completed, printed, and submitted via fax or mail.

Potential respondents of the BE-15 are selected from those U.S. business enterprises that were required to report on the 2017 BE-12, Benchmark Survey of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States, along with those U.S. business enterprises that subsequently entered the direct investment universe. The BE-15 is a sample survey; universe estimates are developed from the reported sample data.

OMB Control Number: 0608-0034.

Form Number: BE-15.

Type of Review: Regular submission.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,700 annually, of which approximately 2,300 file A forms, 1,600 file B forms, 1,300 file C forms, and 500 file Claim for Exemption forms.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 112,350 hours. Total annual burden is calculated by multiplying the estimated number of submissions of each form by the average hourly burden per form, which is 44.75 hours for the A form, 3.75 hours for the B form, 2.25 hours for the C form, and 1 hour for the Claim for Exemption form.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 19.7 hours per respondent (112,350 hours/5,700 respondents) is the average, but may vary considerably among respondents because of differences in company size and complexity.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: International Investment and Trade in Services Survey Act (Pub. L. 94-472, 22 U.S.C. 3101-3108, as amended).

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

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

On March 1, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on SSB from Brazil.1 The administrative review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Villares. We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary Results. We received no comments. Hence, these final results are unchanged from the Preliminary Results. Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The merchandise subject to the order is SSB. The term SSB with respect to the order means articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, octagons or other convex polygons. SSB includes cold-finished SSBs that are turned or ground in straight lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process.

Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless steel semi-finished products, cut length flat-rolled products (i.e., cut length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness), wire (i.e., cold-formed products in coils, of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles, shapes and sections.

The SSB subject to the order is currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.10.00, 7222.11.00, 7222.19.00, 7222.20.00, 7222.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

We determine that a weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent exists for Villares for the period of February 1, 2016, through January 31, 2017.

In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1) and the Final Modification, 2 Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate all appropriate entries for Villares without regard to antidumping duties.

For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Villares for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company involved in the transaction. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of SSB from Brazil entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Villares will be 0.00 percent, the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 19.43 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV Determination of Stainless Steel Bar from Brazil. 3

These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a final 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 could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction 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 terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing these results of an administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

Background

Commerce regulations provide that the Secretary will publish in the Federal Register a list of scope rulings on a quarterly basis.1 Our most recent notification of scope rulings was published on October 20, 2017.2 This current notice covers all scope rulings and anticircumvention determinations made by Enforcement and Compliance between October 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016, inclusive. Four additional subsequent lists will immediately follow to bring these quarterly notices up to date.

Interested parties are invited to comment on the completeness of this list of completed scope inquiries. Any comments should be submitted to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, Washington, DC 20230.

This notice is published in accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(o).

The MEP Advisory Board is authorized under Section 3003(d) of the America COMPETES Act (Pub. L. 110-69), as amended by the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act, Public Law 114-329 sec. 501 (2017), and codified at 15 U.S.C. 278k(m), in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. The Hollings MEP Program (Program) is a unique program, consisting of centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico with partnerships at the state, federal, and local levels. By statute, the MEP Advisory Board provides the NIST Director with: (1) Advice on the activities, plans, and policies of the Program; (2) assessments of the soundness of the plans and strategies of the Program; and (3) assessments of current performance against the plans of the Program.

Background information on the MEP Advisory Board is available at http://www.nist.gov/mep/about/advisory-board.cfm.

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the MEP Advisory Board will hold an open meeting on Wednesday, June 13, 2018, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time. The meeting agenda will include an update on Hollings MEP programmatic operations, as well as provide guidance and advice on current activities related to the 2017-2022 MEP National Network Strategic Plan. The MEP Advisory Board will provide input to NIST on supply chain development with an emphasis on defense suppliers, in order to strengthen the defense industrial base; make recommendations on the development of research and performance metrics to support and enrich MEP Center evaluation, and receive updates on the “Embedding MEP in Manufacturing USA Institutes Pilot Projects” funding awards. The final agenda will be posted on the MEP Advisory Board website at http://www.nist.gov/mep/about/advisory-board.cfm.

Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the MEP Advisory Board's business are invited to request a place on the agenda. Approximately 15 minutes will be reserved for public comments at the end of the meeting. Speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received but is likely to be no more than three to five minutes each. Requests must be received in writing before June 6, 2018 to be considered. The exact time for public comments will be included in the final agenda that will be posted on the MEP Advisory Board website at http://www.nist.gov/mep/about/advisory-board.cfm. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, or those who are or were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the MEP Advisory Board, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-4800, via fax at (301) 963-6556, or electronically by email to [email protected].

Admittance Instructions: Anyone wishing to attend the MEP Advisory Board meeting must submit their name, email address, and phone number to Cheryl Gendron ([email protected] or 301-975-2785) no later than Friday, June 8, 2018, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

This is a notice in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i) that NIST is contemplating the grant of an exclusive license throughout the world, to NIST's interest in the invention embodied in PCT Application PCT\US18\20679, titled “Non-resonant Electron Spin Resonant Probe and Associated Hardware” (NIST Docket 17-017) to Global Resonance Technologies, LLC. The grant of the license would be for the manufacture and use of a system for determination of radiation dosimetry.

The prospective exclusive license will be royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published Notice, NIST receives written evidence and argument which establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The Patent Application was filed on March 2, 2018 and describes a system and methods for determining radiation exposure.

Authority:

15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(1) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App.

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award will meet on Wednesday, June 6, 2018 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Eastern time. The Judges Panel is composed of twelve members, appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, chosen for their familiarity with quality improvement operations and competitiveness issues of manufacturing companies, services companies, small businesses, nonprofits, health care providers, and educational institutions. The Judges Panel will assemble to discuss and review the role and responsibilities of the Judges Panel and information received from NIST in order to ensure the integrity of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award selection process. The agenda will include: Judges Panel roles and processes; Baldrige Program updates; new business/public comment; lessons learned from the 2017 judging process; and the 2018 Award process. A portion of this meeting is closed to the public in order to protect the proprietary data to be examined and discussed.

The portion of the meeting from 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Eastern time will include discussions on the Judges Panel roles and processes and Baldrige program updates and is open to the public. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments related to the Judges Panel general process are invited to request a place on the agenda. Approximately one-half hour will be reserved for public comments, and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be about 3 minutes each. The exact time for public comments will be included in the final agenda that will be posted on the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program website at https://patapsco.nist.gov/BoardofExam/Examiners_Judge2.cfm. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak, but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, Attention Robyn Verner, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-1020, via fax at 301-975-4967 or electronically by email to [email protected].

All visitors to the National Institute of Standards and Technology site will have to pre-register to be admitted. Please submit your name, time of arrival, email address and phone number to Robyn Verner no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, Thursday, May 31, 2018, and she will provide you with instructions for admittance. Non-U.S. citizens must submit additional information; please contact Robyn Verner by email at [email protected] or by phone at (301) 975-2702. Also, please note that under the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-13), federal agencies, including NIST, can only accept a state-issued driver's license or identification card for access to federal facilities if issued by states that are REAL ID compliant or have an extension. NIST also currently accepts other forms of federal-issued identification in lieu of a state-issued driver's license. For detailed information please contact Ms. Verner or visit: http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/visitor/.

