Vol. 84 Tuesday, No. 78 April 23, 2019

Pages 16767–17054

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:13 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\23APWS.LOC 23APWS jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTWS II Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019

The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) Subscriptions: and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Government Publishing Office, is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general (Toll-Free) applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published FEDERAL AGENCIES by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public Subscriptions: interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Email [email protected] issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents Phone 202–741–6000 currently on file for public inspection, see www.federalregister.gov. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration The Federal Register Printing Savings Act of 2017 (Pub. L. 115- authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication 120) placed restrictions on distribution of official printed copies established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, of the daily Federal Register to members of Congress and Federal the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. offices. Under this Act, the Director of the Government Publishing The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. Office may not provide printed copies of the daily Federal Register It is also available online at no charge at www.govinfo.gov, a unless a Member or other Federal office requests a specific issue service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office. or a subscription to the print edition. For more information on how to subscribe use the following website link: https:// The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the www.gpo.gov/frsubs. authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6:00 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and graphics from Volume 1, 1 (March 14, 1936) forward. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800 or 866-512- 1800 (toll free). E-mail, gpocusthelp.com. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $860 plus postage, or $929, for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $330, plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Publishing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1-866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 84 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.

.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:13 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\23APWS.LOC 23APWS jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTWS III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 78

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Safety Zones: NOTICES Fireworks Displays in the Fifth Coast Guard District, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 16781–16782 Submissions, and Approvals, 16856–16859 Lake of the Ozarks, Osage Beach, MO, 16782–16784

Agricultural Research Service Commerce Department NOTICES See International Trade Administration Intent to Grant Exclusive License, 16836 See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Agriculture Department Commodity Futures Trading Commission See Agricultural Research Service NOTICES See Rural Business-Cooperative Service Meetings; Sunshine Act, 16846–16847 See Rural Housing Service See Rural Utilities Service Consumer Product Safety Commission NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Request for Information: Submissions, and Approvals, 16836–16837 Possible Exemptions from Testing and Other Changes to the Standard for the Flammability of Clothing Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Textiles, 16797–16799 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Copyright Office, Library of Congress Submissions, and Approvals, 16847 RULES Architectural Works, 16784–16785 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Education Department Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, NOTICES Submissions, and Approvals, 16859–16868 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Consolidated State Performance Report Renewal (Part 1 PROPOSED RULES and Part 2), 16847–16848 Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Employment and Training Administration Interoperability and Patient Access for Medicare NOTICES Advantage Organization and Medicaid Managed Care Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Plans, State Medicaid Agencies, CHIP Agencies and Submissions, and Approvals: CHIP Managed Care Entities, Issuers of Qualified National Dislocated Workers Emergency Grant Health Plans in the Federally-facilitated Exchanges Application and Reporting Procedures, 16884–16885 and Health Care Providers; Supplement and Extension of Comment Period, 16834 Energy Department Medicare Program: See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Fiscal Year 2020 Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities PROPOSED RULES Prospective Payment System and Quality Reporting Energy Conservation Program: Updates for Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2019, Test Procedures for Small Electric Motors and Electric 16948–17002 Motors, 17004–17028

Children and Families Administration Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES RULES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Submissions, and Approvals: Promulgations: National and Tribal Evaluation of the 2nd Generation of Georgia; Non-Interference Demonstration and the Health Profession Opportunity Grants, 16870– Maintenance Plan Revision for Federal Low–Reid 16872 Vapor Pressure Requirement in the Atlanta Area, State Access and Visitation Grant Application, 16872 16786–16789 Tolerance Exemption: Coast Guard Bacteriophage active against Xylella fastidiosa, 16789– RULES 16791 2019 Quarterly Listings: PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones, Security Zones, Special Local Regulations, Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Drawbridge Operation Regulations and Regulated Promulgations: Navigation Areas, 16777–16778 South Carolina; 2010 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide National Anchorage Grounds: Ambient Air Quality Standard Transport Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore, MD, 16778–16781 Infrastructure, 16799–16809

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:51 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\23APCN.SGM 23APCN jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with CONTENTS IV Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Contents

Interpretive Statement on Application of the Clean Water Health and Human Services Department Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System See Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Program to Releases of Pollutants from a Point Source See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to Groundwater, 16810–16826 See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Procedures for Review of Confidential Business Information See Children and Families Administration Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on the Toxic See National Institutes of Health Substances Control Act Inventory, 16826–16833 PROPOSED RULES NOTICES 21st Century Cures Act: Interoperability, Information Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Blocking, and the ONC Health IT Certification Program, Submissions, and Approvals: 16834–16835 Application Materials for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, 16850–16851 Homeland Security Department Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program: See Coast Guard Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit for Piedmont Natural Gas—Wadesboro Compressor Housing and Urban Development Department Station (Anson County, North Carolina), 16851– NOTICES 16852 Regulatory Waiver Requests Granted for the Fourth Quarter of Calendar Year 2018, 16874–16882 Federal Aviation Administration RULES Internal Revenue Service Airworthiness Directives: PROPOSED RULES Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes, 16767–16770 Updating Section 301 Regulations to Reflect Statutory Conforming Amendments and Technical Corrections to Changes: Department Rules Implementing the Transportation Correction, 16799 Industry Drug Testing Program, 16770–16775 NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Submissions, and Approvals: Project Committee, 16944 Survey of Airman Satisfaction with Aeromedical Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Communications Certification Services, 16929–16930 Project Committee, 16944–16945 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Notices and Correspondence Federal Bureau of Investigation Project Committee, 16945 NOTICES Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Special Projects Committee, Meetings: 16944 Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Tax Forms and Publications Board, 16884 Project Committee, 16944 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Toll-Free Phone Line Project Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Committee, 16945 NOTICES International Trade Administration Combined Filings, 16848–16850 Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 16849– NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, 16850 or Reviews: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India, 16843– Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 16845 NOTICES Polyester Textured Yarn from the People’s Republic of Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation: China, 16840–16843 Agricultural and Food Transporters Conference of Determinations in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation: American Trucking Associations Application for Magnesium from Israel, 16845–16846 Exemption; Correction, 16930 Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the People’s Republic of China, 16843 Federal Trade Commission NOTICES International Trade Commission Granting of Requests for Early Termination of the Waiting NOTICES Period under the Premerger Notification Rules, 16852– Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, 16856 etc.: Certain Road Milling Machines and Components Thereof, Federal Transit Administration 16882–16884 RULES Silicomanganese from India, Kazakhstan, and Venezuela, Conforming Amendments and Technical Corrections to 16882 Department Rules Implementing the Transportation Industry Drug Testing Program, 16770–16775 Justice Department See Federal Bureau of Investigation General Services Administration RULES RULES Freedom of Information Act Regulations, 16775–16777 Acquisition Regulations: Federal Supply Schedule Contracting (Administrative Labor Department Changes), 17030–17054 See Employment and Training Administration

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\23APCN.SGM 23APCN jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Contents V

See Wage and Hour Division Rural Business-Cooperative Service NOTICES NOTICES Vacancy Posting: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, District Chief Administrative Law Judge, 16885–16886 Submissions, and Approvals, 16838–16839 Requests for Applications: Legal Services Corporation Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, and Biobased Product NOTICES Manufacturing Assistance Program for Federal Fiscal Grantees of Application Process for Subgranting 2020 Basic Year 2019; Amendment, 16837–16838 Field Funds, 16887–16888 Library of Congress Rural Housing Service See Copyright Office, Library of Congress NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, National Credit Union Administration Submissions, and Approvals, 16838–16839 PROPOSED RULES Compensation in Connection with Loans to Members and Rural Utilities Service Lines of Credit to Members, 16796–16797 NOTICES Broadband Pilot Program—ReConnect Program, 16839– National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 16840 NOTICES Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Securities and Exchange Commission Daimler Trucks North America, 16930–16932 NOTICES Application: National Institutes of Health Putnam Managed Municipal Income Trust, et al., 16920– NOTICES 16921 Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act Priority List of Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics, 16872–16874 BOX Exchange, LLC, 16911–16913, 16925–16928 Fixed Income Clearing Corp., 16921–16925 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ICE Clear Credit, LLC, 16900–16903 NOTICES Nasdaq ISE, LLC, 16899–16900 Meetings: Nasdaq MRX, LLC, 16907–16911 Workshop on Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Management Strategy Nasdaq PHLX, LLC, 16913–16915 Evaluation, 16846 NYSE National, Inc., 16903–16906 National Science Foundation The Options Clearing Corp., 16915–16920 RULES Conservation of Antarctic Animals and Plants, 16791– Small Business Administration 16795 NOTICES NOTICES Major Disaster Declaration: Requests for Nominations: Iowa; Amendment 1, 16929 Directorate and Office Advisory Committees, 16888– Major Disaster Declarations: 16889 Nebraska, 16928–16929

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Transportation Department NOTICES See Federal Aviation Administration Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Submissions, and Approvals: See Federal Transit Administration Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 16889–16890 See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Facility Operating and Combined Licenses: Administration Applications and Amendments Involving No Significant RULES Hazards Considerations; Biweekly Notice, 16890– Conforming Amendments and Technical Corrections to 16897 Department Rules Implementing the Transportation Guidance: Industry Drug Testing Program, 16770–16775 Safety Related Concrete Structures for Nuclear Power NOTICES Plants (Other than Reactor Vessels and Funding Opportunity: Containments), 16897–16898 National Infrastructure Investments under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 16933–16943 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RULES Treasury Department Conforming Amendments and Technical Corrections to See Internal Revenue Service Department Rules Implementing the Transportation Industry Drug Testing Program, 16770–16775 Wage and Hour Division NOTICES Hazardous Materials: NOTICES Emergency Waiver No. 12, 16932–16933 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Railroad Retirement Board Records to be kept by Employers—Fair Labor Standards NOTICES Act, 16886–16887 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 16898–16899

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:51 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\23APCN.SGM 23APCN jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with CONTENTS VI Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Contents

Separate Parts In This Issue Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Part II phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice Health and Human Services Department, Centers for of recently enacted public laws. Medicare & Medicaid Services, 16948–17002 To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Part III electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/ Energy Department, 17004–17028 accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or Part IV manage your subscription. General Services Administration, 17030–17054

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:51 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\23APCN.SGM 23APCN jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Contents VII

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.

10 CFR Proposed Rules: 431...... 17004 12 CFR Proposed Rules: 701...... 16796 14 CFR 39...... 16767 120...... 16770 16 CFR Proposed Rules: 1610...... 16797 26 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 16799 28 CFR 16...... 16775 33 CFR 100...... 16777 110...... 16778 117...... 16777 147...... 16777 165 (3 documents) ...... 16777, 16781, 16782 37 CFR 202...... 16784 40 CFR 52...... 16786 180...... 16789 Proposed Rules: 52...... 16799 122...... 16810 710...... 16826 42 CFR Proposed Rules: 406...... 16834 407...... 16834 412...... 16948 422...... 16834 423...... 16834 431...... 16834 438...... 16834 457...... 16834 482...... 16834 485...... 16834 45 CFR 670...... 16791 Proposed Rules: 170...... 16834 171...... 16834 48 CFR 501...... 17030 515...... 17030 538...... 17030 552...... 17030 49 CFR 40...... 16770 199...... 16770 655...... 16770

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:16 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\23APLS.LOC 23APLS jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTLS 16767

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 78

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER information on the availability of this CF–2018–20, dated July 27, 2018 contains regulatory documents having general material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. (referred to after this as the Mandatory applicability and legal effect, most of which It is also available on the internet at Continuing Airworthiness Information, are keyed to and codified in the Code of http://www.regulations.gov by searching or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe Federal Regulations, which is published under for and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. 0965. Model BD–100–1A10 airplanes. The MCAI states: The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by Examining the AD Docket the Superintendent of Documents. The landing gear supplier has informed You may examine the AD docket on Bombardier Aerospace about a quality escape the internet at http:// involving Main Landing Gear (MLG) side DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION www.regulations.gov by searching for brace actuators that have been assembled and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– using non-conforming split ball bearings. The Federal Aviation Administration 0965; or in person at Docket Operations affected bearings are manufactured from between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday material that does not meet the required 14 CFR Part 39 through Friday, except Federal holidays. material properties. If not corrected, this condition can result in potentially [Docket No. FAA–2018–0965; Product The AD docket contains this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any asymmetric MLG gear extension or retraction Identifier 2018–NM–124–AD; Amendment and subsequent gear collapse during landing. 39–19617; AD 2019–07–06] comments received, and other This [Canadian] AD mandates verification RIN 2120–AA64 information. The address for Docket of the installed MLG side brace actuator Operations (phone: 800–647–5527) is assemblies and replacement of the affected Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, U.S. Department of Transportation, parts. Inc., Airplanes Docket Operations, M–30, West You may examine the MCAI in the AD Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, AGENCY: Federal Aviation docket on the internet at http:// 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, www.regulations.gov by searching for Administration (FAA), Department of Washington, DC 20590. Transportation (DOT). and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 0965. ACTION: Final rule. Darren Gassetto, Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Admin Comments SUMMARY: We are adopting a new Services Section, FAA, New York ACO airworthiness directive (AD) for certain We gave the public the opportunity to Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite Bombardier, Inc., Model BD–100–1A10 participate in developing this final rule. 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone airplanes. This AD was prompted by a The following presents the comments 516–228–7323; fax 516–794–5531; email report that certain split ball bearings received on the NPRM and the FAA’s [email protected]. used in main landing gear (MLG) side response to each comment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: brace actuator assemblies are Support for the NPRM manufactured from material that does Discussion not meet the required material One commenter, Andy Ingwersen, properties. This AD requires an We issued a notice of proposed and Flexjet indicated support for the inspection of the left and right MLG side rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR NPRM. part 39 by adding an AD that would brace actuator assemblies and, if Request for Records Check To apply to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model necessary, replacement of the split ball Determine MLG Side Brace Actuator BD–100–1A10 airplanes. The NPRM bearings. We are issuing this AD to Assembly Serial Number as an published in the Federal Register on address the unsafe condition on these Alternative Method of Compliance products. November 29, 2018 (83 FR 61336). The NPRM was prompted by a report that Flexjet requested that an additional DATES: This AD is effective May 28, certain split ball bearings used in MLG means of verification be allowed for 2019. side brace actuator assemblies are determining the serial number of the left The Director of the Federal Register manufactured from material that does and right MLG side brace actuator approved the incorporation by reference not meet the required material assembly part number 40310–103. of certain publications listed in this AD properties. The NPRM proposed to Flexjet suggested that we add language as of May 28, 2019. require an inspection of the left and to paragraph (g) of the proposed AD ADDRESSES: For service information right MLG side brace actuator stating ‘‘A review of airplane identified in this final rule, contact assemblies and, if necessary, maintenance records is acceptable in Bombardier, Inc., 200 Coˆte-Vertu Road replacement of the split ball bearings. lieu of this inspection if the serial West, Dorval, Que´bec H4S 2A3, Canada; We are issuing this AD to address the number can be conclusively determined North America toll-free telephone 1– non-conforming split ball bearings, from that review.’’ Flexjet justified this 866–538–1247 or direct-dial telephone which, if not corrected, could result in request by pointing out that similar 1–514–855–2999; email ac.yul@ potentially asymmetric MLG extension language is used in other ADs. Flexjet aero.bombardier.com; internet http:// or retraction and consequent collapse of explained that 20 MLG side brace www.bombardier.com. You may view the MLG during landing. actuator assembly serial numbers are this service information at the FAA, Transport Canada Civil Aviation affected by Bombardier Service Bulletin Transport Standards Branch, 2200 (TCCA), which is the aviation authority 100–32–30, dated December 18, 2017, South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For for Canada, has issued Canadian AD and 217 MLG side brace actuator

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16768 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

assembly serial numbers are affected by operators have the means to address the • Do not add any additional burden Bombardier Service Bulletin 350–32– unsafe condition sooner than the 48 upon the public than was already 006, dated December 18, 2017, and month compliance time allows. proposed in the NPRM. reasoned that a logbook review would We agree to clarify. As noted in figure We also determined that these save time and present less of a financial 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, changes will not increase the economic burden on operators. the compliance time varies depending burden on any operator or increase the We agree with the commenter for the on the total number of flight cycles scope of this final rule. reasons provided. We have determined accumulated on an airplane, with 48 months being the longest possible Related Service Information Under 1 that a review of maintenance records is CFR Part 51 acceptable for complying with the compliance time. In consideration of the average utilization rate by the affected actions specified in paragraph (g) of this Bombardier, Inc., has issued Service U.S. operators, the practical aspects of AD, provided the serial number can be Bulletin 100–32–30, dated December 18, an orderly modification of the U.S. fleet conclusively determined from that 2017; and Service Bulletin 350–32–006, during regular maintenance periods, review. We have revised paragraph (g) dated December 18, 2017. This service and the availability of required of this AD accordingly. information describes procedures for modification parts, we have determined inspecting the left and right MLG side Request To Shorten Compliance Time that the compliance times specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h) of this brace actuator assemblies to verify the One commenter, Ty Smith, made a AD are appropriate. We have not serial number and replace the split ball request to change the compliance time changed this AD in this regard. bearings. These documents are distinct to verify the MLG side brace actuator since they apply to airplanes in different assembly serial number and perform Conclusion configurations. This service information applicable on-condition actions, and we We reviewed the relevant data, is reasonably available because the infer from the request that the considered the comments received, and interested parties have access to it commenter wishes the compliance time determined that air safety and the through their normal course of business to be shortened. The commenter public interest require adopting this or by the means identified in the asserted that a compliance time of 48 final rule with the changes described ADDRESSES section. months leaves a large window of previously and minor editorial changes. Costs of Compliance opportunity for the unsafe condition to We have determined that these minor potentially lead to a malfunction. The changes: We estimate that this AD affects 468 commenter conceded that a certain • Are consistent with the intent that airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate amount of time is needed to address the was proposed in the NPRM for the following costs to comply with this unsafe condition, but presumed that addressing the unsafe condition; and AD:

ESTIMATED COSTS FOR REQUIRED ACTIONS

Cost per Cost on U.S. Labor cost Parts cost product operators

1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ...... $0 $85 $39,780

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

ESTIMATED COSTS OF ON-CONDITION ACTIONS

Cost per Labor cost Parts cost product

8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 per airplane ...... $1,820 $2,500

According to the manufacturer, some detail the scope of the Agency’s products identified in this rulemaking or all of the costs of this AD may be authority. action. covered under warranty, thereby We are issuing this rulemaking under This AD is issued in accordance with reducing the cost impact on affected the authority described in Subtitle VII, authority delegated by the Executive individuals. We do not control warranty Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: Director, Aircraft Certification Service, coverage for affected individuals. As a ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. result, we have included all known costs in our cost estimate. section, Congress charges the FAA with In accordance with that order, issuance promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in of ADs is normally a function of the Authority for This Rulemaking air commerce by prescribing regulations Compliance and Airworthiness Title 49 of the United States Code for practices, methods, and procedures Division, but during this transition specifies the FAA’s authority to issue the Administrator finds necessary for period, the Executive Director has rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, safety in air commerce. This regulation delegated the authority to issue ADs section 106, describes the authority of is within the scope of that authority applicable to transport category the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: because it addresses an unsafe condition airplanes and associated appliances to Aviation Programs, describes in more that is likely to exist or develop on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16769

the Director of the System Oversight Adoption of the Amendment (e) Reason Division. Accordingly, under the authority This AD was prompted by a report that certain split ball bearings used in main Regulatory Findings delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as landing gear (MLG) side brace actuator assemblies are manufactured from material This AD will not have federalism follows: that does not meet the required material implications under Executive Order properties. We are issuing this AD to address 13132. This AD will not have a PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS these non-conforming split ball bearings, substantial direct effect on the States, on DIRECTIVES which, if not corrected, can result in the relationship between the national potentially asymmetric MLG extension or ■ government and the States, or on the 1. The authority citation for part 39 retraction and consequent collapse of the distribution of power and continues to read as follows: MLG during landing. responsibilities among the various Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. (f) Compliance levels of government. § 39.13 [Amended] Comply with this AD within the For the reasons discussed above, I compliance times specified, unless already ■ certify that this AD: 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding done. the following new airworthiness (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory directive (AD): (g) Inspection To Verify Serial Number action’’ under Executive Order 12866, At the applicable time specified in figure 2019–07–06 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD: (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 39–19617; Docket No. FAA–2018–0965; Perform an inspection to verify the serial the DOT Regulatory Policies and Product Identifier 2018–NM–124–AD. Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, number of the left and right MLG side brace (a) Effective Date actuator assemblies having part number (P/N) 1979), This AD is effective May 28, 2019. 40310–103, in accordance with paragraphs (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 2.A. and 2.B. of the Accomplishment in Alaska, and (b) Affected ADs Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin None. 100–32–30, dated December 18, 2017; or (4) Will not have a significant perform an inspection to verify the serial economic impact, positive or negative, (c) Applicability number of the left and right MLG side brace on a substantial number of small entities This AD applies to all Bombardier, Inc., actuator assemblies having P/N 2–8554–2, in under the criteria of the Regulatory Model BD–100–1A10 airplanes, certificated accordance with paragraphs 2.A. and 2.B. of Flexibility Act. in any category, serial numbers 20003 the Accomplishment Instructions of through 20500 and 20501 through 20665 Bombardier Service Bulletin 350–32–006, List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 inclusive. dated December 18, 2017; as applicable. A review of airplane maintenance records is Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (d) Subject acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the safety, Incorporation by reference, Air Transport Association (ATA) of serial number can be conclusively Safety. America Code 32, Landing gear. determined from that review.