The portion of the meeting from 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Eastern time will include discussions on lessons learned from the 2017 judging process and on the 2018 Award process, and is closed to the public in order to protect the proprietary data to be examined and discussed. The Acting Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the Assistant General Counsel for Employment, Litigation and Information, formally determined on March 7, 2018, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended by Section 5(c) of the Government in Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that a portion of the meeting of the Judges Panel may be closed to the public in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) because the meeting is likely to disclose trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) because for a government agency the meeting is likely to disclose information that could significantly frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action. Portions of the meeting involve examination of prior year Award applicant data. Award applicant data are directly related to the commercial activities and confidential information of the applicants.

NIST administers NVLAP under regulations found in 15 CFR part 285. NVLAP provides an unbiased third-party evaluation and recognition of laboratory performance, as well as expert technical assistance to upgrade that performance, by accrediting calibration and testing laboratories found competent to perform specific calibrations or tests. NVLAP is comprised of a set of Laboratory Accreditation Programs (LAPs) which are established on the basis of requests and demonstrated need. Each LAP includes specific test and/or calibration standards and related methods and protocols assembled to satisfy the unique needs for accreditation in the field of testing, field of calibration, product, or service.

Under 15 CFR 285.5, the Chief of NVLAP may terminate a specific LAP when it is determined that a need no longer exists to accredit laboratories for the services covered under the scope of the LAP. A review of the Chemical Calibration: Certifiers of Spectrophotometric NTRMs Program revealed that there are zero (0) laboratories enrolled in the program. Given this, it is unnecessary and not cost effective to continue this LAP. Therefore, the Chief of NVLAP has determined that there no longer exists a need to continue this LAP.

After the comment period, the Chief of NVLAP has determined there is no public support for the continuation of the LAP. NVLAP shall no longer grant or renew accreditations under the terminated program effective upon publication of this notice.

Additive construction by extrusion (ACE) has the potential to revolutionize construction by eliminating the need for formwork and enabling architectural or structural designs that cannot be achieved by standard practices. As ACE is in its early stages of development, this Consortium will study the measurement science needs for the successful adoption of ACE by the construction industry. The objective of this consortium will be to identify and then translate cementitious material measurements to in-line or in-process measurements for quality control and quality assurance of the ACE process. The MACE consortium will undertake the following tasks over a three-year renewable period:

Task 1 will focus on correlating off-line measurements of fresh and hardening cement paste with measures of print quality. The objectives will be to determine material performance characteristics that are critical to the success of ACE.

Task 2 will focus on developing in-situ and in-process measurements that can be used to provide feedback into the control of the ACE process. The objective will be to implement material property measurements in line to the ACE process.

Task 3 will focus on scaling paste and mortar measurements to the concrete scale, including a proper consideration of field issues. This includes, but is not limited to, hardened property measurements; studies on curing practices and finishing procedures; and development of numerical simulations of material deposition. The objectives will be to measure hardened properties of 3-D printed structures and investigate how paste and mortar measurements can inform concrete-based ACE through the use of numerical simulations.

No proprietary information will be shared as part of the Consortium.

Interested parties with relevant ACE capabilities (see below), products, and/or technical expertise to support this Consortium should contact NIST using the information provided in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

Eligibility will be determined by NIST using the information provided by an organization in response to this notice based on the information requested below, and upon the availability of necessary resources to NIST. An eligible member must be involved in current or future efforts to advance ACE, either through commercial technology development or academic research.

An organization responding to this notice should provide the following information to NIST's Consortium Manager by email.

1. Description of organization's interest in ACE and current activities prompting the development of ACE.

2. Topics of interest from the statement of work. There is no limit on the number of areas of participation.

3. List of interested party's anticipated participants.

4. For non-profit institutions, anticipated in-kind donations and cost equivalency.

A responding organization should not include any business proprietary information in its response to this request for information. NIST will not treat any information provided in response to this request as proprietary information.

NIST will notify each organization of its eligibility. In order to participate in this Consortium, each eligible organization must sign a CRADA for this Consortium. All participants to this Consortium will be bound by the same terms and conditions. Participation fees will be at least $20,000 annually. For non-profit institutions, in-kind donations equivalent to the membership fee may be accepted, subject to the discretion of NIST and justification of cost equivalency. NIST does not guarantee participation in the Consortium to any organization.

Authority:

15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(1), 15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(2)(B) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App.

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the Board of Overseers and the Judges Panel will meet in open session on Thursday, June 7, 2018 from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Eastern time. The Board of Overseers (Board), composed of approximately twelve members preeminent in the field of organizational performance excellence and appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, makes an annual report on the results of Award activities to the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), along with its recommendations for improvement of the Award process. The Judges Panel consists of no less than nine, and not more than twelve, members with balanced representation from U.S. service, manufacturing, small business, nonprofit, education, and health care industries. The Panel includes members who are familiar with the quality improvement operations and competitiveness issues of manufacturing companies, service companies, small businesses, nonprofits, health care providers, and educational institutions. The Judges Panel recommends Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award recipients to the Secretary of Commerce.

The purpose of this meeting is to discuss and review information received from NIST and from the Chair of the Judges Panel. The agenda will include: Baldrige Program News, Alliance for Performance Excellence Update, Baldrige Foundation Update, Report from the Baldrige Judges Panel, Ethics Review, Baldrige Enterprise Planning, Award Process Redesign, Proposal to Expand Award Categories, and New Business/Public Comment. The agenda may change to accommodate the Judges Panel and Board of Overseers business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Baldrige Performance Excellence Program website at http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/community/overseers.cfm. The meeting is open to the public. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Board's affairs and/or the Panel of Judges' general process are invited to request a place on the agenda. On June 7, 2018, approximately one-half hour will be reserved in the afternoon for public comments, and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be about 3 minutes each. The exact time for public comments will be included in the final agenda that will be posted on the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program website at http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/community/overseers.cfm. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak, but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, Attention Robyn Verner, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1020, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-1020, via fax at 301-975-4967 or electronically by email to [email protected].

All visitors to the National Institute of Standards and Technology site will have to pre-register to be admitted. Please submit your name, time of arrival, email address and phone number to Robyn Verner no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, Thursday, May 31, 2018, and she will provide you with instructions for admittance. Non-U.S. citizens must submit additional information; please contact Robyn Verner by email at [email protected] or by phone at (301) 975-2361. Also, please note that under the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-13), federal agencies, including NIST, can only accept a state-issued driver's license or identification card for access to federal facilities if issued by states that are REAL ID compliant or have an extension. NIST also currently accepts other forms of federal-issued identification in lieu of a state-issued driver's license. For detailed information please contact Ms. Verner or visit: http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/visitor/.