(h) Replacement Service Bulletin 100–32–30, dated December (i) Parts Installation Limitation If, during the inspection specified in 18, 2017; or paragraph 2.C. of the As of the effective date of this AD, no paragraph (g) of this AD, the serial number Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier person may install on any Bombardier, Inc., of the part installed is listed in table 1 of Service Bulletin 350–32–006, dated Model BD–100–1A10 airplane any MLG side paragraph 2.B. of the Accomplishment December 18, 2017; as applicable. If the serial brace actuator assembly having a serial Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin number of the installed part is not listed in number listed in table 1 of paragraph 2.B. of 100–32–30, dated December 18, 2017; or table 1 of paragraph 2.B. of the the Accomplishment Instructions of table 1 of paragraph 2.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Bombardier Service Bulletin 100–32–30, Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 100–32–30, dated December dated December 18, 2017; or table 1 of Service Bulletin 350–32–006, dated paragraph 2.B. of the Accomplishment 18, 2017; or table 1 of paragraph 2.B. of the December 18, 2017; as applicable: at the Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin applicable time specified in figure 1 to Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 350–32–006, dated December 18, 2017; as paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, replace the Service Bulletin 350–32–006, dated applicable; unless the split ball bearing split ball bearing having P/N 104467672, in December 18, 2017; as applicable; no further having P/N 104467672 has been previously accordance with paragraph 2.C. of the action is required by this paragraph. replaced as specified in paragraph (h) of this Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier AD.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES ER23AP19.022 16770 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions (5) You may view this service information previously covered drugs morphine, 6- The following provisions also apply to this that is incorporated by reference at the acetylmorphine, and codeine, by the AD: National Archives and Records more inclusive term ‘‘opioids,’’ rather (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance Administration (NARA). For information on than ‘‘opiates.’’ This rule amends the the availability of this material at NARA, call (AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO term in the FAA, FTA, and PHMSA Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr- regulations to ensure that all DOT drug AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the testing rules are consistent with one procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In locations.html. another and with the Mandatory accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on request to your principal inspector or local April 8, 2019. Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. In addition, this rule Flight Standards District Office, as Michael J. Kaszycki, appropriate. If sending information directly makes a conforming amendment to to the manager of the certification office, Acting Director, System Oversight Division, include the term ‘‘opioids’’ in the Aircraft Certification Service. send it to ATTN: Program Manager, wording of the Department’s annual Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New [FR Doc. 2019–08095 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] information collection requirement and York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, BILLING CODE 4910–13–P clarifications to section 40.26 and Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. Before Appendix H regarding the requirement for employers to follow the using any approved AMOC, notify your DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a Department’s instructions for the annual principal inspector, the manager of the local Federal Aviation Administration information collection. flight standards district office/certificate DATES: This rule is effective on April 23, holding district office. 2019. (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 14 CFR Part 120 requirement in this AD to obtain corrective FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For actions from a manufacturer, the action must Office of the Secretary of OST, Patrice M. Kelly, Director, Office be accomplished using a method approved Transportation of Drug and Alcohol Policy and by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, Compliance, 1200 New Jersey Avenue FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation 49 CFR Parts 40 SE, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA Design 202–366–3784; email: ODAPCwebmail@ Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by Pipeline and Hazardous Materials dot.gov). For FTA, for program issues, the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature. Safety Administration contact Iyon Rosario, Office of Transit Safety and Oversight (TSO), FTA, 1200 (k) Related Information 49 CFR Part 199 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 20590–0001 (telephone: 202–366–2010; Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Federal Transit Administration email: [email protected]). For legal AD CF–2018–20, dated July 27, 2018, for issues, contact Bruce Walker, Office of related information. This MCAI may be 49 CFR Part 655 Chief Counsel (TCC), FTA, 1200 New found in the AD docket on the internet at Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC http://www.regulations.gov by searching for RIN 2105–AE78 and locating Docket No. FAA–2018–0965. 20590–0001 (telephone: 202–366–9109; (2) For more information about this AD, Conforming Amendments and email: [email protected]). For FAA, contact Darren Gassetto, Aerospace Engineer, Technical Corrections to Department Rafael Ramos, Office of Aerospace Mechanical Systems and Admin Services Rules Implementing the Transportation Medicine, Drug Abatement Division, Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Industry Drug Testing Program AAM–800, FAA, 800 Independence Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591 11590; telephone 516–228–7323; fax 516– AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of (telephone 202–267–8442; facsimile 794–5531; email [email protected]. Transportation (OST), Federal Aviation 202–267–5200; email: drugabatement@ (l) Material Incorporated by Reference Administration (FAA), Federal Transit faa.gov). For PHMSA, Wayne Lemoi, (1) The Director of the Federal Register Administration (FTA), and Pipeline and Drug and Alcohol Program Manager, approved the incorporation by reference Hazardous Materials Safety PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety (IBR) of the service information listed in this Administration (PHMSA); U.S. (telephone 909–937–7232, email paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Department of Transportation (DOT). [email protected]). part 51. ACTION: Final rule. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by SUMMARY: This final rule makes minor Background this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. technical corrections to the OST, FAA, On January 23, 2017, the Department (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 100–32–30, FTA, and PHMSA regulations governing of Health and Human Services (HHS) dated December 18, 2017. (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 350–32– drug testing for safety-sensitive published its final version of its 006, dated December 18, 2017. employees to ensure consistency with Mandatory Guidelines for Federal (3) For service information identified in the recent amendments made to the Workplace Drug Testing Programs using this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 200 Coˆte- Department of Transportation’s Urine (HHS Mandatory Guidelines) (82 Vertu Road West, Dorval, Que´bec H4S 2A3, regulation, ‘‘Procedures for FR 7920). In that final rule, HHS added Canada; North America toll-free telephone 1– Transportation Workplace Drug and four semi-synthetic opioid substances 866–538–1247 or direct-dial telephone 1– Alcohol Testing Programs,’’ which (hydrocodone, hydromorphone, 514–855–2999; email ac.yul@ added requirements to test for oxycodone, and oxymorphone) to the aero.bombardier.com; internet http:// oxycodone, oxymorphone, drugs for which laboratories test under www.bombardier.com. (4) You may view this service information hydrocodone, and hydromorphone to the HHS Mandatory Guidelines. That at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, DOT-regulated drug testing programs. rule became effective October 1, 2017. 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For The changes to the Department’s By statute, the Department of information on the availability of this regulation make it necessary to refer to Transportation is required to follow the material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. these substances, as well as the HHS Mandatory Guidelines for the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16771

drugs for which it tests in the respective DOT Agency regulations conduct their anti-drug programs transportation industry drug testing since 2003. Therefore, we are making a according to the requirements of part program. Consequently, the Department technical amendment to § 40.26 and 199 and the DOT Procedures in part 40. issued a notice of proposed rulemaking Appendix H to part 40 to clarify the Moreover, the regulations explain that (NPRM) on January 23, 2017 (82 FR requirement for employers to use the the terms and concepts used in part 199 7771). In that NPRM, the Department MIS instructions. have the same meaning as in the DOT proposed to revise 49 CFR part 40 (part Discussion Procedures in part 40. The ODAPC final 40) to harmonize with certain parts of rule, dated November 13, 2017, changed the revised HHS Mandatory Guidelines. The Department’s 2017 final rule was the definition of ‘‘drug’’ in 49 CFR 40.3 The Department received 69 comments promulgated under the authority of the to: ‘‘The drugs for which tests are on the NPRM from various stakeholders, Omnibus Transportation Employee required under this part and DOT which were addressed in the final rule Testing Act (OTETA) of 1991 (Pub. L. Agency regulations are marijuana, published on November 13, 2017. 102–143, Title V, 105 Stat. 952). The cocaine, amphetamines, phencyclidine The Department’s final rule, among OTETA sets the requirements for DOT’s (PCP), and opioids.’’ As a conforming other things, added the four semi- reliance on the HHS Mandatory amendment, PHMSA is changing the synthetic opioid substances Guidelines for scientific testing issues. definition of ‘‘prohibited drug’’ in part (hydrocodone, hydromorphone, Section 503 of the Supplemental 199 to align it with the recently changed oxycodone, and oxymorphone) to the Appropriations Act, 1987 (Pub. L. 100– definition of ‘‘drugs’’ in part 40. Instead Department’s drug testing program (82 71, 101 Stat 391, 468), 5 U.S.C. 7301, of referencing the Controlled Substances FR 52229). The Department’s final rule and Executive Order 12564 establish Act, the definition of ‘‘prohibited drug’’ became effective on January 1, 2018. HHS as the agency that directs scientific will now reference part 40. This change These testing requirements are now and technical guidelines for Federal will also conform with the requirement codified at 49 CFR 40.85(d) and 40.87. workplace drug-testing programs and under part 40 that the drug test panel Before the 2017 HHS and DOT standards for certification of includes the four semi-synthetic opioids rulemakings, laboratories under the laboratories’ regulated programs. While (i.e., hydrocodone, oxycodone, HHS Mandatory Guidelines and Part 40 the Department has discretion hydromorphone, oxymorphone) in tested for codeine, 6-acetylmorphine, concerning many aspects of the addition to the three natural opiates and morphine, properly referred to as regulations governing testing in the (i.e., heroin, morphine, codeine) ‘‘opiates.’’ The four substances added in transportation industries’ regulated previously included in DOT drug tests. the DOT 2017 final rule are semi- programs, we must follow the HHS synthetic substances, closely related to Mandatory Guidelines for the drugs for Regulatory Analyses and Notices opiates but chemically distinct. For this which we require testing. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption reason, it is more accurate to refer to all The final rule follows that same Without Prior Notice and Comment six substances under the more inclusive mandate with respect to 49 CFR part 40 term ‘‘opioids.’’ (OST), 14 CFR part 120 (FAA), and 49 Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the CFR part 655 (FTA), all of which are Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 DOT Management Information System directly subject to the OTETA mandate U.S.C. 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies Form to conform to the HHS Mandatory to dispense with prior notice and The 2017 DOT final rule changed the Guidelines. Although PHMSA is not one comment for rules when the agency for terminology from ‘‘opiates’’ to ‘‘opioids’’ of the agencies mentioned in OTETA, ‘‘good cause’’ finds that those throughout part 40, with one minor PHMSA’s drug testing rule (49 CFR part procedures are ‘‘impracticable, exception in the DOT’s Management 199) has always incorporated part 40 unnecessary, or contrary to the public Information System (MIS) Form. procedures, and it is important for all interest.’’ Under this section, an agency, Specifically, we did not change the term DOT drug testing regulations, and their upon finding good cause, may issue a ‘‘opiates’’ to ‘‘opioids’’ within the MIS terminology, to remain consistent. For final rule without seeking comment Form in order to avoid any confusion on this reason, we are changing the prior to the rulemaking. what employers were to report for the definition of ‘‘prohibited drug’’ in part As discussed above, this final rule 2017 calendar year MIS reporting 199 to directly reference part 40 and not revises the terminology in the respective period. Since testing for the semi- the Controlled Substances Act. OST, FAA, FTA, and PHMSA drug synthetic opioids began in calendar year In the OST rule, in Appendix H, the testing rules to conform to the 2018, employers would not need to MIS form, in Section III, ‘‘Drug Testing Department of Transportation’s final report that data until after January 1, Data,’’ the word ‘‘opiates’’ in Column 7 rule requiring testing for semi-synthetic 2019. Therefore, we are now updating is being changed to ‘‘opioids.’’ opioids. Also, as discussed above, OST, the MIS Form to be consistent with the In the FAA rule, the FAA is revising FAA, and FTA are statutorily required rest of part 40. The costs for the the definition of ‘‘prohibited drug’’ in to incorporate the Department of Health additional opioid testing were § 120.7(m) to mean any of the drugs and Human Services (HHS) scientific addressed in the final rule dated specified in part 40. The FAA is also and technical guidelines, including November 13, 2017. revising §§ 120.107 and 120.109 to mandatory guidelines establishing the In addition, in our November 13, replace the list of drugs and drug list of controlled substances which 2017, final rule (82 FR 52243), we metabolites with the term ‘‘prohibited individually may be tested. While moved the instructions to the MIS data drug.’’ These changes will harmonize PHMSA is not subject to the OTETA collection form from Appendix H to our part 120, in pertinent part, with part 40. mandate to follow the HHS Mandatory website. We did so to provide greater In § 120.109(c) the words ‘‘can not’’ are Guidelines, the PHMSA rule already flexibility to make changes and/or being corrected to ‘‘cannot.’’ required compliance with part 40. The updates to the MIS instructions. We did In the FTA rule, the FTA is replacing terminological changes involved will not intend for this to suggest that the term ‘‘opiates’’ with ‘‘opioids’’ in 49 not make substantive changes in the employers were no longer required to CFR 655.21(b)(3). obligations of regulated parties but use the MIS instructions as they have In the PHMSA rule, 49 CFR 199.5, clarify those parties’ obligations. For been required to do by part 40 and the pipeline operators are required to these reasons, we find that it is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16772 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

unnecessary to seek public comment not interfere with any action planned by the Executive Order. The rule would not before issuing this final rule. another agency and does not materially significantly affect the rights, roles, and There will be no additional costs alter the budgetary impact of any responsibilities of States, and would not associated with any of these changes, entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan involve preemption of State law, nor which are all administrative. Each of programs. Consequently, a full would it limit State policymaking these changes removes inconsistencies regulatory evaluation is not required. discretion. and harmonizes with changes made to the HHS Mandatory Guidelines in Executive Order 13771 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act January of 2017 that were incorporated This rule is not an Executive Order This rule is not an unfunded Federal into 49 CFR part 40 on November 13, 13771 regulatory action because this mandate within the meaning of the 2017. Any costs associated with the rule is not significant under Executive Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 substantive rulemaking changes to add Order 12866. (Pub. L. 104–4, March 22, 1995, 109 the semi-synthetic opioids were Stat. 48). This rule will not result in the Regulatory Flexibility Act accounted for in the final rule dated expenditure by State, local, and tribal November 13, 2017 (82 FR 52229). The requirements of the Regulatory governments, in the aggregate, or by the Similarly, section 553(d)(3) of the Flexibility Act (RFA) do not apply when private sector, of $148.1 million or more APA requires that agencies publish a an agency finds good cause pursuant to in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). rule not less than 30 days before its 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without Executive Order 13175 (Tribal effective date, except as otherwise prior notice and comment. Because this Consultation) provided by the agency for good cause rule adopts Departmental regulatory found and published with the rule. DOT requirements pursuant to part 40, the The agencies involved have analyzed finds that, for the same reasons stated involved agencies have determined that this action under Executive Order above, there is good cause to make these there is good cause to adopt the rule as 13175, and determined that this rule amendments effective immediately. a final rule; therefore, RFA analysis is would not have substantial direct effects not required. Additionally, this on one or more Indian Tribes; would not Executive Order 12866 and 13563 administrative action will result in no impose substantial direct compliance Executive Order 12866 and 13563 significant economic impact nor impose costs on Indian Tribal governments; and direct agencies to assess all costs and any additional cost to small entities that would not preempt Tribal law. benefits of available regulatory are subject to alcohol misuse and National Environmental Policy Act alternatives and, if regulation is controlled substance testing necessary, to select regulatory requirements of the cited regulations. The Department has analyzed the approaches that maximize net benefits environmental impacts of this action (including potential economic, Paperwork Reduction Act pursuant to the National Environmental environmental, public health and safety This rule does not provide a new Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et effects, distributive impacts, and collection of information that is subject seq.) and has determined that it is equity). Executive Order 13563 to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 categorically excluded pursuant to DOT emphasizes the importance of (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). Under the Order 5610.1C, Procedures for quantifying both costs and benefits, of provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Considering Environmental Impacts (44 reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, Act, the affected agencies may not FR 56420, Oct. 1, 1979). Categorical and of promoting flexibility. This final conduct or sponsor, and a person is not exclusions are actions identified in an rule implements changes that are required to respond to or may not be agency’s NEPA implementing administrative in nature. All agencies penalized for failing to comply with, a procedures that do not normally have a involved have determined that this collection of information unless it significant impact on the environment action is not a significant regulatory displays a currently valid OMB control and therefore do not require either an action under section 3(f) of Executive number. environmental assessment (EA) or Order 12866, nor is it significant within environmental impact statement (EIS). the meaning of Department of Executive Order 13132, Federalism See 40 CFR 1508.4. In analyzing the Transportation regulatory policies and Executive Order 13132 sets forth applicability of a categorical exclusion, procedures. principles and criteria that agencies the agency must also consider whether This rule provides technical must adhere to in formulating and extraordinary circumstances are present corrections to the cited regulations implementing policies that have that would warrant the preparation of harmonizing them with part 40. The Federalism implications. That is, an EA or EIS. Id. Paragraph 4(c)(5) of only entities affected by this rule are regulations that have substantial direct DOT Order 5610.1C incorporates by those aviation, transit, and pipeline effects on the States, or on the reference the categorical exclusions for entities already subject to DOT drug distribution of power and all DOT Operating Administrations. testing rules and the changes made to responsibilities among the various This action is covered by the categorical part 40 by the final rule dated November levels of government. Federal agencies exclusion listed in the Federal Transit 13, 2017. This rule does not require any must closely examine the statutory Administration’s implementing additional costs associated with authority supporting any action that procedures, ‘‘[p]lanning and compliance. Accordingly, it has not would limit the policymaking discretion administrative activities that do not been reviewed by the Office of of the States, and to the extent involve or lead directly to construction, Management and Budget. practicable, must consult with State and such as: . . . promulgation of rules, This rule is not expected to impose local officials before implementing any regulations, directives . . .’’ 23 CFR any new compliance costs, and would such action. 771.118(c)(4). The purpose of this not adversely affect, in any material The agencies involved have reviewed rulemaking is to make minor technical way, any sector of the economy. There this rule under the threshold criteria of corrections to the Department’s drug- are no significant changes to the existing Executive Order 13132 on Federalism testing regulations. The Department program with the publication of this and certify that the rule would not have does not anticipate any environmental rulemaking. Additionally, this rule does Federalism implications as defined by impacts and there are no extraordinary

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16773

circumstances present in connection Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101– this section must be based on a with this rulemaking. 40103, 40113, 40120, 41706, 41721, 44106, determination, using the best 44701, 44702, 44703, 44709, 44710, 44711, information available at the time of the International Compatibility and 45101–45105, 46105, 46306. determination, that the employee’s Cooperation ■ 2. In § 120.7, revise paragraph (m) to performance could not have contributed In keeping with U.S. obligations read as follows: to the accident. The employee shall under the Convention on International submit to post-accident testing under Civil Aviation (ICAO), it is FAA policy § 120.7 Definitions. this section. to conform to ICAO Standards and * * * * * * * * * * Recommended Practices to the (m) Prohibited drug means any of the maximum extent practicable. The FAA drugs specified in 49 CFR part 40. Title 49—Transportation has determined that its portion of this * * * * * PART 40—PROCEDURES FOR final rule does not conflict with any ■ 3. Revise § 120.107 to read as follows: international agreement of the United TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE States. § 120.107 Substances for which testing DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING must be conducted. PROGRAMS List of Subjects Each employer shall test each ■ 5. The authority citation for part 40 14 CFR Part 120 employee who performs a safety- continues to read as follows: Air carriers, Alcoholism, Alcohol sensitive function for evidence of a prohibited drug during each test Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331, abuse, Aviation safety, Drug abuse, Drug 20140, 31306, and 54101 et seq. testing, Operators, Reporting and required by § 120.109. recordkeeping requirements, Safety, ■ 4. In § 120.109, revise paragraphs ■ 6. Revise § 40.26 to read as follows: Safety-sensitive, Transportation. (a)(5) and (c) to read as follows: § 40.26 What form must an employer use 49 CFR Part 40 § 120.109 Types of drug testing required. to report Management Information System (MIS) data to a DOT agency? Administrative practice and * * * * * procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol (a) * * * As an employer, when you are testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, (5) Before hiring or transferring an required to report MIS data to a DOT Laboratories, Reporting and individual to a safety-sensitive function, agency, you must use the U.S. recordkeeping requirements, Safety, the employer must advise each Department of Transportation Drug and Transportation. individual that the individual will be Alcohol Testing MIS Data Collection required to undergo pre-employment Form to report that data. You must use 49 CFR Part 655 testing in accordance with this subpart, the form and instructions referenced at Mass transportation, Alcohol testing, to determine the presence of a Appendix H to part 40. You must Drug testing, Reporting and prohibited drug in the individual’s submit the MIS report in accordance recordkeeping requirements, Safety, system. The employer shall provide this with rule requirements (e.g., dates for Transportation. same notification to each individual submission; selection of companies required by the employer to undergo required to submit, and method of 49 CFR Part 199 pre-employment testing under reporting) established by the DOT Alcohol testing, Drug testing, Pipeline paragraph (a)(4) of this section. agency regulating your operation. safety, Reporting and recordkeeping * * * * * ■ 7. Revise Appendix H to part 40 to requirements, Safety, Transportation. (c) Post-accident drug testing. Each read as follows: In consideration of the foregoing, the employer shall test each employee who Appendix H to Part 40—DOT Drug and Department of Transportation and its performs a safety-sensitive function for Alcohol Testing Management agencies amend their regulations as the presence of a prohibited drug in the Information System (MIS) Data follows: employee’s system if that employee’s Collection Form performance either contributed to an Title 14—Aeronautics and Space accident or cannot be completely The following form is the MIS Data PART 120—DRUG AND ALCOHOL discounted as a contributing factor to Collection form required for use to TESTING PROGRAM the accident. The employee shall be report calendar year MIS data. The tested as soon as possible but not later instructions for this form are found at ■ 1. The authority citation for part 120 than 32 hours after the accident. The https://www.transportation.gov/odapc. continues to read as follows: decision not to administer a test under BILLING CODE 4910–9x–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16774 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

U.S.DEPARTMENTOFTRAN!ii'ORTATIONDRUGANDALCOHOLTESTINGMISDATAOOLLI!CTIONFORM Calendar Year Covered by this Report: <1MB No.2l,.....20 L Employer. fOIDI DOTf 13~ (ll.cv. 412019) ~yNun=·------Doilli Businea As (DBA) Name (ifapplicable)-· ------~: ______~mill: ______Name ofC«

OTPA Name and Telephone (ifapplicable): L___)'------,,--,------Cbock tbo DOT •1"11'7 ...... ,_.,...... MIS~ and ClOIIIplotetbo lllformootloa eaibat ...,...... as appro...... __ FMCSA- Mollll' Cmier: OOr#: OWner-operator: (cirele one) YES « NO Elmlpt (Ci!de One) YES ot NO __ FAA-Aviation: C«

2 7 8 10 11 12 13

~ ~~~E .1! -- {!. ~~a'~ ~- ~ ~ ~ j ! !~ ! Ji'l!~ I !j. ·11 ~~ 'll~ ... il .. ~~~ & ... j!t ~ il ;: ~~; &::S iJ ··~ I! & I j§g ~~. I T)'pc ofTCit .o:.J.