Agenda Tuesday, June 12, 2018

After introductions and brief announcements, the meeting will begin with reports from the Council Chairman and Executive Director, NMFS's Regional Administrator for the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO), liaisons from the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, representatives from NOAA General Counsel and the Office of Law Enforcement, and staff from the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and U.S. Coast Guard. Next, the Council will hear from its Skate Committee. The Council is expected to take final action on Framework Adjustment 6 to the Northeast Skate Complex Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which was developed to consider alternatives for prolonging the skate wing fishery. The Council then will discuss the Council Program Review Panel's final report and potentially take action on next steps to improve operations based on the panel's recommendations. The Observer Policy/Industry-Funded Monitoring Committee will be up next. The Council will consider and potentially adopt the committee's comments on NMFS's draft policy directive for allocating costs in electronic monitoring programs for federally managed U.S. fisheries.

After the lunch break, members of the public will have the opportunity to speak during an open comment period on issues that relate to Council business but are not included on the published agenda for this meeting. The Council asks the public to limit remarks to 3-5 minutes. Following public comment, the Atlantic Herring Committee will provide a report on two items. First, the committee will discuss and present its recommendation on whether or not river herring and shad should be added as stocks in the Atlantic herring fishery. The Council may take action based on the committee's advice. Next, the Council will receive an initial overview of the 2019-2021 specifications process. The Council also may consider options for mitigating impacts of potentially lower catch limits through appropriate adjustments authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Council then will adjourn for the day. Immediately thereafter and in the same room, the Council will conduct a public hearing on Amendment 8 to the Atlantic Herring FMP, which proposes alternatives to: (1) Establish an acceptable biological catch (ABC) control rule for Atlantic herring; and (2) address potential localized depletion and user conflicts in the fishery.

The second day of the meeting will begin with a report on NMFS's Fisheries Allocation Policy Directive and two associated Procedural Directives. The Council will discuss these directives for reviewing fisheries allocations, which include identifying “triggers” to initiate an allocation review. Next, the Council will receive an update from NEFSC staff on the Northeast Fisheries Observer Program and the 2018 fishing year sea day schedule. The Groundfish Committee report will follow. The Council will initiate Framework Adjustment 58 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP, which will include: (1) 2019 Total allowable catches for U.S./Canada stocks of Eastern Georges Bank (GB) cod, Eastern GB haddock, and GB yellowtail flounder; (2) rebuilding plans for several groundfish stocks; and (3) other measures. Groundfish Monitoring Amendment 23 will be taken up next. The Council will view video footage of electronic monitoring in operation on fishing vessels. It then will receive an update on the potential range of alternatives in the amendment, which is being developed to improve the overall catch and discard monitoring program in the Northeast multispecies fishery. The Council may select the range of alternatives for further analysis at this meeting. The Council also will receive a progress report from its Fishery Dependent Data Working Group

Following a lunch break, the Council will continue with and conclude its work on the groundfish items. Then, the Council will receive a short update on the Research Set-Aside (RSA) Program Review Panel Report, which is being prepared by representatives from the Council, GARFO, and NEFSC. Next, the Scallop Committee will provide a list of recommended 2019-2020 scallop RSA priorities. The Council will discuss and approve a final list of research priorities for the program. The Scallop Committee also will provide an initial overview of the 2019-2020 scallop specifications process. In its final item of business before adjourning for the day, the Council will finalize the list of proposals being prepared for NMFS to address regulatory reform as mandated by Executive Orders 13777, 13771, and 13565.

The third day of the meeting will begin with Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management (EBFM). The Council will receive a summary report on the Center for Independent Experts EBFM Strategy Review from the peer review panel chair. The Council also will receive an update on future EBFM Committee activities. The Habitat Committee will be up next with two items. First will be the Clam Dredge Framework, which is being developed to consider continued surfclam dredge fishery access to the new Great South Channel Habitat Management Area and possible consideration of a mussel dredge exemption. The Council is expected to select the framework's range of alternatives for further analysis at this meeting. The Council also will receive an update on ongoing offshore energy activities in the Northeast and discuss any needed consultations with federal agencies. After that, the Council will receive an update on efforts by the Northeast Regional Coordinating Council to improve timing and scheduling of stock assessments and stock assessment research. The Council will close out the meeting with “other business.”

Although non-emergency issues not contained on this agenda may come before the Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. The public also should be aware that the meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

The 129th SSC meeting will be held between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on June 6-8, 2018. The joint Executive & Budget and Legislative Standing Committees will meet on June 10, 2018, from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. The 173rd Council meeting will be held between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on June 11, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on June 12 and between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on June 13, 2018. On June 11, 2018, the Council will host a Fishers Forum between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. All times listed are local island times.

Agenda items noted as “Final Action Items” refer to actions that result in Council transmittal of a proposed fishery management plan, proposed plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). In addition to the agenda items listed here, the Council will hear recommendations from Council advisors. Opportunities to submit public comment will be provided throughout the agendas. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change and will be announced in advance at the Council meeting. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business. Background documents will be available from and written comments should be sent to Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, phone: (808) 522-8220 or fax: (808) 522-8226.

Non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Council for discussion and formal Council action during the 173rd meeting. However, Council action on regulatory issues will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any regulatory issue arising after publication of this document that requires emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency.

These meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

Background

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

An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.

NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

The MMPA states that the term “take” means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal.

Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D) authorization requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

NMFS preliminary determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance of incidental harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is anticipated) of NOAA's Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A, and we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical exclusion under NEPA.

We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to making a final decision as to whether application of this CE is appropriate in this circumstance.

On November 21, 2017, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal species incidental to Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in Seattle, Washington, from August 1, 2018 to July 31, 2019. After receiving the revised project description and the revised IHA application, NMFS determined that the IHA application is adequate and complete on April 4, 2018. NMFS is proposing to authorize the take by Level A and Level B harassments of the following marine mammal species: harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris); California sea lion (Zalophus californianus); Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus); killer whale (Orcinus orca); long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus); humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata); harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena); and Dall's porpoise (P. dalli). Neither WSDOT nor NMFS expect mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.

NMFS previously issued an IHA to WSDOT for the first year of this project (FR 21579; July 7, 2017). WSDOT complied with all the requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the previous IHA and information regarding their monitoring results may be found in the Estimated Take section.

The purpose of the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to preserve the transportation function of an aging, deteriorating and seismically deficient facility to continue providing safe and reliable service. The project will also address existing safety concerns related to conflicts between vehicles and pedestrian traffic and operational inefficiencies.

Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water work timing restrictions to protect ESA-listed salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water construction is limited each year to July 16 through February 15.

The Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman Dock, serving State Route 519, is located on the downtown Seattle waterfront, in King County, Washington. The terminal services vessels from the Bainbridge Island and Bremerton routes, and is the most heavily used terminal in the Washington State Ferry system. The Seattle terminal is located in Section 6, Township 24 North, Range 4 East, and is adjacent to Elliott Bay, tributary to Puget Sound (Figure 1-2 of the IHA application). Land use in the area is highly urban, and includes business, industrial, the Port of Seattle container loading facility, residential, the Pioneer Square Historic District and local parks.

The project will reconfigure the Colman Dock while maintaining approximately the same vehicle holding capacity as current conditions. The construction began in August 2017. In the 2017-2018 season, the construction activities were focused on the South Trestle, Terminal Building Foundation, and the temporary and permanent Passenger Offloading Facility.

In the 2018-2019 season, WSDOT plans to continue the project by constructing the North Trestle, and Slip 3 bridge seat, overhead loading, wingwall, and inner dolphin. Both impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile removal would be conducted. A total of 37 days are estimated for pile driving and 77 days for pile removal.

In-water construction methods include:

• Installing 119 36-inch (in) permanent steel piles with a vibratory hammer, and then proofed with an impact hammer for the last 5-10 feet;

• Installing six 36-in and (8) 30-in steel piles with a vibratory hammer;

• Installing one 108-in steel pile with a vibratory hammer;

• Removing all existing 12-in steel, 14-in timber, 14-in H, 24-in steel and 30-in steel piles with a vibratory hammer;

• Installing and then removing eight 24-in Slip 3 Overhead loading temporary piles with a vibratory hammer; and

• Installing and then removing 147 24-in temporary template piles with a vibratory hammer.

A list of pile driving and removal activities is provided in Table 1.

Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in this document (please see “Proposed Mitigation” and “Proposed Monitoring and Reporting”).

Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more general information about these species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's website (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/).

Table 2 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in the lower Puget Sound area and summarizes information related to the population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats.

Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For harbor seal Washington northern inland waters stock, the abundance is based on radio-tagging studies conducted at three Washington inland waters with correcting factors described in the 2016 SARs (Jefferies et al., 2003; Carretta et al., 2017). For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS's 2016 U.S. Pacific Draft Marine Mammal SARs (Carretta et al., 2017). All values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and are available in the 2016 SARs (Carretta et al., 2017); and draft 2017 SARs (available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).

All species that could potentially occur in the proposed survey areas are included in Table 2. However, the temporal and/or spatial occurrence of humpback whale and Southern Resident killer whale (SRKW) and the implementation of monitoring and mitigation measures are such that take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed further beyond the explanation provided here. The occurrence of humpback whale in the WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project area is considered extralimital, and WSDOT's 2017 monitoring report showed no sighting of this species. Although the SRKW could occur in the vicinity of the project area, WSDOT proposes to implement strict monitoring and mitigation measures with assistance from local marine mammal researchers and observers. Thus, the take of this marine mammal stock can be avoided (see details in Proposed Mitigation section).

In addition, the sea otter may be found in Puget Sound area However, this species is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are not considered further in this document.

Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016) described generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. The functional groups and the associated frequencies are indicated below (note that these frequency ranges correspond to the range for the composite group, with the entire range not necessarily reflecting the capabilities of every species within that group):

• Low-frequency cetaceans (mysticetes): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 hertz (Hz) and 35 kilohertz (kHz);

• Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger toothed whales, beaked whales, and most delphinids): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;

• High-frequency cetaceans (porpoises, river dolphins, and members of the genera Kogia and Cephalorhynchus; including two members of the genus Lagenorhynchus, on the basis of recent echolocation data and genetic data): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz.

• Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz;

• Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz.

• The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013).

The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth et al., 2013).

For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency ranges, please see NMFS (2016) for a review of available information. Twelve marine mammal species (8 cetacean and 4 pinniped (2 otariid and 2 phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean species that may be present, two species are classified as low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., gray whale and humpback whale), two are classified as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise and Dall's porpoise), and the rest of them mid-frequency cetaceans.

This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The “Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination” section will consider the content of this section, the “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section, and the “Proposed Mitigation” section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks.

Potential impacts to marine mammals from the proposed Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project are from noise generated during in-water pile driving and pile removal activities.

Here, we first provide background information on marine mammal hearing before discussing the potential effects of the use of active acoustic sources on marine mammals.

The WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project using in-water pile driving and pile removal could adversely affect marine mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated noise levels in the vicinity of the activity area.

Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift (TS)—an increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran et al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold shift include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal pattern, and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of hearing threshold shift normally decreases over time following cessation of the noise exposure. The amount of TS just after exposure is the initial TS. If the TS eventually returns to zero (i.e., the threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is a temporary threshold shift (TTS) (Southall et al., 2007).

Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)—When animals exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced TS. An animal can experience TTS or permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last from minutes or hours to days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a temporary loss of hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can also occur in a specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above for TTS.

For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran, 2015). For pinnipeds in water, data are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal, and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al., 2012b).

Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a harbor porpoise after exposing it to airgun noise with a received sound pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 micropascal (μPa), which corresponds to a sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re: 1 μPa2 s after integrating exposure. Because the airgun noise is a broadband impulse, one cannot directly determine the equivalent of root mean square (rms) SPL from the reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a conservative conversion factor of 16 dB for broadband signals from seismic surveys (McCauley, et al., 2000) to correct for the difference between peak-to-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 μPa, and the received levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would be higher. Therefore, based on these studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor porpoises is lower than other cetacean species empirically tested (Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012).

Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree (elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious (similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note, reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.

In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for marine mammals, which utilize sound for vital biological functions (Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as from human sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their performance fitness in survival and reproduction.

Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize. Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales). However, lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also affect communication signals when they occur near the noise band and thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).

Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms ofSPL) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For WSDOT's dolphin relocation project, noises from vibratory pile driving and pile removal contribute to the elevated ambient noise levels in the project area, thus increasing potential for or severity of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project area are high due to ongoing shipping, construction and other activities in the Puget Sound.

Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as changing durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).

The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises (such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Ferry Terminal, both 120-dB and 160-dB levels are considered for effects analysis because WSDOT plans to use both impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile removal.

The biological significance of many of these behavioral disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral modification could be biologically significant if the change affects growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity, duration, and context of the effects.

The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are associated with elevated sound levels produced by vibratory pile removal and pile driving in the area. However, other potential impacts to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.

With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to communicate (Tavolga et al., 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson and Dill, 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the signal in relation to the natural background noise level.

The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition (Engas et al., 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of sound (such as noise from impact pile driving) rather than continuous signals (such as noise from vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al., 1981), and a quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal intensity rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the same level.

During the coastal construction, only a small fraction of the available habitat would be ensonified at any given time. Disturbance to fish species would be short-term and fish would return to their pre-disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the proposed construction would have little, if any, impact on marine mammals' prey availability in the area where construction work is planned.

Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species.

This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration of whether the number of takes is “small” and the negligible impact determination.

Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to noise generated from vibratory pile driving and removal. Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown measures—discussed in detail below in Proposed Mitigation section), Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor proposed to be authorized.