RondQIII

P

R...... ablo&np.ICiuoe R.elum-to-Duty

follow·Up

TOTAL

IV, Abbol TetCIDg Dala: 4 8 9

Kdlsllllcsulls ~~ ~ is j~ ~ ·-!~ ! ~00\ .. ~ r· !.I!!~ !.I!! ~~ 'i~ j ~~~~1 .rl !~ ~-~ ..... ~ Z~J:IE.,: e.~~~ -'~~~ .Ill l21 !1 =' g fio

R.orulom Post-Aocidelll

hlmnableSU'!'JCiuoe R.ctum-to-Duty

l'ollow·Up

TOTAL

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES ER23AP19.024 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16775

BILLING CODE 4910–9x–C DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE considering all comments, the Department has determined to adopt the PART 199—DRUG AND ALCOHOL 28 CFR Part 16 provisions of the interim rule in final TESTING [Docket No. OAG 155; A.G. Order No. 4442– form without change. 2019] The first commenter did not suggest ■ 8. The authority citation for part 199 any changes to the rule, but instead continues to read as follows: RIN 1105–AB51 generally provided his opinion on the importance of the FOIA and how it Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, Department of Justice Freedom of 60108, 60117, and 60118; 49 CFR 1.53. should operate. Information Act Regulations The second comment pertained to ■ 9. In § 199.3, revise the definition of AGENCY: Department of Justice. duplication fees for student requesters and the services provided by the Office ‘‘Prohibited drug’’ to read as follows: ACTION: Final rule. of Government Information Services § 199.3 Definitions. SUMMARY: The Department of Justice, (OGIS). The commenter noted that it is * * * * * after consideration of the public important for students to be able to Prohibited drug means any of the comments, adopts without change the obtain documents in a reasonably cost- substances specified in 49 CFR part 40. interim final rule amending the effective manner, which is reflected in Department’s regulations under the the decision rendered by the Court of * * * * * Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that Appeals for the District of Columbia was published on January 4, 2017. Circuit in Sack v. DOD, 823 F.3d 687 PART 655—PREVENTION OF (D.C. Cir. 2016). The commenter ALCOHOL MISUSE AND PROHIBITED DATES: This rule is effective April 23, 2019. indicated that, despite qualifying for DRUG USE IN TRANSIT OPERATIONS educational institution requester status, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: students will still be required to pay ■ 10. The authority citation for part 655 Lindsay Roberts, Attorney-Advisor, duplication fees. The commenter stated continues to read as follows: Office of Information Policy, (202) 514– that duplication fees may become 3642. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5331; 49 CFR 1.91. obsolete over time as records are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The maintained electronically and responses ■ 11. Amend § 655.21 by revising Department issued an interim final rule are likewise provided electronically. paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: amending the Department’s regulations The commenter encouraged the under the Freedom of Information Act Department to keep all records § 655.21 Drug testing. (FOIA) to incorporate certain changes electronically to reduce duplication * * * * * made to the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552, by the fees. The commenter suggested that the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Public Department consider removing (b) * * * Law 114–185, 130 Stat. 538 (June 30, duplication fees, unless the component (3) Opioids; 2016). 82 FR 725 (Jan. 4, 2017) Those certifies that the records being produced * * * * * changes included providing requesters are in paper format and the component 90 days to submit an administrative does not possess an electronic copy. Issued in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, appeal and implementing certain notice The Department considered this March 19, 2019. requirements for FOIA response letters. comment and declines to remove the Elaine L. Chao, The rule also updated the requirements provision for charging applicable Secretary of Transportation. pertaining to two FOIA fee categories, duplication fees to educational Daniel K. Elwell, ‘‘representative of the news media’’ and institutions. The FOIA provides that Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation ‘‘educational institution,’’ to reflect agencies shall promulgate regulations Administration. recent decisions by the Court of Appeals providing for reasonable standard [FR Doc. 2019–06986 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] for the District of Columbia Circuit. The charges for duplication fees, which are rule went into effect on February 3, the only type of fees assessed to BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 2017. The Department received three educational institution requesters. See 5 public comments about the interim final U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II). The rule. After carefully reviewing and Department’s regulations contain the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES ER23AP19.025 16776 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

directive that components ‘‘ensure that some components. The commenter website that lists contact information for searches, review, and duplication are noted that different components have all components. Every component has a conducted in the most efficient and the different portals, which can be FOIA Requester Service Center and least expensive manner.’’ 28 CFR confusing for requesters, and that some FOIA Public Liaison who are available 16.10(a). Further, requesters qualifying components also accept requests via to answer questions about submitting as educational institutions are provided email. The commenter suggested requests. OIP works with components the first 100 pages of duplication (or the amending § 16.3(a) to require all through the administrative appeal cost equivalent) without charge. components to accept requests via process and through its general § 16.10(d)(4)(i). Moreover, any requester email, as well as through a portal or compliance functions to help ensure may seek a fee waiver. Components other means, and amending § 16.8(a) to that components’ procedures are grant fee waivers if the requester has require the Office of Information Policy requester-friendly. Components are demonstrated that disclosure of the (OIP) to receive appeals via email, in continually working to streamline the information is in the public interest addition to using an online portal and request and appeal submission process because it is likely to contribute other means. Currently, components to the extent feasible while also striving significantly to public understanding of must have the capability to accept to use available resources most the operations or activities of the requests electronically either through efficiently to ensure faster processing to government and is not primarily in the email or a web portal, but they are not benefit all requesters. Finally, the commercial interest of the requester. 5 required to provide both capabilities. Department has developed a National U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)(iii); 28 CFR The Department considered this FOIA Portal that the public can use to 16.10(k)(1). For all these reasons, the comment but, due to the efficiencies make requests that is designed to help Department believes that no changes are gained by using portals, declines to standardize the request-making process needed to the provisions concerning the require components to receive requests across the government. The National assessment of duplication fees for and appeals via email in addition to FOIA Portal also contains a wealth of educational institutions. online portals, or other methods. The information to educate requesters on the The second commenter also provided Department recognizes that it may seem FOIA and assist them in making his opinion about the helpfulness of easier for requesters to have the option requests. The National FOIA Portal advising requesters about the services to use email instead of a web portal. contains a customized form for each available from the FOIA Public Liaison Using web portals, though, actually agency and agency component that both and OGIS. In response, the Department provides significant efficiencies for both follows a uniform format and provides notes that the interim rule already requesters and components when a link to the authority for any directs components to inform requesters compared to email. For example, when specialized requirements that an agency of the availability of the FOIA Public a requester submits a request via a web or component might have for making Liaison when providing notice of portal the component can start working requests. These features are designed to unusual circumstances and in all final on the request immediately upon receipt simplify and standardize the request- responses. The Department also informs rather than having to manually enter the making process for the public. We requesters of the services provided by information contained in the email into expect to continually improve the OGIS when giving notice of unusual the component’s tracking system. functionality of the National FOIA circumstances and in all adverse Particularly for components that receive Portal over time. determinations. See 28 CFR 16.5(c) and thousands of requests each year, this 16.6(e)(5). time savings can be significant and Regulatory Certifications This commenter also suggested that benefits requesters overall. Moreover, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563— § 16.8(d) be amended to require web portals also help requesters ensure Regulatory Review components to provide an explanation that they provide all required to the requester if a component chooses information when submitting their This regulation has been drafted and not to participate in mediation. The request or appeal, a capability that is not reviewed in accordance with Executive Department declines to make this available when requesters submit via Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and change. Mediation is a voluntary email. Without any built-in structure, an Review,’’ section 1(b), Principles of process and the statute does not require email request might omit essential Regulation, and Executive Order 13563, agencies to provide an explanation if information and require the component ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory they choose not to engage in this to engage in additional back and forth Review,’’ section 1(b), General process. Consistent with the statute, the with the requester before processing can Principles of Regulation. Department provides multiple begin. By contrast, a web portal form The Department of Justice has opportunities for the requester and will guide the requester through the determined that this rule is not a agency to communicate about a request. process, helping to ensure that all ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under The Department also encourages necessary information is provided from Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), and components to have open the start. This allows the component to accordingly this rule has not been communication with requesters start processing the request more reviewed by the Office of Management throughout the request process and quickly than would occur if it needed and Budget. requesters can contact the component’s additional information from a requester Both Executive Orders 12866 and FOIA Requester Service Center and who submitted an incomplete request 13563 direct agencies to assess costs and FOIA Public Liaison any time during via email. Again, this benefits all benefits of available regulatory the processing of their request. As part requesters. alternatives and, if regulation is of these communications, components The Department is committed to necessary, to select regulatory may choose to explain why they making it easy for the public to submit approaches that maximize net benefits decided not to participate in mediation requests and appeals. The Department’s (including potential economic, in any given case. FOIA Reference Guide, available on environmental, public health and safety The third commenter raised concerns OIP’s website, provides detailed effects, distributive impacts, and about the exclusive use of web portals instructions for making requests, and equity). The Department conducted the to accept FOIA requests electronically at OIP maintains a single page on its required assessment for the interim final

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16777

rule and this rule finalizes those PART 16—PRODUCTION OR delegated the authority to issue certain regulations without change. DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR local regulations. Safety zones may be INFORMATION established for safety or environmental Regulatory Flexibility Act purposes. A safety zone may be Accordingly, the interim rule stationary and described by fixed limits This rule finalizes the amendment of amending 28 CFR part 16, which was the Department of Justice’s regulations or it may be described as a zone around published at 82 FR 725 on January 4, a vessel in motion. Security zones limit under the FOIA to incorporate certain 2017, is adopted as a final rule without access to prevent injury or damage to changes made by the FOIA change. vessels, ports, or waterfront facilities. Improvement Act of 2016, and to reflect Dated: April 17, 2019. Special local regulations are issued to developments in the case law and to William P. Barr, enhance the safety of participants and streamline the description of the factors spectators at regattas and other marine to be considered when making fee Attorney General. [FR Doc. 2019–08122 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] events. Drawbridge operation waiver determinations. Because the regulations authorize changes to BILLING CODE 4410–BE–P Department was not required to publish drawbridge schedules to accommodate a notice of proposed rulemaking for this bridge repairs, seasonal vessel traffic, rule, a Regulatory Flexibility analysis is and local public events. Regulated DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND not required. 5 U.S.C. 603(b). Navigation Areas are water areas within SECURITY Executive Order 13132—Federalism a defined boundary for which Coast Guard regulations for vessels navigating within This regulation will not have the area have been established by the substantial direct effects on the States, 33 CFR Parts 100, 117, 147, and 165 regional Coast Guard District on the relationship between the national Commander. [USCG–2019–0255] government and the States, or on Timely publication of these rules in distribution of power and the Federal Register may be precluded 2019 Quarterly Listings; Safety Zones, when a rule responds to an emergency, responsibilities among the various Security Zones, Special Local or when an event occurs without levels of government. Therefore, in Regulations, Drawbridge Operation sufficient advance notice. The affected accordance with Executive Order 13132, Regulations and Regulated Navigation public is, however, often informed of the Department has determined that this Areas these rules through Local Notices to rule does not have sufficient federalism AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Mariners, press releases, and other implications to warrant the preparation means. Moreover, actual notification is ACTION: Notification of expired of a federalism summary impact provided by Coast Guard patrol vessels temporary rules issued. statement. enforcing the restrictions imposed by Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice SUMMARY: This document provides the rule. Because Federal Register Reform notification of substantive rules issued publication was not possible before the by the Coast Guard that were made end of the effective period, mariners This regulation meets the applicable temporarily effective but expired before were personally notified of the contents standards set forth in sections 3(a) and they could be published in the Federal of these safety zones, security zones, 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. Register. This document lists temporary special local regulations, regulated safety zones, security zones, special navigation areas or drawbridge Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 local regulations, drawbridge operation operation regulations by Coast Guard officials on-scene prior to any This rule will not result in the regulations and regulated navigation enforcement action. However, the Coast expenditure by State, local and tribal areas, all of limited duration and for Guard, by law, must publish in the governments, in the aggregate, or by the which timely publication in the Federal Register was not possible. Federal Register notice of substantive private sector, of $100 million or more rules adopted. To meet this obligation in any one year, and it will not DATES: This document lists temporary Coast Guard rules that became effective, without imposing undue expense on the significantly or uniquely affect small public, the Coast Guard periodically governments. Therefore, no actions were primarily between December 2018 and March 2019, unless otherwise indicated, publishes a list of these temporary deemed necessary under the provisions safety zones, security zones, special of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and were terminated before they could be published in the Federal Register. local regulations, regulated navigation of 1995. areas and drawbridge operation ADDRESSES: Temporary rules listed in Congressional Review Act regulations. Permanent rules are not this document may be viewed online, included in this list because they are under their respective docket numbers, This rule is not a major rule as published in their entirety in the at https://www.regulations.gov. defined by the Congressional Review Federal Register. Temporary rules are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Act. 5 U.S.C. 804. For also published in their entirety if questions on this document contact sufficient time is available to do so Paperwork Reduction Act Deborah Thomas, Office of Regulations before they are placed in effect or and Administrative Law, telephone terminated. This rule imposes no information (202) 372–3864. The following unpublished rules were collection or record keeping SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Coast placed in effect temporarily during the requirements. Guard District Commanders and period between December 2018 and List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 16 Captains of the Port (COTP) must be March 2019 unless otherwise indicated. immediately responsive to the safety To view copies of these rules, visit Administrative practice and and security needs within their www.regulations.gov and search by the procedure, Freedom of information, jurisdiction; therefore, District docket number indicated in the Privacy. Commanders and COTPs have been following table.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16778 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Docket No. Type Location Effective date

USCG–2018–0818 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Sunken Vessel Charleston Harbor; Charleston, 11/18/18 SC. USCG–2018–0914 ...... Security Zones (Part 165) ...... Potomac River and Anacostia River, Wash- 12/3/18 ington, DC. USCG–2018–1113 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Downtown Sandusky Fireworks, Lake Erie, 12/31/18 Sandusky, OH. USCG–2018–1112 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Ohio River, Vanport, PA ...... 1/1/19 USCG–2018–1086 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL ...... 1/4/19 USCG–2019–0008 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Tennessee River, Huntsville, AL ...... 1/9/19 USCG–2019–0021 ...... Security Zones (Part 165) ...... Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Corpus Christi, 1/12/19 TX. USCG–2018–1059 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Tappan Zee Bridge Demolition, Hudson River; 1/12/19 Tarrytown, NY. USCG–2018–1111 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Fireworks Displays in the Fifth Coast Guard 1/13/19 District. USCG–2018–1116 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Camp Lejeune, 1/15/19 NC. USCG–2019–0026 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Tennessee River, Calvert City, KY ...... 1/16/19 USCG–2019–0006 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Ohio River, Owensboro, KY ...... 1/19/19 USCG–2018–1115 ...... Drawbridges (Part 117) ...... Newport River, Beaufort, NC ...... 1/25/19 USCG–2019–0007 ...... Special Local Regulations (Part 100) ...... Gasparilla Marine Parade; Hillsborough Bay; 1/26/19 Tampa, FL. USCG–2018–1120 ...... Special Local Regulations (Part 100) ...... Hanohano Ocean Challenge, San Diego, CA .. 1/26/19 USCG–2019–0027 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Pier 84; Fireworks Display in the COTP, NY ... 2/11/19 USCG–2018–1109 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Murden Cove, Bainbridge Island, WA ...... 2/26/19 USCG–2019–0204 ...... Safety Zones (Parts 147 and 165) ...... Squalicum Harbor, WA ...... 3/16/19 USCG–2019–0173 ...... Security Zones (Part 165) ...... Charleston Harbor and Cooper River, Charles- 3/19/19 ton, SC.

Dated: April 18, 2019. environment by accurately depicting the II. Background Information and Katia Kroutil, anchorage locations. The changes to the Regulatory History Chief, Office of Regulations and regulated uses of the anchorages will Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard. support current and future port activity Anchorage regulation duties and [FR Doc. 2019–08120 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] related to the safety of post-Panamax powers were transferred to the Coast Guard in 1967 (32 FR 17726, Dec. 12, BILLING CODE 9110–04–P commercial cargo vessels, and will remove vessel security provisions that 1967). On December 12, 1968, the Fifth currently exist in these Baltimore Coast Guard District published a final DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Harbor regulations. rule in the Federal Register (33 FR SECURITY 18438) establishing an anchorage area in DATES: This rule is effective May 23, Baltimore Harbor, Maryland. The Coast Guard 2019. anchorage grounds at Baltimore, Maryland are described in 33 CFR 33 CFR Part 110 ADDRESSES: To view documents 110.158. These anchorage grounds are mentioned in this preamble as being involved in a federal navigation project [Docket Number USCG–2017–0181] available in the docket, go to http:// under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army RIN 1625–AA01 www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2017– Corps of Engineers Baltimore District. 0181 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click Section 101a(22) of the Water Resources Anchorage Grounds; Baltimore ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Development Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 106– Harbor, Baltimore, MD Folder on the line associated with this 53, 113 Stat 269 (1999)) authorized rule. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. widening of the Dundalk and Seagirt ACTION: Final rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If Marine Terminal channels. Widening of you have questions on this rule, call or the Seagirt Marine Terminal channel SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending email Mr. Ronald L. Houck, U.S. Coast occurred in 2015. This dredging its Baltimore Harbor anchorage grounds Guard, Sector Maryland-National widened the limits of existing regulation. The changes will reduce the Capital Region, Waterways Management navigation channels which are used to size of three general anchorages, Division, Coast Guard; telephone (410) access key Maryland Port establish one new general anchorage, 576–2674, email Ronald.L.Houck@ Administration marine terminals rename two existing general anchorages, uscg.mil. located immediately adjacent to the and change the duration a vessel may Baltimore Harbor, Maryland anchorage remain within an anchorage for two SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: grounds, and put the existing anchorage existing general anchorages. This rule grounds in the way of the newly will ensure that Coast Guard regulations I. Table of Abbreviations expanded navigation channels. To are consistent with the U.S. Army Corps CFR Code of Federal Regulations addresses these changes, Sector of Engineers Baltimore District Port of DHS Department of Homeland Security Maryland-National Capital Region, Baltimore Anchorages and Channels FR Federal Register Baltimore, Maryland, worked in civil works project that widened the NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking coordination with the Port of Baltimore channel, and provide a higher degree of § Section Harbor Safety and Coordination safety to persons, property and the U.S.C. United States Code Committee to develop proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16779

revisions to the affected anchorage No. 3 Upper, Anchorage No. 3 Lower, the waters of Curtis Bay. Designation of boundaries and associated regulations. Anchorage No. 4, Anchorage No. 5 and the new Anchorage No. 3C will create On August 14, 2018, the Coast Guard Anchorage No. 6. a new paragraph, (a)(9) for Anchorage published a notice of proposed This rule reduces the sizes of No. 7, Dead ship anchorage. This rulemaking (NPRM) titled ‘‘Anchorage Anchorage No. 2, Anchorage No. 3 rulemaking modifies paragraph (c)(3) of Grounds; Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore, Lower, and Anchorage No. 4. These the general regulations to remove the MD’’ (83 FR 40164). There we stated reductions will remove the portions of reference to a vessel becoming ‘‘a why we issued the NPRM, and invited the anchorage grounds that are in the menace’’ because we do not define that comments on our proposed regulatory navigable channel. The area of term and we don’t believe it is needed action related to this anchorage grounds. Anchorage No. 2 is reduced by given other factors already included in During the comment period that ended approximately 16,330 square yards that paragraph. We also change the November 13, 2018, we received no along its northern limit and defined term ‘‘dangerous cargo’’ to comments. approximately 326,770 square yards ‘‘certain dangerous cargo’’ without along its eastern limit. The area of changing the definition, continuing to III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule Anchorage No. 3 Lower is reduced at its incorporate the definition of certain The Coast Guard is issuing this rule eastern limit by 12,560 square yards. dangerous cargo from 33 CFR 160.202, under authority in 33 U.S.C. 471, 2071; The area of Anchorage No. 4 is reduced and aligning terminology used in this 46 U.S.C 70034; 33 CFR 1.05–1; and at its western limit by 6,000 square rule with that used throughout the rest Department of Homeland Security yards. of 33 CFR 110.158. This rulemaking Delegation No. 0170.1, which This rule renames Anchorage No. 3 removes paragraphs (c)(4) regarding collectively authorize the Coast Guard Lower to Anchorage No. 3A, and revocable permits for habitual use of an to define anchorage grounds. The renames Anchorage No. 3 Upper to anchorage, and paragraph (d) in its purpose of this rule is to reduce Anchorage No. 3B. This rule revises entirety, as described in section III navigational safety risk and support port Anchorage No. 2 and creates an area above. efficiency in Baltimore Harbor. This called Anchorage No. 3C out of existing regulation will designate a new general anchorage ground from Anchorage No. V. Regulatory Analyses anchorage ground developed from an 2. An area within Anchorage No. 2 that We developed this rule after existing anchorage ground that is is approximately 500 yards in length considering numerous statutes and located outside of the established and 165 yards in width, and adjacent to Executive orders related to rulemaking. navigation channel in order to align Anchorage No. 3 Upper, becomes Below we summarize our analyses with the existing U.S. Army Corps of Anchorage No. 3C. This reconfiguration based on a number of these statutes and Engineers Baltimore District Port of does not provide new space available Executive orders, and we discuss First Baltimore Anchorages and Channels for anchorage, will not restrict traffic, Amendment rights of protestors. civil works project. The Baltimore and is located outside of the established A. Regulatory Planning and Review Harbor anchorage grounds are typically navigation channel. A graphic depicting used by deep draft commercial cargo these changes is included in the docket. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 vessels. In order to maximize the This rule will reduce the duration a direct agencies to assess the costs and availability and use of these important vessel may remain within Anchorage benefits of available regulatory anchorages, this regulation will also No. 3 Lower (renumbered as Anchorage alternatives and, if regulation is change the duration for which vessels No. 3A) and Anchorage No. 4, from 72 necessary, to select regulatory may remain in these anchorages. This hours to 24 hours. These changes are approaches that maximize net benefits. regulation will reduce the duration a based on recommendations documented Executive Order 13771 directs agencies vessel may remain within Anchorage by the Port of Baltimore Harbor Safety to control regulatory costs through a No. 3 Lower (renumbered as Anchorage and Coordination Committee on budgeting process. This rule has not No. 3A) and Anchorage No. 4, from 72 September 8, 2010, and the Association been designated a ‘‘significant hours to 24 hours. Lastly, due to similar of Maryland Pilots. The Port of regulatory action,’’ under Executive provisions within the Maritime Baltimore Harbor Safety and Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has Transportation Security Act of 2002 Coordination Committee’s not been reviewed by the Office of (MTSA) (Pub. L. 107–295) and federal recommendation is available in the Management and Budget (OMB), and regulations (33 CFR part 104, and 46 docket. The Coast Guard agrees that the pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt CFR chapter 1, subchapters N and O), Committee’s recommendation addresses from the requirements of Executive the vessel security requirements in the problem of ensuring maximum Order 13771. § 110.158(d) are now redundant and availability and use of these anchorages. This regulatory action determination will be removed as part of this In addition, this rule establishes that a is based on the following: (i) It will not regulation. vessel may remain within Anchorage interfere with existing maritime activity No. 3C for no more than 72 hours in Baltimore Harbor, (ii) the changes IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, without permission from the Captain of will reduce navigational safety risk in and the Rule the Port, to remain consistent with the Baltimore Harbor by: (1) Aligning As noted above, we received no regulations for Anchorage No. 2. existing general anchorage boundaries comments on our NPRM published This rulemaking renumbers several with recent dredging projects that August 14, 2018. There are no changes paragraphs listed in 33 CFR 110.158, widened the limits of adjacent in the regulatory text of this rule from from (a)(3) Anchorage No. 3, Upper, navigational channels, (2) reducing the the proposed rule in the NPRM. general anchorage, through (a)(8) duration a vessel may remain within an This rule amends the Baltimore Anchorage No. 7, Dead ship anchorage. anchorage to increase availability and Harbor, Maryland anchorage grounds as All anchorage ground descriptions will usage, and (3) renaming and described in 33 CFR 110.158. The be updated to state they are in the reconfiguring general anchorages that general anchorages currently listed in waters of the Patapsco River, except for support a proper naming and numbering the regulation that are affected by this Anchorage No. 7, Dead ship anchorage, convention within the existing rule are Anchorage No. 2, Anchorage which will be updated to state it is in anchorage regulation, and (iii) the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16780 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