As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.

Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these components in more detail and present the take estimate.

Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).

Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources—Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above received levels of 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.

Applicant's proposed activity includes the generation of impulse (impact pile driving) and non-impulse (vibratory pile driving and removal) sources; and, therefore, both 160- and 120-dB re 1 μPa (rms) are used.

Level A harassment for non-explosive sources—NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 2016) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). Applicant's proposed activity would generate and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and pile removal) noises. These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the best available science and soliciting input multiple times from both the public and peer reviewers to inform the final product and are provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.

Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds.

The source level for vibratory pile driving and removal of the 24- and 30-in steel pile is based on vibratory pile driving of the 30-in steel pile at Port Townsend (WSDOT, 2010). The unweighted SPLrms source level at 10 meters (m) from the pile is 174 dB re 1 re 1 μPa.

The source level for vibratory pile driving of the 36-in steel piles is based on vibratory test pile driving of 36-in steel piles at Port Townsend in 2010 (Laughlin 2011). Recordings of vibratory pile driving were made at a distance of 10 m from the pile. The results show that the unweighted SPLrms for vibratory pile driving of 36-in steel pile was 177 dB re 1 μPa.

The source level for vibratory pile driving of the 108-in steel pile is based on measurements of 72-in steel piles vibratory driving conducted by CALTRANS. The unweighted SPLrms source level ranged between 170 and 180 dB re 1 µPa at 10 m from the pile (CALTRANS 2015). The value of 180 dB is chosen to be more conservative.

The source level for impact pile driving of the 36-in steel pile is based on impact test pile driving for the 36-in steel pile at Mukilteo in November 2006 (WSDOT 2007). Recordings of the impact pile driving that were made at a distance of 10 m from the pile were analyzed using Matlab. The results show that the unweighted source levels are 178 dB re 1 µPa2-s for SELss and 193 dB re 1 µPa for SPLrms. The peak source level for impact pile driving of the 36-in steel pile is based on measurement conducted by CALTRANS for the same type and dimension of the pile, which is 210 dBpk re 1 µPa.

The source level for vibratory pile removal of 14-in timber pile is based measurements conducted at the Port Townsend Ferry Terminal during vibratory removal of a 12-in timber pile by WSDOT (Laughlin 2011). The recorded source level is 152 dBrms re 1 µPa at 16 m from the pile, with an adjusted source level of 155 dBrms re 1 µPa at 10 m.

The source levels for vibratory pile removal of 12-in steel and 14-in steel H piles are based on vibratory pile driving of 12-in steel pipe pile measured by CALTRANS. The unweighted source level is 155 dBrms re 1 µPa at 10 m.

A summary of source levels is presented in Table 4.

These source levels are used to compute the Level A injury zones and to estimate the Level B harassment zones. For Level A harassment zones, since the peak source levels for both pile driving are below the injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used to do the calculations using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016).

The Level B harassment ensonified areas for vibratory removal of the 14-in timber, 12-in steel, 14-in steel H, and 18-in concrete piles are based on the above source level of 155 dBrms re 1 µPa at 10 m, applying practical spreading loss of 15*log(R) for transmission loss calculation. The derived distance to the 120-dB Level B zone is 2,175 m.

For Level B harassment ensonified areas for vibratory pile driving and removal of the 24-in, 30-in, 36-in, and 108-in steel piles, the distance is based on measurements conducted during the year 1 Seattle multimodal project at Colman. The result showed that pile driving noise of two 36-in steel piles being concurrently driven was no longer detectable at a range of 5.4 miles (8.69 km) (WSDOT 2017). Therefore, the distance of 8,690 m is selected as the Level B harassment distance for vibratory pile driving and removal of the 24-in, 30-in, 36-in and 108-in steel piles.

The Level B harassment ensonified area for impact pile driving of the 36-in steel piles is based on the above source level of 193 dBrms re 1 µPa at 10 m, applying practical spreading loss of 15*log(R) for transmission loss calculation. The derived distance to the 160-dB Level B zone is 1,585 m.

For Level A harassment, calculation is based on pile driving duration of each pile and the number of piles installed or removed per day, using NMFS optional spreadsheet.

Distances of ensonified area for different pile driving/removal activities for different marine mammal hearing groups is present in Table 5.

In this section we provide the information about the presence, density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take calculations.

All marine mammal density data except harbor seal, California sea lion, harbor porpoise, bottlenose dolphin, and short-beaked common dolphin are from the U.S. Navy Marine Species Density Report. For harbor seal and California sea lion, because WSDOT has better local distribution data based on recent survey in the area, local animal abundance are used to calculate the take numbers. Specifically, the occurrence of these two species are based on local seal abundance information off the Seattle area from Year One (2017/18) of WSDOT's Seattle Colman Project.

For bottlenose dolphin and short-beaked common dolphin, no density estimate is available. Therefore, take numbers for these two species are based on prior anecdotal observations and strandings in the action area (Shuster et al., 2015; Huggins et al., 2016).

Harbor porpoise density is based on a recent study by Jefferson et al. (2016) for the Seattle area near the Colman Dock.

A summary of marine mammal density, days and Level A and Level B harassment areas from different pile driving and removal activities is provided in Table 6.

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).

Advisory Panel Appointments.

Committee review and approve a range of alternatives for consideration by the Council.

Reports will be received from the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard.

Review Advisory Panel, SSC, and staff recommendations for 2019 specifications and recommend any changes if necessary.

Take final action on modifications to mackerel closure provisions.

Public hearing on Amendment 8 to the Atlantic Herring FMP with proposed alternatives to: (1) Establish an acceptable biological catch control rule for Atlantic herring; and (2) address potential localized depletion and user conflicts in the fishery.

Update on progress (FMAT, AP, and Committee meetings); approve draft goals and objectives for inclusion in a public hearing document; consider management unit alternatives for consideration by the SSC.

Review and approve Draft EIS.

Discuss and approve recommendations for regulatory streamlining.

Committee Reports (Executive Committee and Surfclam/Ocean Quahog Committee); Executive Director's Report (Update on mackerel rebuilding framework and consider changes to alternatives if necessary); Organization Reports; and Liaison Reports.

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.

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.

The primary purpose of the meeting is for the CPSAS and the CPSMT to develop supplemental reports on a potential for a fishery management plan (FMP) amendment to consider changes to the incidental take provisions for the CPS live bait fishery.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may be discussed, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any issues arising after publication of this document that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

The public listening station is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at [email protected] or (503) 820-2411) at least 10 days prior to the meeting date.