reconfiguration of the additional general C. Collection of Information paragraph L59(a) of Appendix A, Table anchorage does not provide additional This rule will not call for a new 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– anchorage area and will not restrict collection of information under the 001–01, Rev. 01. A Record of traffic, as it is developed from an Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Environmental Consideration existing anchorage and is located U.S.C. 3501–3520). supporting this determination is outside of the established navigation available in the docket where indicated channel. As discussed in section IV D. Federalism and Indian Tribal under ADDRESSES. above, this rule will replace the Governments G. Protest Activities ‘‘dangerous cargo’’ definition with one A rule has implications for federalism for ‘‘certain dangerous cargo’’ and under Executive Order 13132, The Coast Guard respects the First remove vessel security provisions that Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Amendment rights of protesters. are redundant to other federal effect on the States, on the relationship Protesters are asked to contact the regulations. between the national government and person listed in the FOR FURTHER the States, or on the distribution of INFORMATION CONTACT section to B. Impact on Small Entities power and responsibilities among the coordinate protest activities so that your The Regulatory Flexibility Act of various levels of government. We have message can be received without 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, analyzed this rule under that Order and jeopardizing the safety or security of requires Federal agencies to consider have determined that it is consistent people, places or vessels. the potential impact of regulations on with the fundamental federalism List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 small entities during rulemaking. The principles and preemption requirements Anchorage Grounds. term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small described in Executive Order 13132. businesses, not-for-profit organizations Also, this rule does not have tribal For the reasons discussed in the that are independently owned and implications under Executive Order preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 operated and are not dominant in their 13175, Consultation and Coordination CFR part 110 as follows: fields, and governmental jurisdictions with Indian Tribal Governments, PART 110—ANCHORAGE with populations of less than 50,000. because it does not have a substantial REGULATIONS The Coast Guard received no comments direct effect on one or more Indian from the Small Business Administration tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 110 on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard continues to read as follows: certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this or on the distribution of power and rule will not have a significant responsibilities between the Federal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 2071; 46 U.S.C. Government and Indian tribes. If you 70034; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of economic impact on a substantial believe this rule has implications for Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. number of small entities. federalism or Indian tribes, please ■ 2. Revise § 110.158 to read as follows: For the reasons stated in section V.A contact the person listed in the FOR above, this rule will not have a FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. § 110.158 Baltimore Harbor, MD. significant economic impact on any E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (a) Anchorage Grounds—(1) No. 1, vessel owner or operator. general anchorage. (i) All waters of the Under section 213(a) of the Small The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Patapsco River, bounded by a line Business Regulatory Enforcement of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires connecting the following points: Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In Latitude Longitude we want to assist small entities in 39°15′13.51″ N 76°34′07.76″ W understanding this rule. If the rule particular, the Act addresses actions 39°15′11.01″ N 76°34′11.69″ W would affect your small business, that may result in the expenditure by a 39°14′52.98″ N 76°33′52.67″ W organization, or governmental State, local, or tribal government, in the 39°14′47.90″ N 76°33′40.73″ W jurisdiction and you have questions aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or (ii) No vessel shall remain in this concerning its provisions or options for anchorage for more than 12 hours compliance, please contact the person more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, without permission from the Captain of listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION we do discuss the effects of this rule the Port. CONTACT section. elsewhere in this preamble. (2) Anchorage No. 2, general Small businesses may send comments anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco on the actions of Federal employees F. Environment River, bounded by a line connecting the who enforce, or otherwise determine We have analyzed this rule under following points: compliance with, Federal regulations to Department of Homeland Security Latitude Longitude the Small Business and Agriculture Directive 023–01 and Commandant 39°14′50.06″ N 76°33′29.86″ W Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the 39°14′57.53″ N 76°33′37.74″ W 39°15′08.56″ N 76°33′37.66″ W and the Regional Small Business Coast Guard in complying with the ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Regulatory Fairness Boards. The National Environmental Policy Act of 39 15 15.77 N 76 33 28.81 W 39°15′18.87″ N 76°33′12.82″ W Ombudsman evaluates these actions 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 39°15′17.71″ N 76°33′09.09″ W annually and rates each agency’s determined that this action is one of a 39°14′50.35″ N 76°32′40.43″ W responsiveness to small business. If you category of actions that do not 39°14′45.28″ N 76°32′48.68″ W wish to comment on actions by individually or cumulatively have a 39°14′46.27″ N 76°32′49.69″ W employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– significant effect on the human 39°14′43.76″ N 76°32′53.63″ W 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The environment. This rule involves the 39°14′57.51″ N 76°33′08.14″ W Coast Guard will not retaliate against modification of existing anchorages 39°14′55.60″ N 76°33′11.14″ W ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ small entities that question or complain within the Baltimore Harbor, Maryland 39 14 59.42 N 76 33 15.17 W about this rule or any policy or action anchorage grounds. It is categorically (ii) No vessel shall remain in this of the Coast Guard. excluded from further review under anchorage for more than 72 hours

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16781

without permission from the Captain of without permission from the Captain of obtains permission from the Captain of the Port. the Port. the Port. (3) Anchorage No. 3A, general (8) Anchorage No. 6, general (4) Upon notification by the Captain anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco of the Port to shift its position, a vessel River, bounded by a line connecting the River, bounded by a line connecting the at anchor must get underway and shall following points: following points: move to its new designated position Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude within two hours after notification. 39°14′15.66″ N 76°32′53.59″ W 39°13′42.98″ N 76°32′19.11″ W (5) The Captain of the Port may 39°14′32.48″ N 76°33′11.31″ W 39°13′20.65″ N 76°31′55.58″ W prescribe specific conditions for vessels ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 39°14′46.27″ N 76°32′49.69″ W 39 13 34.00 N 76 31 33.50 W anchoring within the anchorages ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 39 14 32.50 N 76 32 35.18 W 39 14 01.95 N 76 32 02.65 W described in this section, including, but ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 39°13′51.01″ N 76°32′18.71″ W 39 14 22.37 N 76 32 43.07 W not limited to, the number and location (ii) No vessel shall remain in this (ii) No vessel shall remain in this of anchors, scope of chain, readiness of anchorage for more than 24 hours anchorage for more than 72 hours engineering plant and equipment, usage without permission from the Captain of without permission from the Captain of of tugs, and requirements for the Port. the Port. maintaining communication guards on (4) Anchorage No. 3B, general (9) Anchorage No. 7, Dead ship selected radio frequencies. anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco anchorage. (i) All waters of Curtis Bay, (6) No vessel at anchor or at a mooring River, bounded by a line connecting the bounded by a line connecting the within an anchorage may transfer oil to following points: following points: or from another vessel unless the vessel Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude has given the Captain of the Port the ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 39°14′32.48″ N 76°33′11.31″ W 39 13 00.40 N 76 34 10.40 W four hours advance notice required by ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ 39°14′46.23″ N 76°33′25.83″ W 39 13 13.40 N 76 34 10.81 W ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ § 156.118 of this chapter. 39°14′57.51″ N 76°33′08.14″ W 39 13 13.96 N 76 34 05.02 W ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ (7) No vessel shall anchor in a ‘‘dead 39°14′43.76″ N 76°32′53.63″ W 39 13 14.83 N 76 33 29.80 W 39°13′00.40″ N 76°33′29.90″ W ship’’ status (propulsion or control (ii) No vessel shall remain in this unavailable for normal operations) anchorage for more than 24 hours (ii) The primary use of this anchorage without prior approval of the Captain of without permission from the Captain of is to lay up dead ships. Such use has the Port. priority over other uses. Permission the Port. Dated: April 17, 2019. (5) Anchorage No. 3C, general from the Captain of the Port must be obtained prior to the use of this Keith M. Smith, anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, River, bounded by a line connecting the anchorage for more than 72 hours. (b) Definitions. As used in this Fifth Coast Guard District. following points: section— [FR Doc. 2019–08116 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Latitude Longitude ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Certain dangerous cargo means BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 39 14 46.23 N 76 33 25.83 W certain dangerous cargo as defined in 39°14′50.06″ N 76°33′29.86″ W ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ § 160.202 of this chapter. 39 14 59.42 N 76 33 15.17 W DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 39°14′55.60″ N 76°33′11.14″ W COTP means Captain of the Port Sector Maryland—National Capital SECURITY (ii) No vessel shall remain in this Region. anchorage for more than 72 hours (c) General regulations. (1) Except as Coast Guard without permission from the Captain of otherwise provided, this section applies the Port. to vessels over 20 meters long and all 33 CFR Part 165 (6) Anchorage No. 4, general vessels carrying or handling certain [Docket No. USCG–2019–0241] anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco dangerous cargo while anchored in an River, bounded by a line connecting the anchorage ground described in this Safety Zones; Fireworks Displays in following points: section. the Fifth Coast Guard District Latitude Longitude (2) Except in cases where unforeseen 39°13′52.92″ N 76°32′29.60″ W circumstances create conditions of AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 39°14′04.38″ N 76°32′41.69″ W imminent peril, or with the permission ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ ACTION: Notice of enforcement of 39 14 09.35 N 76 32 39.89 W of the Captain of the Port, no vessel regulation. 39°14′17.96″ N 76°32′26.44″ W ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ shall be anchored in Baltimore Harbor 39 14 05.32 N 76 32 13.09 W or the Patapsco River outside of the SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce 39°14′00.05″ N 76°32′17.77″ W anchorage areas established in this the Penn’s Landing, Delaware River, (ii) No vessel shall remain in this section for more than 24 hours. No Philadelphia, PA, safety zone from 8:30 anchorage for more than 24 hours vessel shall anchor within a tunnel, p.m. through 9:00 p.m. on April 26, without permission from the Captain of cable or pipeline area shown on a 2019. This action is necessary to ensure the Port. government chart. No vessel shall be safety of life on the navigable waters of (7) Anchorage No. 5, general moored, anchored, or tied up to any the United States immediately prior to, anchorage. (i) All waters of the Patapsco pier, wharf, or other vessel in such during, and immediately after the River, bounded by a line connecting the manner as to extend into established fireworks displays. Our regulation for following points: channel limits. No vessel shall be safety zones of fireworks displays in the Latitude Longitude positioned so as to obstruct or endanger Fifth Coast Guard District identifies the 39°14′07.89″ N 76°32′58.23″ W the passage of any other vessel. regulated area for this event at Penn’s 39°13′34.82″ N 76°32′23.66″ W (3) Except in an emergency, a vessel Landing in Philadelphia, PA. During the 39°13′22.25″ N 76°32′28.90″ W ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ that is likely to sink or otherwise enforcement periods, vessels may not 39 13 21.20 N 76 33 11.94 W become an obstruction to navigation or enter, remain in, or transit through the (ii) No vessel shall remain in this the anchoring of other vessels may not safety zones during these enforcement anchorage for more than 72 hours occupy an anchorage, unless the vessel periods unless authorized by the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16782 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Captain of the Port or designated Coast ACTION: Temporary final rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard patrol personnel on scene. Guard finds that good cause exists for SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is DATES: The regulations in the table to 33 making this rule effective less than 30 establishing a temporary safety zone for CFR 165.506 at (a)(16) will be enforced days after publication in the Federal certain waters of the Lake of the Ozarks. from 8:30 p.m. through 9 p.m. on April Register. The application for this This action is necessary to provide for 26, 2019. fireworks display was not received in the safety of life on these navigable sufficient time to permit both a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If waters near the Tan-Tar-A Resort, Osage you have questions about this notice of comment period and for making this Beach, MO during a fireworks display rule effective 30 days after publication enforcement, you may call or email on May 4, 2019. This rulemaking will Petty Officer Thomas Welker, U.S. Coast in the Federal Register. The prohibit persons and vessels from determination of good cause was made Guard, Sector Delaware Bay, Waterways entering the safety zone unless due to the fact that no comments in Management Division, telephone 215– authorized by the Captain of the Port opposition to the proposed rule were 271–4814, email Thomas.J.Welker@ Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP) received regarding this event, that this uscg.mil. or a designated representative. area is routinely used for fireworks SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast DATES: This rule is effective on May 4, displays throughout the year, and the Guard will enforce the safety zone in the 2019 from 8:45 to 9:45 p.m. fact that delaying the effective date of Table to 33 CFR 165.506, entry (a)(16) ADDRESSES: To view documents this rule would be contrary to the public for the Delaware River Waterfront mentioned in this preamble as being interest because immediate action is Corporation Fireworks display from available in the docket, go to https:// needed to respond to the potential 8:30 p.m. through 9 p.m. on April 26, www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2019– safety hazards associated with the barge 2019. This action is necessary to ensure 0113 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click launched fireworks display at this safety of life on the navigable waters of ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket location. the United States immediately prior to, Folder on the line associated with this III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule during, and immediately after the rule. The Coast Guard is issuing this rule fireworks displays. Our regulation for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If safety zones of fireworks displays you have questions on this rule, call or under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 within the Fifth Coast Guard District, email Lieutenant Commander Christian (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP table to § 165.506, entry (a)(16) specifies Barger, Waterways Management has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks to be used the location of the regulated area as all Division, Sector Upper Mississippi in this May 4, 2019 display will be a waters of Delaware River, adjacent to River, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 314– safety concern for anyone within a 300- Penn’s Landing, Philadelphia, PA, 269–2560, email Christian.J.Barger@ foot radius of the fireworks barge. The within 500 yards of a fireworks launch uscg.mil. site at approximate position latitude purpose of this rule is to ensure safety SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 39°56′49″ N, longitude 075°08′11″ W. of vessels and the navigable waters in During the enforcement period, as I. Table of Abbreviations the safety zone before, during, and after reflected in § 165.506(d), vessels may the scheduled event. CFR Code of Federal Regulations not enter, remain in, or transit through COTP Captain of the Port Sector Upper IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, the safety zone during the enforcement Mississippi River and the Rule period unless authorized by the Captain DHS Department of Homeland Security As noted above, we received five of the Port or designated Coast Guard FR Federal Register comments on our NPRM published patrol personnel on scene. NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking In addition to this notice of § Section March 15, 2019. All five comments enforcement in the Federal Register, the U.S.C. United States Code recognized the inherent risks involved Coast Guard will provide notification of with fireworks displays and indicated II. Background Information and favor for the proposed rule. One this enforcement period via broadcast Regulatory History notice to mariners. comment posed a concern about On February 18, 2019, the Premier providing an alternate route to avoid the Dated: April 18, 2019. Pyrotechnics Inc. notified the Coast safety zone to ensure there would not be Scott E. Anderson, Guard that it would be conducting a a buildup of vessels surrounding the Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the fireworks display from 9 to 9:30 p.m. on zone. Waters of Lake of the Ozarks Port, Delaware Bay. May 4, 2019, for a private event taking outside of the established safety zone [FR Doc. 2019–08127 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] place at the Tan-Tar-A Resort in Osage will be available and open for all traffic, BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Beach, MO. The fireworks are to be as normal. There are no changes in the launched from a barge in the Lake of the regulatory text of this rule from the Ozarks approximately 250 feet southeast proposed rule in the NPRM. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND of the southern point of the resort near This rule establishes a safety zone SECURITY mile marker 26. In response, on March from 8:45 to 9:45 p.m. on May 4, 2019. 15, 2019, the Coast Guard published a The safety zone would cover all Coast Guard notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) navigable waters within 300 feet of a titled Safety Zone; Lake of the Ozarks, barge in the Lake of the Ozarks located 33 CFR Part 165 Osage Beach, MO (84 FR 9468). There approximately 250 feet southeast of the [Docket Number USCG–2019–0113] we stated why we issued the NPRM, southern point of the Tan-Tar-a Resort and invited comments on our proposed near mile marker 26. The duration of the RIN 1625–AA00 regulatory action related to this zone is intended to ensure the safety of Safety Zone; Lake of the Ozarks, fireworks display. During the comment vessels on these navigable waters before, Osage Beach, MO period that ended April 15, 2019, we during, and after the scheduled received five comments, all of which fireworks display. No vessel or person AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. were in favor of the safety zone. would be permitted to enter the safety

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16783

zone without obtaining permission from Under section 213(a) of the Small E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act the COTP or a designated Business Regulatory Enforcement The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act representative. Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires we want to assist small entities in V. Regulatory Analyses Federal agencies to assess the effects of understanding this rule. If the rule We developed this rule after their discretionary regulatory actions. In would affect your small business, particular, the Act addresses actions considering numerous statutes and organization, or governmental Executive orders related to rulemaking. that may result in the expenditure by a jurisdiction and you have questions State, local, or tribal government, in the Below we summarize our analyses concerning its provisions or options for based on a number of these statutes and aggregate, or by the private sector of compliance, please contact the person $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or Executive orders, and we discuss First listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Amendment rights of protestors. more in any one year. Though this rule CONTACT section. will not result in such an expenditure, A. Regulatory Planning and Review Small businesses may send comments we do discuss the effects of this rule Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 on the actions of Federal employees elsewhere in this preamble. who enforce, or otherwise determine direct agencies to assess the costs and F. Environment benefits of available regulatory compliance with, Federal regulations to alternatives and, if regulation is the Small Business and Agriculture We have analyzed this rule under necessary, to select regulatory Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman Department of Homeland Security approaches that maximize net benefits. and the Regional Small Business Directive 023–01 and Commandant Executive Order 13771 directs agencies Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the to control regulatory costs through a Ombudsman evaluates these actions Coast Guard in complying with the budgeting process. This rule has not annually and rates each agency’s National Environmental Policy Act of been designated a ‘‘significant responsiveness to small business. If you 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have regulatory action,’’ under Executive wish to comment on actions by determined that this action is one of a Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– category of actions that do not not been reviewed by the Office of 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The individually or cumulatively have a Management and Budget (OMB), and Coast Guard will not retaliate against significant effect on the human pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt small entities that question or complain environment. This rule involves a safety from the requirements of Executive about this rule or any policy or action zone lasting 1 hour that will prohibit Order 13771. of the Coast Guard. entry within 300 feet of a barge in the Lake of the Ozarks located This regulatory action determination C. Collection of Information is based on the duration of the rule and approximately 250 feet southeast of the the location of the safety zone within This rule will not call for a new southern point of the Tan-Tar-A Resort the waterway. This regulatory action collection of information under the near mile marker 26. It is categorically would be in place for a period of 1 hour, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 excluded from further review under within a 300 foot radius of the fireworks U.S.C. 3501–3520). paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table barge, close to the shoreline of the Tan- 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– Tar-A Resort in Osage Beach, MO. The D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 001–01, Rev. 01. A Record of majority of the waterway would remain Governments Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is open to traffic during the fireworks A rule has implications for federalism available in the docket where indicated display. under Executive Order 13132, under ADDRESSES. B. Impact on Small Entities Federalism, if it has a substantial direct The Regulatory Flexibility Act of effect on the States, on the relationship G. Protest Activities 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, between the national government and The Coast Guard respects the First requires Federal agencies to consider the States, or on the distribution of Amendment rights of protesters. the potential impact of regulations on power and responsibilities among the Protesters are asked to contact the various levels of government. We have small entities during rulemaking. The person listed in the FOR FURTHER analyzed this rule under that Order and term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small INFORMATION CONTACT section to businesses, not-for-profit organizations have determined that it is consistent coordinate protest activities so that your that are independently owned and with the fundamental federalism message can be received without operated and are not dominant in their principles and preemption requirements jeopardizing the safety or security of fields, and governmental jurisdictions described in Executive Order13132. people, places or vessels. with populations of less than 50,000. Also, this rule does not have tribal List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 The Coast Guard received no comments implications under Executive Order from the Small Business Administration 13175, Consultation and Coordination Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard with Indian Tribal Governments, (water), Reporting and recordkeeping certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this because it does not have a substantial requirements, Security measures, rule will not have a significant direct effect on one or more Indian Waterways. economic impact on a substantial tribes, on the relationship between the For the reasons discussed in the number of small entities. Federal Government and Indian tribes, preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 While some owners or operators of or on the distribution of power and CFR part 165 as follows: vessels intending to transit the safety responsibilities between the Federal zone may be small entities, for the Government and Indian tribes. If you PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION reasons stated in section V.A above, this believe this rule has implications for AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS rule will not have a significant federalism or Indian tribes, please economic impact on any vessel owner contact the person listed in the FOR ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 or operator. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. continues to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16784 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR ACTION: Final rule. only if the architectural work was 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; embodied in unpublished plans created Department of Homeland Security Delegation SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is prior to December 1, 1990 and if the No. 0170.1. amending its regulations pertaining to building was constructed before January ■ 2. Add § 165.T08–0113 to read as the registration of architectural works. 1, 2003. The rule amends the deposit follows: To improve the efficiency of the requirements by allowing applicants to registration process, and encourage submit drawings and photographs of an § 165.T08–0113 Safety Zone; Lake of the broader participation in the registration Ozarks, Osage Beach, MO. architectural work in any form that system, the final rule will require allows the Office to access, perceive, (a) Location. The following area is a applicants to submit their claims using and examine the entire copyrightable safety zone: all navigable waters of the an online application, rather than a content of the work, including by Lake of the Ozarks within a 300-foot paper application. Applicants will be uploading the deposit through the radius of a barge-launched fireworks required to provide a date of electronic registration system in an display located approximately 250 feet construction, but only if the work was acceptable file format. Finally, the rule southeast of the southern point of the embodied in unpublished plans or confirms that architectural works are Tan-Tar-A Resort near mile marker 26. drawings on or before December 1, 1990 classified as ‘‘works of the visual arts’’ (b) Period of enforcement. This and if the work was constructed before for purposes of registration, and it section will be enforced from 8:45 p.m. January 1, 2003. And, applicants will be makes some technical amendments that through 9:45 p.m. on May 4, 2019. encouraged—but not required—to will improve the organization and (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with upload a digital copy of their readability of the regulations. the general regulations in § 165.23, architectural works through the The commenters generally supported persons and vessels are prohibited from electronic registration system, instead of the online filing requirement and agreed entering the safety zone unless submitting a physical copy. that it will improve the efficiency of the authorized by the Captain of the Port DATES: Effective May 23, 2019. registration process. One individual Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP) expressed concern that applicants may or a designated representative. A FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Kasunic, Associate Register of be accustomed to using paper forms and designated representative is a may need time to adapt to this change. commissioned, warrant, or petty officer Copyrights and Director of Registration Policy and Practice; Erik Bertin, Deputy Another noted that some applicants may of the U.S. Coast Guard assigned to not have access to computers, and units under the operational control of Director of Registration Policy and Practice; Jordana Rubel, Assistant encouraged the Office to ‘‘allow certain USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River. 3 General Counsel by telephone at 202– exceptions’’ for such persons. (2) Persons or vessels desiring to enter The final rule provides the requested 707–8040 or by email at rkas@ into or pass through the zone must flexibility. When the rule goes into copyright.gov, [email protected], request permission from the COTP or a effect, applicants will be required to use and [email protected]. designated representative. They may be the online application to register an contacted by telephone at 314–269– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On architectural work. Paper applications 2332. December 26, 2018, the Copyright Office submitted on Form VA will not be (3) If permission is granted, all published a notice of proposed rule accepted. However, the Office will have persons and vessels shall comply with rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) setting forth the authority to waive the online filing the instructions of the COTP or proposed amendments to the requirement in ‘‘an exceptional case’’ designated representative. regulations governing the registration of and ‘‘subject to such conditions as the (d) Informational broadcasts. The architectural works. 83 FR 66182 (Dec. Associate Register and Director of the COTP or a designated representative 26, 2018). The Office received Office of Registration Policy and will inform the public of the comments from three individuals who Practice may impose on the applicant.’’ enforcement date and times for this generally supported the proposal.1 Applicants who do not have a computer safety zone, as well as any emergent Having reviewed and carefully or internet access may contact the safety concerns that may delay the considered these comments, the Office Office, and the Office will review the enforcement of the zone through Local is issuing a final rule that is identical to specific details of their situation to Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and/or the rule proposed in the NPRM. determine if a waiver is warranted. actual notice. The final rule requires applicants to The commenters generally supported Dated: April 18, 2019. submit their claims through the the proposal to allow for digital uploads S.A. Stoermer, electronic registration system using the in lieu of physical copies, though one Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Standard Application, in lieu of a paper individual suggested that digital 2 Port Sector Upper Mississippi River. form. The rule states that applicants submissions should be mandatory rather [FR Doc. 2019–08126 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] must provide a date of construction, but than permissive. Sections 407 and 408 BILLING CODE 9110–04–P of the Copyright Act give the Register of 1 All of the comments submitted in response to Copyrights broad authority to issue the NPRM can be found on the Copyright Office’s website at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/ regulations concerning the specific LIBRARY OF CONGRESS architecturalworks/. nature of the copies that must be 2 The Office recently issued a final rule submitted for purposes of registration Copyright Office confirming that the Standard Application may be and mandatory deposit.4 Architectural used to register any work under sections 408(a) and works are typically created with 409 of the Copyright Act, including an architectural 37 CFR Part 202 work. At the same time, the Office confirmed that computer software, and as noted in the architectural works may not be registered with the NPRM, the Office expects that most [Docket No. 2018–13] Single Application, which is a streamlined version applicants will submit their deposits in of the electronic application. 37 CFR electronic form. That said, the Office Architectural Works 202.3(b)(2)(i)(A), (B). To avoid potential confusion between the Single and Standard Applications, AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library today’s final rule removes the word ‘‘single’’ 3 Comments of Reema Mahmoud and Nik Zou. of Congress. wherever it appears in 37 CFR 202.11. 4 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(1).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16785