The June 7-13, 2018 meeting of the Pacific Council will be streamed live on the internet. The broadcasts begin initially at 9 a.m. PDT Friday, June 8, 2018 and continue at 8 a.m. daily through Wednesday, June 13, 2018. Broadcasts end daily at 5 p.m. PDT or when business for the day is complete. Only the audio portion and presentations displayed on the screen at the Pacific Council meeting will be broadcast. The audio portion is listen-only; you will be unable to speak to the Pacific Council via the broadcast. To access the meeting online, please use the following link: http://www.gotomeeting.com/online/webinar/join-webinar and enter the June Webinar ID, 530-089-227, and your email address. You can attend the webinar online using a computer, tablet, or smart phone, using the GoToMeeting application. It is recommended that you use a computer headset to listen to the meeting, but you may use your telephone for the audio-only portion of the meeting. The audio portion may be attended using a telephone by dialing the toll number 1-562-247-8321 (not a toll-free number), audio access code 240-052-611, and entering the audio pin shown after joining the webinar.

The following items are on the Pacific Council agenda, but not necessarily in this order. Agenda items noted as “Final Action” refer to actions requiring the Council to transmit a proposed fishery management plan, proposed plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Additional detail on agenda items, Council action, advisory entity meeting times, and meeting rooms are described in Agenda Item A.4, Proposed Council Meeting Agenda, and will be in the advance June 2018 briefing materials and posted on the Pacific Council website at www.pcouncil.org no later than Friday, May 18, 2018.

Advisory body agendas will include discussions of relevant issues that are on the Pacific Council agenda for this meeting, and may also include issues that may be relevant to future Council meetings. Proposed advisory body agendas for this meeting will be available on the Pacific Council website http://www.pcouncil.org/council-operations/council-meetings/current-briefing-book/ no later than Friday, May 18, 2018.

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

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at (503) 820-2280, ext. 411 at least 10 business days prior to the meeting date.

The Shark Conservation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-348) amended the Moratorium Protection Act by requiring that actions be taken by the United States to strengthen shark conservation. In November 2015, the Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act of 2015 (IUUFEA) (Pub. L. 114-81) further amended the Moratorium Protection Act by, among other things, expanding the scope of information that can be used for the identification of nations to three years for the IUU fishing and bycatch provisions. In December 2016 the Ensuring Access to Pacific Fisheries Act (EAPFA) (Pub. L. 114-327) amended the Moratorium Protection Act by also expanding the scope of information that can be used for the identification of nations to three years for the shark provisions.

Specifically, the Moratorium Protection Act requires the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to identify in a biennial report to Congress those nations whose fishing vessels are engaged, or have been engaged at any point during the preceding three years, in IUU fishing. The definition of IUU fishing can be found at 50 CFR 300.201 and includes:

(1) Fishing activities that violate conservation and management measures required under an international fishery management agreement to which the United States is a party, including catch limits or quotas, capacity restrictions, bycatch reduction requirements, shark conservation measures, and data reporting;

(2) In the case of non-parties to an international fishery management agreement to which the United States is a party, fishing activities that would undermine the conservation of the resources managed under that agreement;

(3) Overfishing of fish stocks shared by the United States, for which there are no applicable international conservation or management measures or in areas with no applicable international fishery management organization or agreement, that has adverse impacts on such stocks;

(4) Fishing activity that has an adverse impact on vulnerable marine ecosystems such as seamounts, hydrothermal vents, cold water corals and other vulnerable marine ecosystems located beyond any national jurisdiction, for which there are no applicable conservation or management measures or in areas with no applicable international fishery management organization or agreement; and

(5) Fishing activities by foreign flagged vessels in U.S. waters without authorization of the United States.

In addition, the Secretary must identify in the biennial report those nations whose fishing vessels are engaged, or have been engaged at any point during the preceding three years in fishing activities in waters beyond any national jurisdiction that result in bycatch of a PLMR, or beyond the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) that result in bycatch of a PLMR shared by the United States, and that have not implemented measures to address that bycatch that are comparable in effectiveness to U.S. regulatory requirements. In this context, PLMRs are defined as non-target fish, sea turtles, sharks, or marine mammals that are protected under U.S. law or international agreement, including the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Shark Finning Prohibition Act, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna. PLMRs do not include species, except sharks, managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act, or any international fishery management agreement. A list of species considered as PLMRs for this purpose is available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/international-affairs/identification-iuu-fishing-activities.

Furthermore, the Shark Conservation Act and the EAPFA requires that the Secretary identify nations in a biennial report to Congress whose fishing vessels are engaged, or have been engaged during the preceding three years prior to the biennial report in fishing activities or practices in waters beyond any national jurisdiction that target or incidentally catch sharks and the nation has not adopted a regulatory program to provide for the conservation of sharks, including measures to prohibit removal of any of the fins of a shark (including the tail) and discarding the carcass of the shark at sea, that is comparable to that of the United States, taking into account different conditions.

More information regarding the identification process and how the information received will be used in that process can be found in the regulations codified at 50 CFR 300.200. Note that the timeframe for activities to be considered for IUU fishing, bycatch, and shark identifications has not been changed to reflect the amendments in the IUUFEA and EAPFA to three years each.

The fifth biennial report to Congress was submitted in January 2017 and is available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/international-affairs/identification-iuu-fishing-activities. The report identified three nations for IUU fishing.

In fulfillment of its requirements under the Moratorium Protection Act, NMFS is preparing the sixth biennial report to Congress, which will identify nations whose fishing vessels are engaged in IUU fishing or fishing practices that result in bycatch of PLMRs, and/or shark catch in waters beyond any national jurisdiction without a regulatory program comparable to the United States. NMFS is soliciting information from the public that could assist in its identification of nations engaged in activities that meet the criteria described above for IUU fishing, PLMR bycatch, or shark catch in waters beyond any national jurisdiction. Some types of information that may prove useful to NMFS include:

• Documentation (photographs, etc.) of IUU activity or fishing vessels engaged in PLMR bycatch or catch of sharks on the high seas;

• Documentation (photographs, etc.) of fishing vessels engaged in shared PLMR bycatch in any waters beyond the U.S. EEZ;

• Fishing vessel records;

• Trade data supporting evidence that a nation's vessels are engaged in shark catch on the high seas;

• Reports from off-loading facilities, port-side government officials, enforcement agents, military personnel, port inspectors, transshipment vessel workers and fish importers;

• Sightings of vessels included on RFMO IUU vessel lists;

• RFMO catch documents and statistical document programs;

• Nation's domestic regulations for bycatch and shark conservation and management;

• Action or inaction at the national level, resulting in non-compliance with RFMO conservation and management measures, such as exceeding quotas or catch limits, or failing to report or misreporting data of the nation's fishing activities; and

• Reports from governments, international organizations, or nongovernmental organizations.

NMFS will consider all available information, as appropriate, when making a determination whether or not to identify a particular nation in the biennial report to Congress. As stated previously, NMFS is limited in the data it may use as the basis of a nation's identification. This information includes IUU fishing activity, bycatch of PLMRs, and shark fishing activity in waters beyond any national jurisdiction in 2016, 2017 and 2018. Information should be as specific as possible as this will assist NMFS in its review. NMFS will consider several criteria when determining whether information is appropriate for use in making identifications, including:

• Corroboration of information;

• Whether multiple sources have been able to provide information in support of an identification;

• The methodology used to collect the information;

• Specificity of the information provided;

• Susceptibility of the information to falsification and alteration; and

• Credibility of the individuals or organization providing the information.

With regard to marine mammals, NMFS is also seeking information on foreign commercial fishing operations that export fish and fish products to the United States and the level of incidental and intentional mortality and serious injury of marine mammals in those fisheries. NMFS will use this information to identify harvesting nations with commercial fishing operations that export fish and fish products to the United States and classify those fisheries based on their frequency of marine mammal interactions as either “exempt” or “export” fisheries as part of its development of the List of Foreign Fisheries (LOFF). The classification of a fishery on the final LOFF determines which regulatory requirements will be applicable to that fishery for it to receive a comparability finding necessary to export fish and fish products to the United States from that fishery. The final LOFF can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/foreign/international-affairs/list-foreign-fisheries

In March 2018, NMFS published its final 2017 LOFF (83 FR 11703, March 16, 2018), as required by the regulations implementing the Fish and Fish Product Import Provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The final LOFF reflects information received in its response to information requests to nations and the public (82 FR 2961, January 10, 2017) and during the comment period on interactions between commercial fisheries exporting fish and fish products to the United States and marine mammals, and updates and revisions to the draft LOFF (82 FR 39762, August 22, 2017).

NMFS will revise the LOFF in 2020. In anticipation of this revision, NMFS is soliciting information from harvesting nations; other foreign, regional, and local governments; regional fishery management organizations; nongovernmental organizations; industry organizations; academic institutions; and citizens and citizen groups to identify commercial fishing operations with intentional or incidental mortality and serious injury of marine mammals. For each item we are requesting you identify the exporting nation as the harvesting nation, the processing or intermediary nation, or both. For fisheries exporting fish and fish products to the United States NMFS is requesting the following information:

• Number of participants;

• Number of vessels;

• Gear type;

• Target species;

• Area of operation;

• Fishing season; and

• Information regarding the frequency of marine mammal incidental and intentional mortality and serious injury.

Such information may include fishing vessel records; reports of on-board fishery observers; information from off-loading facilities, port-side government officials, enforcement agents, transshipment vessel workers and fish importers; government vessel registries; RFMO or intergovernmental agreement documents, reports, and statistical document programs; appropriate catch certification programs; and published literature and reports on commercial fishing operations with intentional or incidental mortality and serious injury of marine mammals.

NMFS will consider all available information, as appropriate. Information should be as specific as possible as this will assist NMFS in its review. NMFS will consider several criteria when determining whether information is appropriate for use in making identifications, including:

• Corroboration of information;

• Whether multiple sources have been able to provide information in support of an identification;

• The methodology used to collect the information;

• Specificity of the information provided;

• Susceptibility of the information to falsification and alteration; and

• Credibility of the individuals or organization providing the information.

Title of Collection: AmeriCorps Enrollment and Exit Form.

OMB Control Number: 3045-0006.

Type of Review: Revision.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals and Households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 160,000.

Total Estimated Annual Frequency: Once.

Total Estimated Average Response Time per Response: 10 minutes.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 266,667.

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

Abstract: CNCS is seeking approval of the National Service Trust Enrollment Form and the National Service Trust Exit Form, which is used by AmeriCorps members and program staff to enroll in the National Service Trust and to document the completion of a member's term of service, a requirement to receiving a Segal Education Award, and to meet other legal and program requirements. CNCS also seeks to continue using the currently approved information collection until the revised information collection is approved by OMB. The currently approved information collection is due to expire on August 30, 2020.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. All written comments will be available for public inspection on regulations.gov.

This information collection request contains: (1) OMB No. 1910-5166; (2) Information Collection Request Title: Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Commercialization Survey; (3) Type of Request: Three year extension; (4) Purpose: The DOE needs this information to satisfy the program requirements of the Small Business Act, including requirements established in the SBIR program reauthorization legislation, Public Law 106-554 and Public Law 107-50. This data will be collected by the DOE and provided to the Small Business Administration (SBA) to maintain information about SBIR/STTR awards issued through the two programs. This data will be provided by DOE based on information collected from SBIR/STTR awardees. This data will be used by DOE, SBA, and Congress to assess the commercial impact of these two programs; (5) Annual

Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,500; (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 2,500; (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 2,500; (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $120,000.

Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

On May 1, 2018, DOE received an application from Matador for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada as a power marketer for a five-year term using existing international transmission facilities.

In its application, Matador states that it does not own or control any electric generation or transmission facilities, and it does not have a franchised service area. The electric energy that the Applicant proposes to export to Canada would be surplus energy purchased from third parties such as electric utilities and Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The existing international transmission facilities to be utilized by the Applicant have previously been authorized by Presidential Permits issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended, and are appropriate for open access transmission by third parties.

Procedural Matters: Any person desiring to be heard in this proceeding should file a comment or protest to the application at the address provided above. Protests should be filed in accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings should file a motion to intervene at the above address in accordance with FERC Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five copies of such comments, protests, or motions to intervene should be sent to the address provided above on or before the date listed above.

Comments and other filings concerning Matador's application to export electric energy to Canada should be clearly marked with OE Docket No. EA-453. An additional copy is to be provided to both Ruta Kalvaitis Skučas, Pierce Atwood LLC, 1875 K St. NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20006 and Diana Stoica, Matador Power Marketing, Inc., 523 Soudan Avenue, Toronto, ON M4S 1X1.

A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to DOE's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021) and after a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system.

Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program website at http://energy.gov/node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy at [email protected].

NNSA published a notice of intent to prepare an EIS in the November 29, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 71490). In 2002, NNSA prepared an Environmental Assessment for the construction and operation of the Facility. On February 26, 2002, NNSA issued an Environmental Assessment and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the construction and operation of the BSL-3 Facility.

Construction on the windowless, single-story, 3,200-square foot BSL-3 Facility, housing one BSL-2 laboratory, and two BSL-3 laboratories began in late 2002, and was completed in the fall of 2003. After completion of the NEPA process and BSL-3 Facility construction, NNSA determined there were seismic concerns that had not been adequately analyzed during the design of the BSL-3 Facility. As a result, in February 2004, NNSA withdrew the FONSI with respect to the operation of the BSL-3 Facility and subsequently decided to prepare an environmental impact statement. The EIS would have evaluated the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Federal action and reasonable alternatives. NNSA is now terminating the NEPA EIS process.

This document provides the receipt and status reports for the period from December 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. The Agency is providing notice of receipt of PMNs, SNUNs and MCANs (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (Biotech exemption); TMEs, both pending and/or concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

EPA is also providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., a chemical substance may be either an “existing” chemical substance or a “new” chemical substance. Any chemical substance that is not on EPA's TSCA Inventory of Chemical Substances (TSCA Inventory) is classified as a “new chemical substance,” while a chemical substance that is listed on the TSCA Inventory is classified as an “existing chemical substance.” (See TSCA section 3(11).) For more information about the TSCA Inventory go to: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

Any person who intends to manufacture (including import) a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose, or to manufacture or process a chemical substance in a non-exempt manner for a use that EPA has determined is a significant new use, is required by TSCA section 5 to provide EPA with a PMN, MCAN or SNUN, as appropriate, before initiating the activity. EPA will review the notice, make a risk determination on the chemical substance or significant new use, and take appropriate action as described in TSCA section 5(a)(3).