recognizes that architectural works may ■ c. Revise paragraphs (c)(3) and (4); (i.e., exterior elevations of the building be created electronically and then and when viewed from the front, rear, and published in a physical form. And the ■ d. Add new paragraph (c)(5). sides), and any interior arrangements of Office recognizes that some digital files The revisions and additions read as spaces and/or design elements in which may be so big that it may not be possible follows: copyright is claimed (i.e., walls or other to upload them to the electronic § 202.11 Architectural works. permanent structures that divide the registration system.5 (a) General. This section prescribes interior into separate rooms and spaces). For these reasons, the final rule gives The deposit should disclose the name(s) architects the option to register their rules pertaining to the registration of of the architect(s) and draftsperson(s) works either by uploading a digital architectural works. and the building site, if known. For deposit to the electronic system or by (b) * * * filing an electronic application and (1) For the purposes of this section, designs of constructed buildings, the mailing the deposit to the Office in a the term building means humanly applicant also must submit identifying physical form. But if the applicant habitable structures that are intended to material in the form of photographs chooses to submit a digital deposit, that be both permanent and stationary, such complying with § 202.21, which clearly file will be accepted solely for the as houses and office buildings, and show several exterior and interior views purpose of registering the architectural other permanent and stationary of the architectural work being work under section 408. Digital deposits structures designed for human registered. occupancy, including but not limited to will not satisfy the mandatory deposit (ii) The deposit may be submitted in churches, museums, gazebos, and requirement under section 407. In other any form that allows the Copyright garden pavilions. words, if an architectural work has been Office to access, perceive, and examine registered with a digital deposit, the (2) Unless otherwise specified, all other terms have the meanings set forth the entire copyrightable content of the Office may issue a demand for a copy work being registered, including by of ‘‘the most finished form of in §§ 202.3 and 202.20. uploading the complete copy and presentation drawings’’ if that work has (c) * * * identifying material in an acceptable file been published in the United States and (3) Registration limited to one if the Library of Congress determines architectural work. For published and format to the Office’s electronic that the published work is needed for its unpublished architectural works, an registration system. Deposits uploaded collections.6 application may cover only one to the electronic registration system will architectural work. Multiple be considered solely for the purpose of List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 202 architectural works may not be registration under section 408 of title 17 Copyright. registered using one application. For of the United States Code, and will not works such as tract housing, one house Final Regulations satisfy the mandatory deposit model constitutes one work, including requirement under section 407 of title For the reasons set forth in the all accompanying floor plan options, 17 of the United States Code. preamble, the Copyright Office is elevations, and styles that are applicable * * * * * amending 37 CFR part 202 as follows: to that particular model. Where dual copyright claims exist in technical ■ 4. Amend § 202.20 as follows: PART 202—PREREGISTRATION AND drawings and the architectural work ■ a. Add paragraph (c)(2)(i)(M); and REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO depicted in the drawings, any claims ■ COPYRIGHT with respect to the technical drawings b. Remove and reserve paragraph (c)(2)(xviii). ■ 1. The authority citation for part 202 and architectural work must be continues to read as follows: registered separately. The addition reads as follows: (4) Online application. (i) The Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408(f), 702. applicant must complete and submit the § 202.20 Deposit of copies and phonorecords for copyright registration. ■ 2. In § 202.3, add a sentence at the end Standard Application. The application of paragraph (b)(1)(iii) to read as should identify the title of the building. * * * * * follows: If the architectural work was embodied (c) * * * in unpublished plans or drawings on or § 202.3 Registration of copyright. before December 1, 1990, and if the (2) * * * * * * * * building was constructed before January (i) * * * (b) * * * 1, 2003, the application should also (M) Architectural works, for which (1) * * * provide the date that the construction (iii) * * * This class also includes the deposit must comply with the was completed. requirements set forth in § 202.11. published and unpublished (ii) In an exceptional case, the architectural works. Copyright Office may waive the online * * * * * * * * * * filing requirement set forth in paragraph Dated: April 5, 2019. ■ 3. Amend § 202.11 as follows: (c)(4)(i) of this section, subject to such Karyn A. Temple, ■ a. Revise paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) and conditions as the Associate Register and Register of Copyrights and Director of the (2); Director of the Office of Registration U.S. Copyright Office. ■ b. Remove paragraph (c)(2) and Policy and Practice may impose on the redesignate paragraph (c)(5) as applicant. Approved by: paragraph (c)(2); (5) Deposit requirements. (i) For Carla D. Hayden, designs of constructed or unconstructed Librarian of Congress. 5 The current limit is 500 MB for each file that buildings, the applicant must submit [FR Doc. 2019–08136 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] is uploaded to the electronic system. See one complete copy in visually Compendium § 1508.1. BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 6 37 CFR 202.19(d)(2)(viii) (specifying the nature perceptible form of the most finished of the deposit required for purposes of mandatory form of an architectural drawing deposit). showing the overall form of the building

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16786 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CAA requirement. EPA is approving this area is the ‘‘Atlanta fuel volatility Area.’’ AGENCY SIP revision because EPA has The nonattainment designation determined that the revision is triggered various requirements for the 40 CFR Part 52 consistent with the applicable Atlanta 1-hour ozone nonattainment [EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0617; FRL–9992–54– provisions of the CAA. EPA will also area. One of those requirements for the Region 4] initiate a separate rulemaking to relax 1-hour ozone nonattainment area was the current Federal requirement to use the Federal 7.8 psi RVP limit for Air Plan Approval; GA: Non- gasoline that complies with the Federal gasoline sold between June 1 and Interference Demonstration and RVP limit from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi in the September 15, which is the subject of Maintenance Plan Revision for Federal Atlanta fuel volatility Area. this action. Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement DATES: This rule will be effective May EPA issued a final rulemaking action in the Atlanta Area 23, 2019. on September 26, 2003, to reclassify or ADDRESSES: EPA has established a ‘‘bump up,’’ the area to a Severe ozone AGENCY: Environmental Protection nonattainment area. This Agency (EPA). docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0617. All reclassification became effective on ACTION: Final rule. documents in the docket are listed on January 1, 2004 (68 FR 55469). EPA redesignated the Atlanta 1-hour ozone SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection the www.regulations.gov website. Agency (EPA) is approving a State Although listed in the index, some area to attainment, effective June 14, 2005 (70 FR 34660). Implementation Plan (SIP) revision that information is not publicly available, On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA supports a change to the Federal Reid i.e., Confidential Business Information designated the following 20 counties in or other information whose disclosure is Vapor Pressure (RVP) requirements in and around metropolitan Atlanta as a restricted by statute. Certain other 13 counties in Atlanta, Georgia. They Marginal nonattainment area for the material, such as copyrighted material, comprise the following counties: 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS: Barrow, is not placed on the internet and will be Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, publicly available only in hard copy Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, and form. Publicly available docket Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Rockdale (Atlanta fuel volatility Area). materials are available either Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, The Atlanta fuel volatility Area is a electronically through and Walton. The Atlanta fuel volatility subset of the Atlanta 15-county 2008 8- www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Area is a sub-set of this 20-county area. hour ozone maintenance area. The 15- the Air Regulatory Management Section, Subsequently, EPA reclassified the county 2008 8-hour ozone maintenance Air Planning and Implementation Atlanta 1997 8-hour ozone area is comprised of the following Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics nonattainment area as a Moderate counties: Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Management Division, U.S. nonattainment area on March 6, 2008 Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Environmental Protection Agency, (73 FR 12013), because the area failed to Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by Newton, Paulding, and Rockdale Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that the required attainment date of June 15, (Atlanta maintenance Area). This if possible, you contact the person listed 2007. On December 2, 2013 (78 FR approval is based in part on EPA’s in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 72040), EPA redesignated the area to analysis of whether the SIP revision CONTACT section to schedule your attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone would interfere with the Atlanta inspection. The Regional Office’s NAAQS. maintenance Area’s ability to meet the official hours of business are Monday Effective July 20, 2012, EPA requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., designated the following 15-counties or Act). On August 15, 2018, Georgia, excluding Federal holidays. Marginal nonattainment for the 2008 8- through the Georgia Environmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: hour ozone NAAQS: Bartow, Cherokee, Protection Division (GA EPD), Dianna Myers, Air Regulatory Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, submitted a noninterference Management Section, Air Planning and Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, demonstration to support its SIP Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides Gwinnett, Henry, Newton, Paulding, revision requesting that EPA relax the and Toxics Management Division, U.S. and Rockdale.1 (77 FR 30088, May 21, Federal RVP requirements for the Environmental Protection Agency, 2012, and 77 FR 34221, June 11, 2012). Atlanta fuel volatility Area. This SIP Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, As mentioned before, the Atlanta fuel revision updates Georgia’s 2008 8-hour Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Myers can be volatility Area is sub-set of this 15- ozone maintenance plan for the Atlanta reached via telephone at (404) 562–9207 county area. The 15-county Atlanta maintenance Area and its emissions or via electronic mail at Myers.Dianna@ 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area inventory, the associated motor vehicle epa.gov. did not attain the 2008 8-hour ozone emissions budgets (MVEBs), and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NAAQS by the attainment date of July includes measures to offset the 20, 2015, and therefore on May 4, 2016 emissions increases expected from the I. What is the background for this (81 FR 26697), EPA published a final relaxation of the Federal RVP action? rule reclassifying the area from a requirements. Georgia’s noninterference On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), Marginal nonattainment area to a demonstration concludes that relaxing EPA designated and classified the Moderate nonattainment area for the the Federal RVP requirement from 7.8 following counties in and around the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. Moderate pounds per square inch (psi) to 9.0 psi Atlanta, Georgia metropolitan area as a areas were required to attain the 2008 8- for gasoline sold between June 1 and Serious ozone nonattainment area for hour ozone NAAQS no later than July September 15 of each year in the Atlanta the 1-hour ozone NAAQS: Cherokee, fuel volatility Area would not interfere Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, 1 In the proposed rule published on February 12, with attainment or maintenance of any Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, 2019 (84 FR 3358) on page 3360 Newton was inadvertently left off the list of the 15-counties in national ambient air quality standards Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, and the Marginal 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment (NAAQS or standards) or with any other Rockdale. This 13-county 1-hour ozone area.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16787

20, 2018, which is six years after the Atlanta fuel volatility Area, and the 7- quality because Georgia’s offsets effective date of the initial county 2015 8-hour ozone provided compensating, equivalent nonattainment designations. See 40 CFR nonattainment area. The demonstration emissions reductions to negate the 51.1103. concluded that relaxing the RVP increases in emissions from NOX and On July 14, 2016 (81 FR 45419), EPA requirement within the Atlanta fuel VOC. determined that the Atlanta 2008 8-hour volatility Area will not interfere with Georgia replaced five old school buses ozone nonattainment area attained the the maintenance or attainment of the (built in 2000–2003) in Paulding County 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on NAAQS or with reasonable further with five 2017 school buses. Also, forty complete, quality-assured, and certified progress toward attainment.2 old school buses (built in 1999–2003) in ozone monitoring data for years 2013 The demonstration included an Fulton County were replaced with forty through 2015. On July 18, 2016, Georgia evaluation of the impact that the 2017 school buses. The locomotive submitted a 2008 8-hour ozone relaxation of the 7.8 psi RVP conversion program consists of two redesignation request and maintenance requirement would have on Atlanta’s components: (1) The conversion of three plan for the area (hereafter the ‘‘Atlanta ability to maintain the 1997 and 2008 older traditional switcher locomotives maintenance Area’’), which EPA ozone standards. It also evaluates into newly-available low emissions approved on June 2, 2017 (82 FR 25523). whether the relaxation of the Federal On October 1, 2015 (80 FR 65292), RVP requirement would interfere with engine technology from Norfolk EPA revised the 8-hour ozone standard the ability of the 7-county 2015 8-hour Southern Railway, Inc., and (2) Norfolk from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm. ozone nonattainment area to attain the Southern Railway, Inc.’s conversion of Subsequently, on June 4, 2018 (83 FR ozone standard by August 3, 2021, two switchers into ‘‘slugs’’ which are 25776), EPA published a final rule which is the attainment date for areas driven by electrical motors whose (effective August 3, 2018) designating classified as Marginal, or with any of the electricity is received from companion the following 7 Atlanta counties other applicable NAAQS. Although the ‘‘mother’’ locomotives. Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 8- attainment date is August 3, 2021, The amount of NOX reductions hour ozone NAAQS: Bartow, Clayton, Marginal areas must show attainment obtained from the school bus Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett and using air quality data for years 2018 replacements and locomotive Henry. Areas designated Marginal through 2020. Based on modeling data conversions were more than what is nonattainment must attain the standard from EPA’s Cross State Air Pollution needed to compensate for the small by August 3, 2021. Rule, the entire State of Georgia is amount of NOX and VOC increases On August 15, 2018, Georgia showing attainment for the 2015 8-hour associated with relaxing the Federal submitted a SIP revision to the 2008 8- ozone NAAQS through 2023.3 gasoline RVP limit from 7.8 psi to 9.0 hour ozone maintenance plan with a The demonstration also included two psi. The SIP revision also included an CAA section 110(l) noninterference offset measures—school bus update to the mobile emissions demonstration to support the State’s replacements and rail locomotive inventory and associated 2030 MVEBs request that EPA relax the Federal RVP conversions—to obtain the necessary due to the relaxation. The on-road requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for emissions reductions from the small emissions inventory and safety margin gasoline sold between June 1 and increases in nitrogen oxides (NOX) and allocation for the year 2030 were September 15 of each year (high ozone volatile organic compounds (VOC) updated but the MVEB totals themselves season) in the Atlanta maintenance emissions at the 9.0 psi RVP level. This remained unchanged. See Table 1 Area, which encompasses the smaller RVP relaxation will not worsen air below.

TABLE 1—UPDATED MVEBS FOR THE 15-COUNTY ATLANTA MAINTENANCE AREA IN TONS PER DAY (tpd)

2014 4 2030

NOX VOC NOX VOC

On-Road Emissions...... 170.15 81.76 39.63 36.01 Safety Margin Allocation 5 ...... 18.37 15.99 MVEBs with Safety Margin ...... 170.15 81.76 58 52

In a notice of proposed rulemaking II. Response to Comments rulemaking that would relax the Federal (NPRM) published on February 12, 2019 RVP standard for gasoline from 7.8 psi EPA received one comment from the (84 FR 3358), EPA proposed to approve to 9.0 psi in the 13-county Area. Society of Independent Gasoline the August 15, 2018, SIP revision. The Specifically, SIGMA stated that a Marketers of America (SIGMA). details of Georgia’s submittal and the compliance date that is either too close Comment: SIGMA expressed support rationale for EPA’s actions are explained to the start or in the middle of the 2019 for the approval of the SIP revision in the NPRM. summer fuel season would inject while also expressing concerns over the compliance date for the future

2 While this final rule focuses on ozone, which is Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Interstate no changes were made to the 2014 attainment year the pollutant most likely to be impacted by the Transport State Implementation Plan Submissions emissions inventory due to the relaxation. proposed revision, the demonstration provided for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 5 The safety margin is the difference between the information that the relaxation would have little to Standards.’’ See also https://www.epa.gov/ attainment level of emissions (from all sources) and no impact on particulate matter (PM), sulfur airmarkets/memo-and-supplemental-information- the projected level of emissions (from all sources) dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon regarding-interstate-transport-sips-2015-ozone- in the maintenance plan. The transportation monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), and related precursors. naaqs. conformity rule provides for establishing safety 3 See the Peter Tsirigotis Memorandum dated 4 The 2014 on-road emissions and MVEBs in this margins for use in transportation conformity October 19, 2018, entitled ‘‘Considerations for chart are shown for illustration purposes because determinations. See 40 CFR 93.124(a). Identifying Maintenance Receptors for Use in Clean

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16788 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

significant disruption into the fuel requirements beyond those imposed by submit a rule report, which includes a marketplace. state law. For that reason, this action: copy of the rule, to each House of the Response: SIGMA’s comment on the • Is not a significant regulatory action Congress and to the Comptroller General compliance date for the future RVP subject to review by the Office of of the United States. EPA will submit a relaxation rulemaking is outside of the Management and Budget under report containing this action and other scope of the approval of this SIP Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, required information to the U.S. Senate, revision, which updates Georgia’s 2008 October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, the U.S. House of Representatives, and 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the January 21, 2011); the Comptroller General of the United Atlanta maintenance Area and adds • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 States prior to publication of the rule in measures to offset emissions increases FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory the Federal Register. A major rule expected from the relaxation of the action because SIP approvals are cannot take effect until 60 days after it Federal RVP standard. As explained at exempted under Executive Order 12866; is published in the Federal Register. proposal, EPA intends to engage in a • Does not impose an information This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as notice and comment rulemaking that collection burden under the provisions defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). would relax the Federal RVP standard of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, in the 13-county area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); petitions for judicial review of this psi (84 FR 3358). SIGMA is encouraged • Is certified as not having a action must be filed in the United States to submit this comment when EPA significant economic impact on a Court of Appeals for the appropriate proposes any such rule. substantial number of small entities circuit by June 24, 2019. Filing a under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 III. Final Action petition for reconsideration by the U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Administrator of this final rule does not • EPA is taking final action to approve Does not contain any unfunded affect the finality of this action for the Georgia’s August 15, 2019, SIP revision, mandate or significantly or uniquely purposes of judicial review nor does it including the section 110(l) affect small governments, as described extend the time within which a petition noninterference demonstration in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act for judicial review may be filed and supporting the change of 7.8 psi to 9.0 of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); shall not postpone the effectiveness of • psi RVP requirements in the Atlanta fuel Does not have federalism such rule or action. This action may not volatility Area, which is a subset of the implications as specified in Executive be challenged later in proceedings to Atlanta maintenance Area. The SIP Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, enforce its requirements. See section revision updates Georgia’s 2008 8-hour 1999); 307(b)(2). ozone maintenance plan for the Atlanta • Is not an economically significant maintenance Area, its emissions regulatory action based on health or List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 inventory, the MVEBs, and it includes safety risks subject to Executive Order Environmental protection, Air measures to offset the emissions 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • pollution control, Incorporation by increases expected from the relaxation Is not a significant regulatory action reference, Intergovernmental relations, of the Federal RVP requirements. subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate Georgia’s noninterference 28355, May 22, 2001); • matter, Reporting and recordkeeping demonstration concludes that relaxing Is not subject to requirements of requirements, Volatile organic the Federal RVP requirement from 7.8 Section 12(d) of the National compounds. psi to 9.0 psi for gasoline sold between Technology Transfer and Advancement June 1 and September 15 of each year Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Dated: April 11, 2019. in the Atlanta fuel volatility Area would application of those requirements would Mary S. Walker, not interfere with attainment or be inconsistent with the CAA; and Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. • maintenance of any NAAQS or with any Does not provide EPA with the Title 40 CFR part 52 is amended as other CAA requirement. EPA is discretionary authority to address, as follows: approving this SIP revision because EPA appropriate, disproportionate human has determined that the revision is health or environmental effects, using PART 52—APPROVAL AND consistent with the CAA. practicable and legally permissible PROMULGATION OF Through this action, EPA is not methods, under Executive Order 12898 IMPLEMENTATION PLANS removing the Federal 7.8 psi RVP (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). requirement for the Atlanta fuel The SIP is not approved to apply on ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 volatility Area. Any such action would any Indian reservation land or in any continues to read as follows: occur in a separate rulemaking. other area where EPA or an Indian tribe Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. has demonstrated that a tribe has IV. Statutory and Executive Order jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian Subpart L—Georgia Reviews country, the rule does not have tribal Under the CAA, the Administrator is implications as specified by Executive ■ 2. Section 52.570(e), is amended by required to approve a SIP submission Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, adding an entry for ‘‘Non-Interference that complies with the provisions of the 2000), nor will it impose substantial Demonstration and Maintenance Plan Act and applicable Federal regulations. direct costs on tribal governments or Revision for Federal Low-Reid Vapor See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). preempt tribal law. Pressure Requirement in the Atlanta Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, The Congressional Review Act, 5 Area’’ at the end of the table to read as EPA’s role is to approve state choices, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small follows: provided they meet the criteria of the Business Regulatory Enforcement CAA. This action merely approves state Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides § 52.570 Identification of plan. law as meeting Federal requirements that before a rule may take effect, the * * * * * and does not impose additional agency promulgating the rule must (e) * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16789

EPA-APPROVED GEORGIA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

State EPA Name of non-regulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or submittal date/ approval Explanation nonattainment area effective date date

******* Non-Interference Demonstration and Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, 8/15/2018 4/23/2019, [Insert Maintenance Plan Revision for Fed- DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Federal Reg- eral Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Re- Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, ister citation]. quirement in the Atlanta Area. and Rockdale counties.

[FR Doc. 2019–08062 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 C. How can I file an objection or hearing BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC request? 20460–0001. The Public Reading Room Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Monday through Friday, excluding legal objection to any aspect of this regulation AGENCY holidays. The telephone number for the and may also request a hearing on those Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, objections. You must file your objection 40 CFR Part 180 and the telephone number for the OPP or request a hearing on this regulation Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review [EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0593; FRL–9991–86] in accordance with the instructions the visitor instructions and additional provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure Bacteriophage Active Against Xylella information about the docket available proper receipt by EPA, you must fastidiosa; Exemption From the at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Requirement of a Tolerance identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OPP–2017–0593 in the subject line on AGENCY: Environmental Protection Robert McNally, Biopesticides and the first page of your submission. All Agency (EPA). Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), objections and requests for a hearing ACTION: Final rule. Office of Pesticide Programs, must be in writing, and must be Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 received by the Hearing Clerk on or SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC before June 24, 2019. Addresses for mail exemption from the requirement of a 20460–0001; main telephone number: and hand delivery of objections and tolerance for residues of lytic (703) 305–7090; email address: hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR bacteriophage active against Xylella [email protected]. 178.25(b). fastidiosa in or on all food commodities SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to filing an objection or when the bacteriophage are sequenced hearing request with the Hearing Clerk and have sequences free of toxins and I. General Information as described in 40 CFR part 178, please lysogenic genes and are used in A. Does this action apply to me? submit a copy of the filing (excluding accordance with label directions and any Confidential Business Information good agricultural practices. Otsuka You may be potentially affected by (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (c/o this action if you are an agricultural Information not marked confidential Technology Sciences Group Inc.) producer, food manufacturer, or pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be submitted a petition to EPA under the pesticide manufacturer. The following disclosed publicly by EPA without prior Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act list of North American Industrial notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your (FFDCA), requesting an exemption from Classification System (NAICS) codes is objection or hearing request, identified the requirement of a tolerance. This not intended to be exhaustive, but rather by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– regulation eliminates the need to provides a guide to help readers 2017–0593, by one of the following establish a maximum permissible level determine whether this document methods: applies to them. Potentially affected for residues of bacteriophage active • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// entities may include: against Xylella fastidiosa in or on all www.regulations.gov. Follow the online • food commodities under FFDCA. Crop production (NAICS code 111). instructions for submitting comments. DATES: This regulation is effective April • Animal production (NAICS code Do not submit electronically any 23, 2019. Objections and requests for 112). information you consider to be CBI or hearings must be received on or before • Food manufacturing (NAICS code other information whose disclosure is June 24, 2019, and must be filed in 311). restricted by statute. accordance with the instructions • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also code 32532). Protection Agency Docket Center Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania INFORMATION). B. How can I get electronic access to Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. other related information? ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, • Hand Delivery: To make special identified by docket identification (ID) You may access a frequently updated arrangements for hand delivery or number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0593, is electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 delivery of boxed information, please available at http://www.regulations.gov through the Government Publishing follow the instructions at http:// or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Office’s e-CFR site at http:// www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- Additional instructions on commenting in the Environmental Protection Agency idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/ or visiting the docket, along with more Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 40tab_02.tpl. information about dockets generally, is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16790 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

available at http://www.epa.gov/ exposure to the pesticide chemical B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology dockets. residue. . . .’’ Additionally, FFDCA An analytical method is not required section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that EPA II. Background because EPA is establishing an consider ‘‘available information exemption from the requirement of a In the Federal Register of March 6, concerning the cumulative effects of [a tolerance without any numerical 2018 (83 FR 9471) (FRL–9973–27), EPA particular pesticide’s] . . . residues and limitation. issued a document pursuant to FFDCA other substances that have a common section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), mechanism of toxicity.’’ C. Response to Comments announcing the filing of a pesticide EPA evaluated the available toxicity Nine comments were received in tolerance petition (PP 7F8562) by and exposure data on bacteriophage response to the notice of filing. EPA Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. active against Xylella fastidiosa and reviewed the comments and determined (Otsuka), 2–9 Kanda-Tsukasamachi, considered their validity, completeness, that they are irrelevant to the tolerance Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101–8535, Japan exemption in this action. (c/o Technology Sciences Group Inc., and reliability, as well as the 712 Fifth St., Suite A, Davis, CA 95616). relationship of this information to D. Differences Between Petition and The petition requested that 40 CFR part human risk. A full explanation of the Tolerance Exemption Rule 180 be amended by establishing an data upon which EPA relied and its risk In its petition, the petitioner exemption from the requirement of a assessment based on those data can be requested generally that EPA issue an tolerance for residues of the bactericide found within the document entitled exemption from the requirement of a bacteriophages active against Xylella ‘‘Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act tolerance for residues of bacteriophage fastidiosa in or on all food commodities. (FFDCA) Safety Determination for active against Xylella fastidiosa in or on That document referenced a summary of Bacteriophage Active Against Xylella all food commodities. The petitioner’s the petition prepared by the petitioner fastidiosa’’ (Safety Determination). This supporting materials indicated that the Otsuka (c/o Technology Sciences Group document, as well as other relevant actual pesticide that would be used Inc.) and available in the docket via information, is available in the docket would be safe because the bacteriophage http://www.regulations.gov. Comments for this action as described under were lytic and were sequenced and have were received on the notice of filing. ADDRESSES. sequences free of toxins and lysogenic EPA’s response to these comments is The available data demonstrated that, genes. EPA believes that only discussed in Unit III.C. with regard to humans, bacteriophage bacteriophage that have these same Based upon review of data and other active against Xylella fastidiosa are not characteristics as the organism tested information supporting the petition, anticipated to be toxic, pathogenic, or would be safe and should be exempt EPA is granting a tolerance exemption infective via any route of exposure. from the requirement of a tolerance. that differs slightly from what the Furthermore, humans, including infants Therefore, EPA is issuing a tolerance petition requested. The reason for this and children, have been exposed to exemption that differs slightly from the difference is explained in Unit III.D. bacteriophage through food and water, petition by limiting the exemption to residues of the bacteriophage that III. Final Rule where they are commonly found, with no known adverse effects. Although possess the same characteristics as the A. EPA’s Safety Determination there may be some exposure to residues bacteriophage that were tested to support this exemption. Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA when bacteriophage active against allows EPA to establish an exemption Xylella fastidiosa is used on food IV. Statutory and Executive Order from the requirement of a tolerance (the commodities in accordance with label Reviews directions and good agricultural legal limit for a pesticide chemical This action establishes a tolerance practices (only grape for now), there is residue in or on a food) only if EPA exemption under FFDCA section 408(d) a lack of concern due to the lack of determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’ in response to a petition submitted to potential for adverse effects. EPA also Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA EPA. The Office of Management and determined in the Safety Determination defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a Budget (OMB) has exempted these types that retention of the Food Quality reasonable certainty that no harm will of actions from review under Executive Protection Act (FQPA) safety factor was result from aggregate exposure to the Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory pesticide chemical residue, including not necessary as part of the qualitative Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, all anticipated dietary exposures and all assessment conducted for bacteriophage October 4, 1993). Because this action other exposures for which there is active against Xylella fastidiosa. has been exempted from review under reliable information.’’ This includes Based upon its evaluation in the Executive Order 12866, this action is exposure through drinking water and in Safety Determination, EPA concludes not subject to Executive Order 13211, residential settings but does not include that there is a reasonable certainty that entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning occupational exposure. Pursuant to no harm will result to the U.S. Regulations That Significantly Affect FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in population, including infants and Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 establishing or maintaining in effect an children, from aggregate exposure to FR 28355, May 22, 2001), or Executive exemption from the requirement of a residues of bacteriophage active against Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of tolerance, EPA must take into account Xylella fastidiosa. Therefore, an Children from Environmental Health the factors set forth in FFDCA section exemption from the requirement of a Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give tolerance is established for residues of April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a special consideration to exposure of lytic bacteriophage active against regulatory action under Executive Order infants and children to the pesticide Xylella fastidiosa in or on all food 13771, entitled ‘‘Reducing Regulations chemical residue in establishing a commodities when the bacteriophage and Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ (82 tolerance or tolerance exemption and to are sequenced and have sequences free FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action ‘‘ensure that there is a reasonable of toxins and lysogenic genes and are does not contain any information certainty that no harm will result to used in accordance with label directions collections subject to OMB approval infants and children from aggregate and good agricultural practices. under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16791

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require Agricultural commodities, Pesticides SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The any special considerations under and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, as Executive Order 12898, entitled requirements. amended (‘‘ACA’’) (16 U.S.C. 2401, et ‘‘Federal Actions to Address Dated: April 12, 2019. seq.) implements the Protocol on Environmental Justice in Minority Environmental Protection to the Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., Populations and Low-Income Antarctic Treaty (‘‘the Protocol’’). Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. Annex V contains provisions for the 1994). Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is protection of specially designated areas Since tolerances and exemptions that amended as follows: specially managed areas and historic are established on the basis of a petition sites and monuments. Section 2405 of under FFDCA section 408(d), such as PART 180—[AMENDED] title 16 of the ACA directs the Director the tolerance exemption in this action, of the National Science Foundation to ■ do not require the issuance of a 1. The authority citation for part 180 issue such regulations as are necessary proposed rule, the requirements of the continues to read as follows: and appropriate to implement Annex V Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. to the Protocol. et seq.) do not apply. ■ 2. Add § 180.1365 to subpart D to read The Antarctic Treaty Parties, which This action directly regulates growers, as follows: includes the United States, periodically food processors, food handlers, and food adopt measures to establish, consolidate retailers, not States or tribes. As a result, § 180.1365 Bacteriophage active against or revoke specially protected areas, this action does not alter the Xylella fastidiosa; exemption from the specially managed areas and historical relationships or distribution of power requirement of a tolerance. sites or monuments in Antarctica. This and responsibilities established by An exemption from the requirement rule is being revised to reflect five Congress in the preemption provisions of a tolerance is established for residues added Antarctic specially protected of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, of lytic bacteriophage active against areas (ASPAs 171–175) and six EPA has determined that this action will Xylella fastidiosa in or on all food historical sites and monuments in not have a substantial direct effect on commodities when the bacteriophage Antarctica (HSM 87–92). The rule is States or tribal governments, on the are sequenced and have sequences free also being revised to reflect the relationship between the national of toxins and lysogenic genes and are revocation, of three Antarctic specially government and the States or tribal used in accordance with label directions protected areas (ASPAs 114, 118 and governments, or on the distribution of and good agricultural practices. 130) and one Antarctic specially power and responsibilities among the [FR Doc. 2019–08111 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] managed area (ASMA 3) primarily due various levels of government or between BILLING CODE 6560–50–P to consolidation. the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, EPA has determined that Public Participation Executive Order 13132, entitled The changes to these areas and sites NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, reflect decisions already made by the 1999), and Executive Order 13175, 45 CFR Part 670 Antarctic Treaty Parties at recent entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination international ATOM meetings. Because with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR RIN 3145–AA59 these amendments directly involve a 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply foreign affairs function, the provisions to this action. In addition, this action Conservation of Antarctic Animals and of Executive Order 12866, Executive does not impose any enforceable duty or Plants Order 13771 and the Administrative contain any unfunded mandate as AGENCY: National Science Foundation. Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, described under Title II of the Unfunded ACTION: Direct final rule. Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et opportunity for public participation, seq.). SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Antarctic and delay in effective date, are This action does not involve any Conservation Act of 1978, as amended, inapplicable. Further, because no notice technical standards that would require the National Science Foundation (NSF) of proposed rulemaking is required for EPA’s consideration of voluntary is amending its regulations to reflect this rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act consensus standards pursuant to section changes to designated Antarctic (5 U.S.C. 601 and 612) does not apply. 12(d) of the National Technology specially protected areas (ASPA), Environmental Impact Transfer and Advancement Act (15 Antarctic specially managed areas U.S.C. 272 note). (ASMA) and historic sites or This final rule makes technical conforming changes to the National V. Congressional Review Act monuments (HSM). These changes reflect decisions already adopted by the Science Foundation’s regulations to Pursuant to the Congressional Review Antarctic Treaty Parties at recent reflect the substantive outcomes of Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings recent Antarctic Treaty Consultative submit a report containing this rule and (ATCM). The United States Department Meetings. The actions taken by the other required information to the U.S. of State heads the United States Antarctic Treaty Parties to manage and Senate, the U.S. House of delegation to these annual Antarctic protect these new Antarctic areas and Representatives, and the Comptroller Treaty meetings. historic resources will result in added General of the United States prior to protection of the Antarctic environment publication of the rule in the Federal DATES: Effective April 23, 2019. and its historic resources. Register. This action is not a ‘‘major FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reducing Regulation and Controlling rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Bijan Gilanshah, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, Regulatory Costs List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 at 703–292–8060, National Science In implementing these international Environmental protection, Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, ATOM agreed to changes, this direct Administrative practice and procedure, Suite W 18200, Alexandria, VA 22314. final rule relates to a foreign affairs

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16792 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

function of the United States. 1531–1538), the Foundation has ASPA 104 Sabrina Island, Northern Accordingly, NSF has determined that assessed the effects of this final rule on Ross Sea, Antarctica this document is not a regulation or rule State, local, and Tribal governments and ASPA 105 Beaufort Island, McMurdo subject to either Executive Order 12866 the private sector. This final rule will Sound, Ross Sea or Executive Order 13771. Further, not compel the expenditure of $100 ASPA 106 Cape Hallett, Northern under section 5 of Executive Order million or more by any State, local, or Victoria Land, Ross Sea 13777, an agency may receive a waiver Tribal government or anyone in the ASPA 107 Emperor Island, Dion from some or all of the requirements of private sector. Therefore, a statement Islands, Marguerite Bay, Antarctic Executive Order 13777 if the Director of under section 202 of the act is not Peninsula the Office of Management and Budget required. ASPA 108 Green Island, Berthelot determines that the agency generally Islands, Antarctic Peninsula Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the issues very few or no regulations. The ASPA 109 Moe Island, South Orkney Public National Science Foundation received Islands such a waiver from the requirements of This final rule does not contain any ASPA 110 Lynch Island, South Orkney Executive Order 13777. recordkeeping or reporting requirements Islands or other information collection ASPA 111 Southern Powell Island and No Takings Implications requirements as defined in 5 CFR part adjacent islands, South Orkney The Foundation has determined that 1320 that are not already required by Islands the final rule will not involve the taking law or not already approved for use. ASPA 112 Coppermine Peninsula, of private property pursuant to E.O. Accordingly, the review provisions of Robert Island, South Shetland Islands 12630. the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 ASPA 113 Litchfield Island, Arthur (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its Harbour, Anvers Island, Palmer Civil Justice Reform implementing regulations at 5 CFR part Archipelago The Foundation has considered this 1320 do not apply. ASPA 115 Lagotellerie Island, final rule under E.O. 12988 on civil Marguerite Bay, Graham Land justice reform and determined the List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 670 ASPA 116 New College Valley, principles underlying and requirements Administrative practice and Caughley Beach, Cape Bird, Ross of E.O. 12988 are not implicated. procedure, Antarctica, Exports, Imports, Island ASPA 117 Avian Island, Marguerite Federalism and Consultation and Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife. Bay, Antarctic Peninsula Coordination With Indian Tribal ASPA 119 Davis Valley and Forlidas Pursuant to the authority granted by Governments Pond, Dufek Massif, Pensacola 16 U.S.C. 2405(a)(1), NSF hereby The Foundation has considered this Mountains amends 45 CFR part 670 as set forth final rule under the requirements of E.O. ASPA 120 Pointe-Geologie below: 13132 on federalism and has Archipelego, Terre Adelie determined that the final rule conforms PART 670—[AMENDED] ASPA 121 Cape Royds, Ross Island with the federalism principles set out in ASPA 122 Arrival Heights, Hut Point this E.O.; will not impose any ■ 1. The authority citation for part 670 Peninsula, Ross Island compliance costs on the States; and will continues to read as follows: ASPA 123 Barwick and Balham not have substantial direct effects on the Valleys, Southern Victoria Land Authority: 16 U.S.C. 2405, as amended. States, the relationship between the ASPA 124 Cape Crozier, Ross Island Federal Government and the States, or ■ 2. Section 670.29 is revised to read as ASPA 125 Fildes Peninsula, King the distribution of power and follows: George Island (25 de Mayo) responsibilities among the various ASPA 126 Byers Peninsula, Livingston § 670.29 Designation of Antarctic Specially Island, South Shetland Islands levels of government. Therefore, the Protected Areas, Specially Managed Areas, Foundation has determined that no and Historic Sites and Monuments. ASPA 127 Haswell Island further assessment of federalism ASPA 128 Western shore of Admiralty (a) The following areas have been implications is necessary. Bay, King George Island, South designated by the Antarctic Treaty Moreover, the Foundation has Shetland Islands Parties for special protection and are determined that promulgation of this ASPA 129 Rdthera Point, Adelaide hereby designated as Antarctic specially final rule does not require advance Island protected areas (ASPA). The Antarctic consultation with Indian Tribal officials ASPA 131 Canada Glacier, Lake Conservation Act of 1978, as amended, as set forth in E.O. 13175, Consultation Fryxell, Taylor Valley, Victoria Land prohibits, unless authorized by a permit, and Coordination with Indian Tribal ASPA 132 Potter Peninsula, King any person from entering or engaging in Governments. George Island (Isla 25 de Mayo) activities within an ASPA. Detailed (South Shetland Islands) Energy Effects maps and descriptions of the sites and ASPA 133 Harmony Point, Nelson The Foundation has reviewed this complete management plans can be Island, South Shetland Islands final rule under E.O. 13211, Actions obtained from the National Science ASPA 134 Cierva Point and offshore Concerning Regulations That Foundation, Office of Polar Programs, islands, Danco Coast, Antarctic Significantly Affect Energy Supply, National Science Foundation, Room Peninsula Distribution, or Use. The Foundation 755, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, ASPA 135 North-eastern Bailey has determined that this final rule does Virginia 22230. Peninsula, Budd Coast, Wilkes Land not constitute a significant energy action ASPA 101 Taylor Rookery, Mac. ASPA 136 Clark Peninsula, Budd as defined in the E.O. Robertson Land Coast, Wilkes Land ASPA 102 Rookery Islands, Holme ASPA 137 North-west White Island, Unfunded Mandates Bay, Mac. Robertson Land McMurdo Sound Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded ASPA 103 Ardery Island and Odbert ASPA 138 Linnaeus Terrace, Asgard Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. Island, Budd Coast, Wilkes Land Range, Victoria Land