TSCA section 5(h)(1) authorizes EPA to allow persons, upon application and under appropriate restrictions, to manufacture or process a new chemical substance, or a chemical substance subject to a significant new use rule (SNUR) issued under TSCA section 5(a)(2), for “test marketing” purposes, upon a showing that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the chemical will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This is referred to as a test marketing exemption, or TME. For more information about the requirements applicable to a new chemical go to: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems.

Under TSCA sections 5 and 8 and EPA regulations, EPA is required to publish in the Federal Register certain information, including notice of receipt of a PMN/SNUN/MCAN (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (biotech exemption); an application for a TME, both pending and concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on the new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

This action provides information that is directed to the public in general.

No.

1. Submitting confidential business information (CBI). Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

In the past, EPA has published individual notices reflecting the status of TSCA section 5 filings received, pending or concluded. In 1995, the Agency modified its approach and streamlined the information published in the Federal Register after providing notice of such changes to the public and an opportunity to comment (See the Federal Register of May 12, 1995, (60 FR 25798) (FRL-4942-7). Since the passage of the Lautenberg amendments to TSCA in 2016, public interest in information on the status of section 5 cases under EPA review and, in particular, the final determination of such cases, has increased. In an effort to be responsive to the regulated community, the users of this information, and the general public, to comply with the requirements of TSCA, to conserve EPA resources and to streamline the process and make it more timely, EPA is providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

For the 41 PMN/SNUN/MCANs received by EPA during this period, Table I provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the notices received by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the notice, a notation of whether the submission is an initial submission, or an amendment, a notation of which version was received, the date the notice was received by EPA, the submitting manufacturer (i.e., domestic producer or importer), the potential uses identified by the manufacturer in the notice, and the chemical substance identity.

As used in each of the tables in this unit, (S) indicates that the information in the table is the specific information provided by the submitter, and (G) indicates that this information in the table is generic information because the specific information provided by the submitter was claimed as CBI. Submissions which are initial submissions will not have a letter following the case number and the version column will note “Initial submission”. Submissions which are amendments to previous submissions will have a case number followed by the letter “A” (e.g. P-18-1234A). The version column designates submissions in sequence as “1”, “2”, “3”, etc. Note that in some cases, an initial submission is not numbered as version 1; this is because earlier version(s) were rejected as incomplete or invalid submissions.

In Table II. of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as CBI) on the NOCs received by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the NOC, the submission document type (initial or amended), the date the NOC was received by EPA, the date of commencement provided by the submitter in the NOC, a notation of the type of amendment (e.g., amendment to generic name, specific name, technical contact information, etc.) and chemical substance identity.

In Table III. of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the test information received by EPA during this time period: The EPA case number assigned to the test information; the date the test information was received by EPA, the type of test information submitted, and chemical substance identity.

If you are interested in information that is not included in these tables, you may contact EPA's technical information contact or general information contact as described under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to access additional non-CBI information that may be available.

This document provides the receipt and status reports for the period from November 1, 2017 to November 30, 2017. The Agency is providing notice of receipt of PMNs, SNUNs and MCANs (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (Biotech exemption); TMEs, both pending and/or concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

EPA is also providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., a chemical substance may be either an “existing” chemical substance or a “new” chemical substance. Any chemical substance that is not on EPA's TSCA Inventory of Chemical Substances (TSCA Inventory) is classified as a “new chemical substance,” while a chemical substance that is listed on the TSCA Inventory is classified as an “existing chemical substance.” (See TSCA section 3(11).) For more information about the TSCA Inventory go to: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

Any person who intends to manufacture (including import) a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose, or to manufacture or process a chemical substance in a non-exempt manner for a use that EPA has determined is a significant new use, is required by TSCA section 5 to provide EPA with a PMN, MCAN or SNUN, as appropriate, before initiating the activity. EPA will review the notice, make a risk determination on the chemical substance or significant new use, and take appropriate action as described in TSCA section 5(a)(3).

TSCA section 5(h)(1) authorizes EPA to allow persons, upon application and under appropriate restrictions, to manufacture or process a new chemical substance, or a chemical substance subject to a significant new use rule (SNUR) issued under TSCA section 5(a)(2), for “test marketing” purposes, upon a showing that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the chemical will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This is referred to as a test marketing exemption, or TME. For more information about the requirements applicable to a new chemical go to: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems.

Under TSCA sections 5 and 8 and EPA regulations, EPA is required to publish in the Federal Register certain information, including notice of receipt of a PMN/SNUN/MCAN (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (biotech exemption); an application for a TME, both pending and concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on the new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

This action provides information that is directed to the public in general.

No.

1. Submitting confidential business information (CBI). Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

In the past, EPA has published individual notices reflecting the status of TSCA section 5 filings received, pending or concluded. In 1995, the Agency modified its approach and streamlined the information published in the Federal Register after providing notice of such changes to the public and an opportunity to comment (See the Federal Register of May 12, 1995, (60 FR 25798) (FRL-4942-7). Since the passage of the Lautenberg amendments to TSCA in 2016, public interest in information on the status of section 5 cases under EPA review and, in particular, the final determination of such cases, has increased. In an effort to be responsive to the regulated community, the users of this information, and the general public, to comply with the requirements of TSCA, to conserve EPA resources and to streamline the process and make it more timely, EPA is providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

For the 49 PMN/SNUN/MCANs received by EPA during this period, Table I provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the notices received by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the notice, a notation of whether the submission is an initial submission, or an amendment, a notation of which version was received, the date the notice was received by EPA, the submitting manufacturer (i.e., domestic producer or importer), the potential uses identified by the manufacturer in the notice, and the chemical substance identity.

As used in each of the tables in this unit, (S) indicates that the information in the table is the specific information provided by the submitter, and (G) indicates that this information in the table is generic information because the specific information provided by the submitter was claimed as CBI. Submissions which are initial submissions will not have a letter following the case number and the version column will note “Initial”. Submissions which are amendments to previous submissions will have a case number followed by the letter “A” (e.g. P-18-1234A). The version column designates amendments in sequence as “1”, “2”, “3”, etc.

In Table II. of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the TMEs and/or Biotech Exemptions received by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the TME and/or Biotech Exemption, the submission document type (initial or amended), the version number, the date the TME and/or Biotech Exemption was received by EPA, the submitting manufacturer (i.e., domestic producer or importer), the potential uses identified by the manufacturer in the TME and/or Biotech Exemption, and the chemical substance identity.