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16793

ASPA 139 Biscoe Point, Anvers Island, ASPA 173 Cape Washington and Point, in memory of driver-mechanic Palmer Archipelago Silverfish Bay, Terra Nova Bay, Ross Ivan Kharma. ASPA 140 Parts of Deception Island, Sea HSM 8 Metal Monument sledge and South Shetland Islands ASPA 174 Stornes, Larsemann Hills, plaque at Mirny Observatory, Mabus ASPA 141 Yukidori Valley, Princess Elizabeth Land Point, in memory of driver-mechanic Langhovde, Lutzow-Holm Bay ASPA 175 High Altitude Geothermal Anatoly Shcheglov. ASPA 142 Svarthamaren sites of the Ross Sea Region HSM 9 Cemetery on Buromskiy ASPA 143 Marine Plain, Mule (b) The following areas have been Island, near Mirny Observatory. Peninsula, Vestfold Hills, Princess designated by the Antarctic Treaty HSM 10 Building (Magnetic Elizabeth Land Parties for special management and Observatory) at Dobrowolsky Station, ASPA 144 Chile Bay (Discovery Bay), have been designated as Antarctic Hunger Hills, with plaque in memory of Greenwich Island, South Shetland specially managed areas (ASMA). the opening of Oasis Station in 1956. Islands Detailed maps and descriptions of the HSM 11 Heavy Tractor at Vostock ASPA 145 Port Foster, Deception sites and complete management plans Station with plaque in memory of the Island, South Shetland Islands can be obtained from the National opening of the Station in 1957. ASPA 146 South Bay, Doumer Island, Science Foundation, Office of Polar HSM 14 Site of ice cave at Palmer Archipelago Programs, Room 755, 4201 Wilson Inexpressible Island, Terra Nova Bay, ASPA 147 Ablation Valley and Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. constructed in March 1912 by Victor Ganymede Heights, Alexander Island Campbell’s Northern Party. ASMA 1 Admiralty Bay, King George ASPA 148 Mount Flora, Hope Bay, HSM 15 Hut at Cape Royds, Ross Island Antarctic Peninsula Island, built in February 1908 by the ASMA 2 McMurdo Dry Valleys, ASPA 149 Cape Shirreff and San British Antarctic Expedition. Southern Victoria Land Telmo Island, Livingston Island, HSM 16 Hut at Cape Evans, Ross ASMA 4 Deception Island South Shetland Islands Island, built in January 1911 by the ASMA 5 Amundsen-Scott South Pole ASPA 150 Ardley Island, Maxwell British Antarctic Expedition. Station, South Pole Bay, King George Island (25 de Mayo) HSM 17 Cross on Wind Vane Hill, ASMA 6 Larsemann Hills, East ASPA 151 Lions Rump, King George Cape Evans, Ross Island, erected by the Antarctica Island, South Shetland Islands Ross Sea Party in memory of three ASMA 7 Southwest Anvers Island and ASPA 152 Western Bransfield Strait members of the party who died in the ASPA 153 Eastern Dallmann Bay Palmer Basin vicinity in 1916. ASPA 154 Botany Bay, Cape Geology, (c) The following areas have been HSM 18 Hut at Hut Point, Ross Victoria Land designated by the Antarctic Treaty Island, built in February 1902 by the ASPA 155 Cape Evans, Ross Island Parties as historic sites or monuments British Antarctic Expedition. ASPA 156 Lewis Bay, Mount Erebus, (HSM). The Antarctic Conservation Act HSM 19 Cross at Hut Point, Ross Ross Island of 1978, as amended, prohibits any Island, erected in February 1904 by the ASPA 157 Backdoor Bay, Cape Royds, damage, removal or destruction of a British Antarctic Expedition in memory Ross Island historic site or monument listed of George Vince. ASPA 158 Hut Point, Ross Island pursuant to Annex V to the Protocol. HSM 20 Cross on Observation Hill, ASPA 159 Cape Adare, Borchgrevink Descriptions of the sites or monuments Ross Island, erected in January 1913 in Coast can be obtained from the National by the British Antarctic Expedition in ASPA 160 Frazier Islands, Windmill Science Foundation, Office of Polar memory of Captain Robert F Scott’s Islands, Wilkes Land, East Antarctica Programs, Room 755, 4201 Wilson party which perished on the return ASPA 161 Terra Nova Bay, Ross Sea Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. journey from the South Pole. ASPA 162 Mawson’s Huts, Cape HSM 1 Flag mast erected in HSM 21 Remains of stone hut at Denison, Commonwealth Bay, George December 1965 at South Geographical Cape Crozier, Ross Island, constructed V Land, East Antarctica Pole by the First Argentine Overland in July 1911 by the British Antarctic ASPA 163 Dakshin Gangotri Glacier, Polar Expedition. Expedition. Dronning Maud Land HSM 2 Rock cairn and plaques HSM 22 Three huts and associated ASPA 164 Scullin and Murray erected in January 1961 at Syowa relics at Cape Adare Two built in Monoliths, Mac. Robertson Land Station in memory of Shun Fukushima. February 1899 the third was built in ASPA 165 Edmonson Point, Wood HSM 3 Rock cairn and plaque February 2011 all by the British Bay, Ross Sea erected in January 1930 by Sir Douglas Antarctic Expedition. ASPA 166 Port-Martin, Terre Adelie Mawson on Proclamation Island, HSM 23 Grave at Cape Adare of ASPA 167 Hawker Island, Vestfold Enderby Land. Norwegian biologist Nicolai Hanson. Hills, Ingrid Christensen Coast, HSM 4 Station building to which a HSM 24 Rock cairn, known as Princess Elizabeth Land, East bust of V.I. Lenin is fixed together with ‘‘Amundsen’s cairn,’’ at Mount Betty, Antarctica a plaque in memory of the conquest of Queen Maud Range erected by Roald ASPA 168 Mount Harding, Grove the Pole of Inaccessibility, by Soviet Amundsen in January 1912. Mountains, East Antarctica Antarctic Explorers in 1958. HSM 26 Abandoned installations of ASPA 169 Amanda Bay, Ingrid HSM 5 Rock cairn and plaque at Argentine Station ‘‘General San Martin’’ Christensen Coast, Princess Elizabeth Cape Bruce, Mac. Robertson Land, on Barry Island, Debenham Islands, Land, East Antarctica erected in February 1931 by Sir Douglas Marguerite Bay, Antarctic Peninsula. ASPA 170 Marion Nunataks, Charcot Mawson. HSM 27 Cairn with a replica of a Island, Antarctic Peninsula HSM 6 Rock cairn and canister at lead plaque erected at Megalestris Hill, ASPA 171 Narebski Point, Barton Walkabout Rocks, Vestfold Hills, Petermann Island in 1909 by the second Peninsula, King George Island Princess Elizabeth Land, erected in 1939 French expedition. ASPA 172 Lower Taylor Glacier and by Sir Hubert Wilkins. HSM 28 Rock Cairn at Port Charcot, Blood Falls, Taylor Vallye, McMurdo HSM 7 Stone with inscribed plaque, Booth Island, with wooden pillar and Dry Valleys, Victoria Land erected at Mirny Observatory, Mabus plaque.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16794 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

HSM 29 Lighthouse named HSM 47 Wooden building called HSM 68 Site of depot at Hells Gate ‘‘Primero de Mayo’’ erected on Lambda ‘‘Base Marret’’ on the Ile des Petrels, Moraine, Inexpressible Island, Terra Island, Melchior Islands, by Argentina Terre Adelie. Nova Bay. in 1942. HSM 48 Iron Cross on the North- HSM 69 Message post at Cape HSM 30 Shelter at Paradise Harbour East headland of the Ile des Petrels, Crozier, Ross Island, erected January erected in 1950. Terre Adelie. 1902 by Capt. Robert F. Scott’s HSM 32 Concrete Monolith erected HSM 49 Concrete pillar erected by Discovery Expedition. in 1947 near Capitan Arturo Prat Base the First Polish Antarctic Expedition at HSM 70 Message post at Cape on Greenwich Island, South Shetland Dobrowski Station on Bunger Hill in Wadworth, Coulman Island, erected Islands. January 1959, to measure acceleration January 1902 by Capt. Robert F. Scott. HSM 33 Shelter and cross with due to gravity. HSM 71 Whalers Bay, Deception plaque near Capitan Arturo Prat Base HSM 50 Brass Plaque bearing the Island, South Shetland Islands (includes Greenwich Island, South Shetland Polish Eagle at Fildes Peninsula, King whaling artifacts). Islands. George Island, South Shetland Islands. HSM 72 Mikkelsen Cairn, Tryne HSM 51 Grave of Wlodzimierz HSM 34 Bust at Capitan Arturo Prat Islands, Vestfold Hills. Puchalski, surmounted by an iron cross base Greenwich Island, South Shetland HSM 73 Memorial Cross for the south of Arctowski station on King Islands, of Chilean naval hero Arturo 1979 Mount Erebus crash victims, Prat. George Island, South Shetland Islands. HSM 52 Monolith commemorating erected in January 1987 at Lewis Bay, HSM 35 Wooden cross and statue of Ross Island. the Virgin of Carmen erected in 1947 the establishment on 20 February 1965 of the ‘‘Great Wall Station’’ on Fildes HSM 74 Unnamed cove on the near Capitan Arturo Prat base south-west coast of Elephant Island, Greenwich Island, South Shetland Peninsula, King George Island, South Shetland Islands. South Shetland Islands, including the Islands. foreshore and intertidal area, in which HSM 36 Replica of a metal plaque HSM 53 Bust of Captain Luis Alberto Pardo, monolith and plaques on the wreckage of a large wooden sailing erected by Eduard Dallman at Potter vessel is located. Cove, King George Island, South Point Wild, Elephant Island, South Shetland Islands. HSM 75 ‘‘A Hut’’ of Scott base, Pram Shetland Islands. Point, Ross Island. HSM 37 Statue erected in 1948 at HSM 54 Richard E. Byrd Historic Monument, a bronze bust at McMurdo HSM 76 Ruins of base Pedro Aguirre General Hernando O’Higgins Base Cerda, Pendulum Cove, Deception (Chile) Trinity Peninsula. Station. HSM 55 East Base, Antarctica, Island, South Shetland Islands. HSM 38 Wooden hut on Snow Hill Stonington Island (Buildings and HSM 77 Cape Denison, Island built in February 1902 by the artifacts) erected by the Antarctic Commonwealth Bay, George V Land, Swedish South Polar Expedition. including Boat Harbour and the historic HSM 39 Stone hut at Hope Bay, Service Expedition (1939–1941) and the Ronne Antarctic Research Expedition artifacts contained within its waters. Trinity Peninsula built in January 1903 (1947–1948). HSM 78 Memorial Plaque at India by the Swedish South Polar Expedition. HSM 56 Waterboat Point, Danco HSM 40 Bust of General San Martin, Point, Humboldt Mountains, Wohlthat Coast, (remains of hut and environs). Massif, central Dronning Maud Land. grotto with statue of the Virgin Lujan, a HSM 57 Plaque at ‘‘Yankee Bay’’ flag mast and graveyard at Base HSM 79 Lillie Marleen Hut, Mt. (Yankee Harbour), MacFarlane Strait, Dockery, Everett Range, Northern Esperanza, Hope Bay Trinity Peninsula, Greenwich Island, South Shetland erected by Argentina in 1955. Victoria Land. Islands. HSM 80 Amundsen’s Tent erected HSM 41 Stone hut and grave at HSM 59 Cairn on Half Moon Beach, Paulet Island built in 1903 by members in December 1911 at the South Pole. Cape Shirreff, Livingston Island, South HSM 81 Rocher du Debarguement of the Swedish South Polar Expedition. Shetland Islands and a Plaque on ‘Cerro HSM 42 Area of Scotia bay, Laurie (Landing Rock). Gaviota’ opposite San Telmo Islets. HSM 82 Monument to the Antarctic Island, South Orkney containing stone HSM 60 Wooden plaque and cairn huts built in 1903 by the Scottish Treaty and Plaques, Fildes Peninsula, placed in November 1903 at ‘‘Penguins King George Island, South Shetland Antarctic Expedition, Argentine Bay,’’ Seymour Island (Marambio), meteorological hut and magnetic Islands. James Ross Archipelago. HSM 83 Base ‘‘W’’ established in observatory (Moneta house) and HSM 61 ‘‘Base A’’ at Port Lockroy, 1956 at Detaille Island, Lallemande graveyard. Goudier Island, off Wiencke Island. HSM 43 Cross erected in 1955 and HSM 62 ‘‘Base F’’ (Wordie House)’ Fjord, Loubert Coast . subsequently moved to Belgrano II on Winter Island, Argentine Islands. HSM 84 Hut at erected in 1973 at Station, Nunatak Bertrab, Confin Coast, HSM 63 ‘‘Base Y’’ on Horseshoe Damoy Point, Dorian Bay, Wiencke Coats Land in 1979. Island, Marguerite Bay, western Graham Island, Palmer Archipelago. HSM 44 Plaque erected at temporary Land. HSM 85 Plaque Commemorating the Indian Station ‘‘Dakshin Gangotri,’’ HSM 64 ‘‘Base E’’ on Stonington PM–3A Nuclear Power Plant at Princess Astrid Kyst, Droning Maud Island, Marguerite Bay, western Graham McMurdo Station. Land, listing the names of the first Land. HSM 86 No.1 Building Indian Antarctic Expedition. HSM 65 Message post erected in Commemorating China’s Antarctic HSM 45 Plaque on Brabant Island, January 1895 on Svend Foyn Island, Expedition at Great Wall Station. on Metchnikoff Point, at a height of 70m Possession Islands. HSM 87 Location of the first on the crest of the moraine separating HSM 66 Prestrud’s cairn, Scott permanently occupied German this point from the glacier and bearing Nunataks, Alexandra Mountains, Antarctic research station ‘‘Georg an inscription. Edward VII Peninsula erected in Forster’’ at the Schirmacher Oasis, HSM 46 All of the buildings and December 1911. Dronning Maud Land. installations of Port-Martin Base, Terre HSM 67 Rock shelter known as HSM 88 Professor Kudryashov’s Adelie, constructed in 1950 by the 3rd ‘‘Granite House,’’ erected in 1911 at Drilling Complex Building, Vostok French expedition in Terre Adelie. Cape Geology, Granite Harbour. Station.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 16795

HSM 89 Terra Nova Expedition HSM 91 Lame Dog Hut at the Dated: April 9, 2019. 1910–12, Upper ‘‘Summit Camp’’, Bulgarian base St. Kliment Ohridski, Lawrence Rudolph, Mount Erebus. Livingston Island. General Counsel. HSM 90 Terra Nova Expedition HSM 92 Oversnow heavy tractor [FR Doc. 2019–08024 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 1910–12, Lower ‘‘Camp E’’ Site, Mount ‘‘Kharkovchanka’’ that was used in BILLING CODE 7555–01–M Erebus. Antarctica from 1959 to 2010.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APR1.SGM 23APR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 16796

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 78

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Lines of Credit to Members’’ in the and a refined blueprint for contains notices to the public of the proposed email subject line. implementing the Agenda. issuance of rules and regulations. The • Fax: (703) 518–6319. Use the One of the Agenda’s purpose of these notices is to give interested subject line described above for email. recommendations specifically suggested persons an opportunity to participate in the • Mail: Address to Gerard Poliquin, that the Board modify its regulations to rule making prior to the adoption of the final Secretary of the Board, National Credit ‘‘provide flexibility with respect to rules. Union Administration, 1775 Duke senior executive compensation plans Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314– that incorporate lending as part of a 3428. broad and balanced set of organizational NATIONAL CREDIT UNION • ADMINISTRATION Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as goals and performance measures.’’ The mail address. Board recognizes that the NCUA’s 12 CFR Part 701 Public Inspection: You can view all regulations in this area, which were last public comments on the NCUA’s updated over 20 years ago, are likely website at https://www.ncua.gov/ RIN 3133–AE97 outdated, burdensome, and at odds with regulation-supervision/rules- industry standards for senior executive Compensation in Connection With regulations/proposed-pending-and- compensation plans.4 As such, the Loans to Members and Lines of Credit recently-final-regulations as submitted, Board is seeking comment on how to to Members except for those we cannot post for update the regulations so that credit technical reasons. The NCUA will not unions can offer competitive AGENCY: National Credit Union edit or remove any identifying or compensation plans without Administration (NCUA). contact information from the public encouraging inappropriate risks, ACTION: Advance notice of proposed comments submitted. You may inspect incentivizing bad loans, or negatively rulemaking. paper copies of comments in the effecting safety and soundness. While NCUA’s law library at 1775 Duke Street, the Board is particularly interested in SUMMARY: The NCUA Board (Board) is Alexandria, Virginia 22314, by how the agency can update its issuing this advance notice of proposed appointment weekdays between 9:00 regulations to provide flexibility with rulemaking (ANPR) to solicit comments a.m. and 3:00 p.m. To make an respect to senior executive on ways to improve the agency’s appointment, call (703) 518–6546, or compensation plans, it would also like regulations limiting a credit union send an email to [email protected]. comments on how the regulations official’s and employee’s compensation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: governing compensation associated with in connection with loans to members Thomas I. Zells, Staff Attorney, Office of lending can be modernized generally. and lines of credit to members. These General Counsel, at 1775 Duke Street, II. Current Standards and Request for regulations have generated confusion Alexandria, VA 22314 or telephone: Comment and are likely outdated, burdensome, (703) 548–2478. and at odds with industry standards. Currently, § 701.21(c)(8)(i) of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NCUA’s regulations establishes a The Board is particularly interested in I. Background obtaining commenter feedback on how II. Current Standards and Request for blanket prohibition on the direct or it can provide flexibility with respect to Comment indirect receipt of any commission, fee, senior executive compensation plans III. Legal Authority or other compensation by any credit that incorporate lending as part of a union official or employee, or an I. Background broad and balanced set of organizational immediate family member of either, in goals and performance measures. In August 2017,1 the Board published connection with any loan made by their credit union.5 However, DATES: Comments must be received on and sought comment on the NCUA or before June 24, 2019. Regulatory Reform Task Force’s (Task § 701.21(c)(8)(iii) carves out four Force) first report on implementing the exceptions to this blanket prohibition. ADDRESSES: You may submit written agency’s regulatory reform agenda Specifically, § 701.21(c)(8)(iii) permits: comments by any of the following (Agenda). The Agenda identifies those (A) Payment, by a federal credit methods (Please send comments by one regulations the Board intends to amend union, of salary to employees; method only): or repeal because they are outdated, (B) Payment, by a federal credit • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// ineffective, or excessively burdensome.2 union, of an incentive or bonus to an www.regulations.gov. Follow the The Board published the Task Force’s employee based on the credit union’s instructions for submitting comments. second and final report in December overall financial performance; • NCUA website: https:// 2018.3 The final report contains the (C) Payment, by a federal credit www.ncua.gov/regulation-supervision/ Task Force’s updated recommendations union, of an incentive or bonus to an rules-regulations/proposed-pending- employee, other than a senior and-recently-final-regulations. Follow 1 82 FR 39702 (Aug. 22, 2017). management employee, in connection the instructions for submitting 2 This is consistent with the spirit of the with a loan or loans made by the credit comments. President’s regulatory reform agenda and Executive union, provided that the board of • Email: Address to regcomments@ Order 13777. Although the NCUA, as an directors of the credit union establishes ncua.gov. Include ‘‘[Your name]— independent agency, is not required to comply with Executive Order 13777, the Board chose to comply written policies and internal controls in Comments on Advance Notice of with it in spirit and reviewed all of the NCUA’s Proposed Rulemaking: Compensation in regulations to that end. 4 60 FR 51886 (Oct. 4, 1995). Connection with Loans to Members and 3 83 FR 65926 (Dec. 21, 2018). 5 12 CFR 701.21(c)(8)(i).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16797

connection with such incentive or regulations that make a more holistic By the National Credit Union bonus and monitors compliance with evaluation of individual compensation Administration Board on April 18, 2019. such policies and controls at least plans and the incentives they provide? Gerard Poliquin, annually; and Is a bright line test even possible in this Secretary of the Board. (D) Receipt of compensation from a highly fact determinative area? If so, [FR Doc. 2019–08166 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] person outside a federal credit union by where is that line? BILLING CODE 7535–01–P a volunteer official or non-senior- • management employee of the credit Are current credit union union, or an immediate family member compensation plans similar to, and competitive with, those provided at CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY of a volunteer official or employee of the COMMISSION credit union, for a service or activity other financial institutions? If not, how do they differ and what, if anything, in performed outside the credit union, 16 CFR Part 1610 provided that no referral has been made the NCUA’s regulations contributes to by the credit union or the official, those differences? [Docket No. CPSC–2019–0008] employee, or family member. • What limitations, if any, are In the past, credit unions have been Request for Information About necessary to prevent individuals from Possible Exemptions From Testing confused about how to interpret the being incentivized to take inappropriate term ‘‘overall financial performance’’ in and Other Changes to the Standard for risks that endanger their credit unions? the Flammability of Clothing Textiles § 701.21(c)(8)(iii)(B). As noted, What authorities do credit unions need § 701.21(c)(8) generally prohibits most to enable them to compete for talented AGENCY: U.S. Consumer Product Safety credit union employees and officials executives? Commission. from receiving compensation made ‘‘in • ACTION: Request for information. connection with any loan’’ a credit To what extent should the NCUA permit loan metrics, such as loan union makes, but provides exceptions, SUMMARY: The U.S. Consumer Product including one that permits incentive volume, to be a part of compensation Safety Commission (CPSC) requests compensation to employees based on plans? How would those metrics be information about possible changes to the credit union’s overall financial incorporated into the overall plan? the Commission’s Standard for the performance. Credit unions have • Should the NCUA provide Flammability of Clothing Textiles to expressed uncertainly about whether additional requirements for expand the list of fabrics that are the NCUA permits loan metrics such as compensation related to a line of exempt from testing under the standard. aggregate loan growth to be a factor in business that is new for the credit union CPSC is particularly interested in assessing overall financial performance. or one in which the credit union lacks receiving information about the They also have asserted that the substantial experience or expertise? possibility of adding spandex to the list regulation is subject to varying of fabrics that are exempt from the interpretations and levels of III. Legal Authority testing requirements. CPSC also would enforcement across the NCUA’s regions. The Board has issued this ANPR like information about the equipment Given the degree of confusion and pursuant to its authority under the and procedures specified in the uncertainty this regulation has caused, Federal Credit Union Act (FCU Act). standard and possible ways to update the Board seeks comment as to how the Under the FCU Act, the NCUA is the those provisions to reduce the burdens NCUA should modernize its regulations chartering and supervisory authority for associated with the testing generally governing the compensation of requirements. credit union officials and employees in federal credit unions and the federal DATES: CPSC will accept written connection with loans made by credit supervisory authority for federally 6 comments through June 24, 2019. unions and specifically with respect to insured credit unions (FICUs). The defining ‘‘overall financial FCU Act grants NCUA a broad mandate ADDRESSES: You may submit written performance.’’ In addition, the Board to issue regulations governing both comments, identified by Docket No. specifically requests feedback federal credit unions and all FICUs. CPSC–2019–20008, using the methods addressing the following: Section 120 of the FCU Act is a general described below. CPSC encourages you • Is there a single industry standard grant of regulatory authority and to submit comments electronically, or methodology for developing authorizes the Board to prescribe rules rather than in hard copy. executive compensation plans? Are and regulations for the administration of Electronic Submissions: Submit there multiple standards or the FCU Act.7 Section 207 of the FCU electronic comments to the Federal methodologies for credit unions of Act is a specific grant of authority over eRulemaking Portal at: different asset sizes? share insurance coverage, www.regulations.gov. Follow the • Are the terms and conditions of conservatorships, and liquidations.8 instructions for submitting comments executive compensation plans Section 209 of the FCU Act is a plenary provided on the website. To ensure developed by credit unions themselves grant of regulatory authority to issue timely processing of comments, please or are the plans crafted by third-party rules and regulations necessary or submit all electronic comments through vendors? appropriate to carry out its role as share www.regulations.gov, rather than by • What do these plans look like? Are insurer for all FICUs.9 Accordingly, the email to CPSC. there specific formulas employed to FCU Act grants the Board broad Written Submissions: Submit written determine terms and conditions? If so, rulemaking authority to ensure that the comments by mail, hand delivery, or what are the formulas? credit union industry and the NCUSIF courier to: Division of the Secretariat, • Is the current structure of remain safe and sound. U.S. Consumer Product Safety § 701.21(c)(8), namely a broad Commission, Room 820, 4330 East-West prohibition with specific exceptions, the 6 12 U.S.C. 1752–1775. Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; best format for regulating this area? 7 12 U.S.C. 1766(a). telephone (301) 504–7923. • Do commenters prefer a bright line 8 12 U.S.C. 1787. Instructions: All submissions must test for permissible compensation to 9 12 U.S.C. 1789. include the agency name and docket

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16798 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

number for this notice. CPSC may post requirements, establish three classes of 1610.1(d)(2) weighing less than 2.6 all comments, without change, flammability, set out the criteria for ounces per square yard, and including any personal identifiers, classifying textiles, and prohibit the use (2) raised surface fabrics, regardless of contact information, or other personal of textiles that exhibit rapid and intense weight, that contain spandex with one information provided, to: http:// burning. The purpose of these or a combination of the exempted fibers www.regulations.gov. Do not submit regulations is to reduce the risk of injury listed in 16 CFR 1610.1(d)(2). confidential business information, trade or death by prohibiting the use of 2. Burden and Cost Associated With secret information, or other sensitive or dangerously flammable clothing textiles. Testing Spandex protected information that you do not 16 CFR 1610.1(a). want to be available to the public. If The regulations exempt certain fabrics Please provide information about the furnished at all, such information from the testing requirements because general test burden and costs associated should be submitted by mail, hand ‘‘experience gained from years of testing with testing fabric containing spandex delivery, or courier. in accordance with the Standard fibers. The following specific Docket: For access to the docket to demonstrates that certain fabrics information would be helpful: read background documents or consistently yield acceptable results • How much testing is required for comments, go to: www.regulations.gov, when tested in accordance with the fabrics containing spandex subject to 16 and insert the docket number, CPSC– Standard.’’ 16 CFR 1610.1(d). Currently, CFR part 1610? 2019–20008, into the ‘‘Search’’ box, and the following fabrics are exempt from • What are the costs associated with follow the prompts. the testing requirements: the required testing? • FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) Plain surface fabrics, regardless of What types of fabrics and garments Allyson Tenney, Director, Division of fiber content, weighing 2.6 ounces per require testing? Engineering, Directorate for Laboratory square yard or more, and B. Additional Possible Changes to the (2) All fabrics, both plain surface and Sciences, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Standard: Commission, 5 Research Place, raised-fiber surface textiles, regardless Rockville, MD 20850; telephone: (301) of weight, made entirely from any of the 1. Availability and Specifications of 987–2769; email: [email protected]. following fibers or entirely from Stop Thread SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: combination of the following fibers: Section 1610.5 specifies the test Acrylic, modacrylic, nylon, olefin, apparatus and materials that must be I. Background polyester, wool. used for flammability testing. The On June 16, 2017, the Commission Id. flammability test apparatus must requested input from interested parties II. Request for Information include, among other things, a about ways to reduce the burdens and particular stop thread that is stretched CPSC is considering changes to the costs associated with existing from the spool through stop guides. The Standard for the Flammability of regulations, while still protecting stop thread must be ‘‘a spool of No. 50, Clothing Textiles to reduce the costs consumers from risks of death or white, mercerized, 100% cotton sewing and burdens associated with these injuries associated with consumer thread.’’ 16 CFR 1610.5(a)(2)(ii). CPSC requirements. One specific possibility products. 82 FR 27636. The Commission staff is aware that this stop thread may that industry members have suggested is followed up on this burden reduction have limited availability or that the to add spandex to the list of fabrics in goal in its Fiscal Year 2019 Operating numbering specified in the standard 16 CFR 1610.1(d)(2) that are exempt Plan, directing CPSC staff to review may be outdated. Please provide from the testing requirements in the possibilities for reducing burdens, comments about the specifications of standard. In addition, possible updates including ‘‘expanding exemptions for the stop thread and thread availability. to the equipment and procedures flammability testing.’’ U.S. Consumer What procedures are used to confirm specified in the standard may reduce Product Safety Commission, Fiscal Year the thread meets the specifications? 2019 Operating Plan, p. 18 (Oct. 10, the burdens associated with the testing 2018), available at: https:// requirements. CPSC requests comments 2. Refurbishing (Dry-Cleaning and www.cpsc.gov/content/fiscal-year-2019- on the following specific topics: Laundering) operating-plan. Accordingly, this notice A. Possible Exemption of Spandex From Section 1610.6(b)(1)(i) specifies a dry requests information about expanding Testing Requirements: cleaning procedure as part of the the exemptions from flammability process of refurbishing plain and raised testing and other ways to reduce the 1. Data Regarding Spandex Test Results textile fabrics. As part of the dry burdens associated with the CPSC staff is aware of stakeholder cleaning procedure, the solvent Commission’s Standard for the interest in adding spandex fibers to the perchloroethylene is required in 16 CFR Flammability of Clothing Textiles. Specific Exemptions in 16 CFR 1610.6(b)(1)(i). Staff is aware of the The Flammable Fabrics Act (15 U.S.C. 1610.1(d). Please provide relevant limited availability of, and legal 1191–1204) authorizes the Commission information and data about spandex restrictions on the use of, to issue flammability standards, under fibers that would help CPSC determine perchloroethylene solvent. Please certain circumstances, when ‘‘needed to whether spandex ‘‘consistently yield[s] provide any comments on the testing protect the public against unreasonable acceptable results when tested in burden or cost of performing the dry risk of the occurrence of fire leading to accordance with the Standard.’’ CPSC is cleaning procedure with death or personal injury, or significant particularly interested in test data from perchloroethylene solvent. Please property damage.’’ 15 U.S.C. 1193(a). testing a range of fabric constructions, provide details, and potential Under this authority, the Commission fabric weights, and fiber blends. For alternatives, when possible. adopted a Standard for the Flammability example, it would be helpful to receive Section 1610.6(b)(1)(ii) requires of Clothing Textiles in 16 CFR part information about: samples to be washed and dried in 1610. The standard applies to clothing (1) Plain surface fabrics with spandex accordance with American Association and textiles intended to be used for blended with one or a combination of of Textile Chemists and Colorists clothing. The regulations provide testing the exempted fibers listed in 16 CFR (AATCC) Test Method 124–2006,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16799

Appearance of Fabrics After Repeated published in the Federal Register on South Carolina’s June 25, 2018, State Home Laundering. AATCC 124–2006 March 26, 2019. The proposed Implementation Plan (SIP) submission requires the use of an automatic washer regulations updated existing regulations pertaining to the ‘‘good neighbor’’ (Table III) and tumble dryer (Table IV) under section 301 to reflect statutory provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA or that meet certain conditions. Staff is changes made by the Technical and Act) for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide aware of the limited availability of Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988. (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality automatic washing machines, and DATES: Written or electronic comments Standard (NAAQS). The good neighbor possibly dryers, capable of meeting the and requests for a public hearing are provision requires each state’s conditions in AATCC 124–2006. Please still being accepted and must be implementation plan to address the provide any comments on the testing received by June 24, 2019. interstate transport of air pollution in burden or cost of performing the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: amounts that contribute significantly to laundering procedure with the Concerning the proposed regulations, nonattainment, or interfere with automatic washing machine and tumble Grid R. Glyer, (202) 317–6847; maintenance, of a NAAQS in any other dryer specified in the standard. Please concerning submission of comments, state. In this action, EPA is proposing to provide details, and potential Regina Johnson, (202) 317–6901 (not determine that South Carolina’s SIP alternatives, when possible. toll-free numbers). contains adequate provisions to prohibit 3. Test Result Codes SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: emissions within the State from contributing significantly to The standard lists reporting codes in Background nonattainment or interfering with 16 CFR 1610.8(b)(2) to describe the

burning behavior of raised surface The proposed regulations that are the maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 fabrics. The reporting codes, which are subject of this correction are under NAAQS in any other state. sections 301, 356, 368, and 902 of the based on test results, indicate the proper DATES: Written comments must be Internal Revenue Code. classification for the textile. CPSC staff received on or before May 23, 2019. has received input that these codes may Need for Correction be confusing. Please provide any ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, As published, the notice of proposed identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– comments on the use or needed regulations (REG–121694–16) contains clarification of these codes. OAR–2018–0665 at http:// errors which may prove to be www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 4. Additional Burdens Associated With misleading and need to be clarified. instructions for submitting comments. 16 CFR Part 1610 Correction of Publication Once submitted, comments cannot be Please provide other input and edited or removed from Regulations.gov. Accordingly, the notice of proposed recommendations about opportunities EPA may publish any comment received rulemaking (REG–121694–16) that was to reduce the cost of testing to its public docket. Do not submit the subject of FR Doc. 2019–05649, requirements or other costs and burdens electronically any information you published at 84 FR 11263 (March 26, associated with 16 CFR part 1610. Also consider to be Confidential Business 2019), is corrected to read as follows: please identify test procedures that may Information (CBI) or other information need clarifications, and provide § 1.301–1 [Corrected] whose disclosure is restricted by statute. recommendations or alternatives that ■ On page 11266, first column, the sixth Multimedia submissions (audio, video, may reduce the burdens associated with and seventh lines of paragraph (f)(3)(ii), etc.) must be accompanied by a written these regulations, as well as details the language ‘‘similar to, the transaction comment. The written comment is about the costs of those alternatives. in Notice 99–59’’ is corrected to read considered the official comment and Alberta E. Mills, ‘‘similar to the transaction in, Notice should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 99–59’’. Commission. not consider comments or comment Martin V. Franks, [FR Doc. 2019–08140 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] contents located outside of the primary Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or BILLING CODE 6355–01–P Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief other file sharing system). For Counsel (Procedure and Administration). additional submission methods, the full [FR Doc. 2019–08113 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] EPA public comment policy, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY BILLING CODE 4830–01–P information about CBI or multimedia Internal Revenue Service submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit 26 CFR Part 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ AGENCY commenting-epa-dockets. [REG–121694–16] 40 CFR Part 52 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RIN 1545–BN80 [EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0665; FRL–9992–52– Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Updating Section 301 Regulations To Region 4] Management Section, Air Planning and Reflect Statutory Changes; Correction Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides Air Plan Approval; SC; 2010 1-Hour and Toxics Management Division, U.S. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), SO2 NAAQS Transport Infrastructure Environmental Protection Agency, Treasury. Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, ACTION: Correction to a notice of AGENCY: Environmental Protection Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Notarianni can proposed rulemaking. Agency (EPA). be reached via phone number (404) ACTION: Proposed rule. 562–9031 or via electronic mail at SUMMARY: This document contains a [email protected]. correction to a notice of proposed SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection rulemaking (REG–121694–16) that was Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16800 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

I. Background Carolina SIP addressing only prongs 1 EPA promulgated the 2010 1-hour and 2 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SO2 NAAQS on June 2, 2010. See 75 FR A. Infrastructure SIPs 1 for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA 35520 (June 22, 2010). EPA completed On June 2, 2010, EPA promulgated a is proposing to approve SC DHEC’s June the first round of designations for the revised primary SO2 NAAQS with a 25, 2018, SIP submission which certifies 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS on July 25, level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), based that existing SIP provisions satisfy the 2013, designating 29 areas in 16 states on a 3-year average of the annual 99th State’s obligation for prongs 1 and 2 for as nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour percentile of 1-hour daily maximum the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. All other SO2 NAAQS. See 78 FR 47191 (August concentrations. See 75 FR 35520 (June elements related to the infrastructure 5, 2013). EPA based this first round of 22, 2010). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the final SO2 designations on monitored of the CAA, states are required to submit 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for South SO2 concentrations violating the 2010 1- SIPs meeting the applicable Carolina are addressed in separate hour SO2 standard. Following the initial requirements of section 110(a)(2) within rulemakings.2 August 5, 2013, designations, three three years after promulgation of a new lawsuits were filed against EPA in B. EPA’s Designations for the 2010 or revised NAAQS or within such different U.S. District Courts, alleging 1-Hour SO NAAQS shorter period as EPA may prescribe. 2 that the Agency had failed to perform a These SIPs, which EPA has historically In this action, EPA has considered nondiscretionary duty under the CAA referred to as ‘‘infrastructure SIPs,’’ are information from the 2010 1-hour SO2 by not designating all portions of the to provide for the ‘‘implementation, NAAQS designations process, as country within the time lines set forth maintenance, and enforcement’’ of such discussed in more detail in section III.C in section 107(d)(1)(B) of the CAA. In an NAAQS, and the requirements are of this document. For this reason, a brief effort intended to resolve the litigation designed to ensure that the structural summary of EPA’s designations process in one of those cases, EPA and the components of each state’s air quality for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is plaintiffs, Sierra Club and the Natural management program are adequate to included here.3 Resources Defense Council, filed a meet the state’s responsibility under the After the promulgation of a new or proposed consent decree with the U.S. CAA. Section 110(a) of the CAA revised NAAQS, EPA is required to District Court for the Northern District requires states to make a SIP submission designate areas as ‘‘nonattainment,’’ of California. On March 2, 2015, the to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but ‘‘attainment,’’ or ‘‘unclassifiable,’’ court entered the consent decree 4 the contents of individual state pursuant to section 107(d)(1) of the which requires EPA to sign for submissions may vary depending upon CAA. The process for designating areas publication in the Federal Register the facts and circumstances. The following promulgation of a new or notices of the Agency’s promulgation of content of the changes proposed in such revised NAAQS is contained in section area designations by three specific SIP submissions may also vary 107(d) of the CAA. The CAA requires deadlines: July 2, 2016 (‘‘round 2’’); depending upon what provisions the EPA to complete the initial designations December 31, 2017 (‘‘round 3’’); and state’s approved SIP already contains. process within two years of December 31, 2020 (‘‘round 4’’).5 Section 110(a)(2) requires states to promulgating a new or revised standard. On August 21, 2015 (80 FR 51052), address basic SIP elements such as If the Administrator has insufficient EPA separately promulgated air quality requirements for monitoring, basic information to make these designations characterization requirements for the program requirements, and legal by that deadline, EPA has the authority 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the Data authority that are designed to assure to extend the deadline for completing Requirements Rule (DRR). The DRR attainment and maintenance of the designations by up to one year. required state air agencies to NAAQS. A detailed history, characterize air quality, through air interpretation, and rationale of these 1 On May 8, 2014, SC DHEC submitted a SIP dispersion modeling or monitoring, in SIPs and their requirements can be revision addressing all infrastructure elements with areas associated with sources that respect to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS with the found in, among other documents, exception of prongs 1 and 2 of CAA emitted greater than 2,000 tons per year EPA’s March 7, 2016 (81 FR 11718), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). (tpy) of SO2, or that have otherwise been notice of proposed rulemaking related to 2 EPA acted on the other elements of South listed under the DRR by EPA or state air infrastructure SIP requirements for the Carolina’s May 8, 2014, infrastructure SIP agencies. In lieu of modeling or submission for the 2010 1-hour SO NAAQS on 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for South 2 May 24, 2016 (81 FR 32651) and September 24, monitoring, state air agencies, by Carolina in the section titled, What is 2018 (83 FR 48237). specified dates, could elect to impose EPA’s approach to the review of 3 While designations may provide useful federally-enforceable emissions infrastructure SIP submissions? information for purposes of analyzing transport, limitations on those sources restricting particularly for a more source-specific pollutant Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA their annual SO2 emissions to 2,000 tpy requires SIPs to include provisions such as SO2, EPA notes that designations themselves are not dispositive of whether or not or less, or provide documentation that prohibiting any source or other type of upwind emissions are impacting areas in the sources have been shut down. EPA emissions activity in one state from downwind states. EPA has consistently taken the expected that the information generated emitting any air pollutant in amounts position that as to impacts, CAA section by implementation of the DRR would that will contribute significantly to 110(a)(2)(D) refers only to prevention of ‘nonattainment’ in other states, not to prevention of help inform SO2 designations specified nonattainment, or interfere with nonattainment in designated nonattainment areas or in the March 2, 2015, consent decree. maintenance, of the NAAQS in another any similar formulation requiring that designations EPA signed Federal Register notices of state. The two clauses of this section are for downwind nonattainment areas must first have promulgation of round 2 designations 6 referred to as prong 1 (significant occurred. See e.g., Clean Air Interstate Rule, 70 FR 25162, 25265 (May 12, 2005); Cross-State Air contribution to nonattainment) and Pollution Rule, 76 FR 48208, 48211 (Aug. 8, 2011); 4 Consent Decree, Sierra Club v. McCarthy, Case prong 2 (interference with maintenance Final Response to Petition from New Jersey No. 3:13–cv–3953–SI (N.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2015). 5 of the NAAQS). Regarding SO2 Emissions From the Portland The term ‘‘round’’ in this instance refers to On June 25, 2018, the South Carolina Generating Station, 76 FR 69052 (Nov. 7, 2011) which ‘‘round of designations.’’ (finding facility in violation of the prohibitions of 6 EPA and state documents and public comments Department of Health and CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the related to the round 2 final designations are in the Environmental Control (SC DHEC) 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS prior to issuance of docket at regulations.gov with Docket ID NO. EPA– submitted a revision to the South designations for that standard). HQ–OAR–2014–0464 and at EPA’s website for SO2

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16801

on June 30, 2016 (81 FR 45039 (July 12, release heights of SO2. Emissions of SO2 evaluated the transport of SO2 to other 2016)), and on November 29, 2016 (81 travel farther and have wider ranging states, the types of information used in FR 89870 (December 13, 2016)), and impacts than emissions of Pb, but do not the analysis, and the conclusions drawn round 3 designations 7 on December 21, travel far enough to be treated in a by the State. EPA then conducted a 2017 (83 FR 1098 (January 9, 2018)). For manner similar to ozone or PM2.5. The weight of evidence analysis based on a South Carolina, EPA designated all approaches that EPA has adopted for review of the State’s submission and counties as attainment/unclassifiable in ozone or PM2.5 transport are too other available information, including round 3. Because all counties in South regionally focused and the approach for SO2 air quality and available source Carolina are now designated for the Pb transport is too tightly circumscribed modeling for states within 50 km of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, and no DRR to the source. SO2 transport is therefore South Carolina border.12 sources in the State opted to monitor to a unique case and requires a different III. South Carolina’s SIP Submission inform Round 4 SO2 designations, no approach. and EPA’s Analysis areas in South Carolina will be Given the properties of SO2, EPA designated in round 4.8 There are no agrees with South Carolina’s selection of A. State Submission nonattainment areas in South Carolina a spatial scale with dimensions from 9 On June 25, 2018, SC DHEC submitted for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. four to 50 kilometers (km) from point sources—the ‘‘urban scale’’—to assess a revision to the South Carolina SIP II. Relevant Factors Used To Evaluate trends in area-wide air quality that addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA 2010 1-Hour SO Interstate Transport 2 might impact downwind states.10 SC section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 1- SIPs DHEC selected the urban scale as hour SO2 NAAQS. South Carolina conducted a weight of evidence analysis Interstate transport of SO2 is unlike appropriate for assessing trends in both the transport of fine particulate matter area-wide air quality and the to examine whether SO2 emissions from the State adversely affect attainment or (PM2.5) or ozone in that SO2 is not a effectiveness of large-scale pollution maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 regional pollutant and does not control strategies at SO2 point sources. commonly contribute to widespread SC DHEC supported this transport NAAQS in downwind states. nonattainment over a large (and often distance threshold with references to 40 SC DHEC reviewed the following information to support its conclusion multi-state) area. The transport of SO2 is CFR 58, Appendix D, Section 4.4.4(4) more analogous to the transport of lead ‘‘Urban scale’’, which states that that South Carolina does not (Pb) because its properties result in measurements in this scale would be significantly contribute to localized pollutant impacts very near used to estimate SO concentrations nonattainment or interfere with 2 the emissions source. However, ambient over large portions of an urban area with maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 concentrations of SO2 do not decrease as NAAQS in downwind states: Trends in dimensions from four to 50 km. The 13 quickly with distance from the source as State also notes that 50 km is the SO2 design values (DVs) at the State’s Pb because of the properties and typical transport distance threshold that EPA air quality monitors from 2008–2017; recommends for use with the air quality highest monitored SO2 DVs for monitors designations at https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide- dispersion model called the American with complete, quality-assured data and designations. located within South Carolina and 7 Meteorological Society/Environmental EPA and state documents and public comments within Florida, Georgia, and North related to round 3 final designations are in the Protection Agency Regulatory Model docket at regulations.gov with Docket ID NO. EPA– (AERMOD). AERMOD is EPA’s Carolina; SO2 emissions trends both statewide (for the years 2008, 2011, and HQ–OAR–2017–0003 and at EPA’s website for SO2 preferred modeling platform for designations at https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide- 2014) and for the State’s title V sources designations. regulatory purposes (Appendix W of 40 (for the years 2008–2016); available SO2 8 CFR part 51).11 EPA agrees with the See Technical Support Document: Chapter 37 modeling data for the State’s round 3 Final Round 3 Area Designations for the 2010 1- State’s selection and application of the DRR-subject sources; and State and Hour SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality 50-km threshold as a reasonable Standard for South Carolina at https:// distance to evaluate emission source federal regulations and State statutes www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-12/ that establish requirements for sources documents/37-sc-so2-rd3-final.pdf. See also impacts into neighboring states and to Technical Support Document: Chapter 37 Intended assess air quality monitors within 50 km 12 This proposed approval action is based on the Round 3 Area Designations for the 2010 1-Hour SO2 of the State’s border, which is discussed Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for information contained in the administrative record South Carolina at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ further in section III.C. for this action, and does not prejudge any future production/files/2017-08/documents/38sc_so2_rd3- As discussed in sections III.C and EPA action that may make other determinations final.pdf. III.D, EPA first reviewed the State’s regarding the air quality status in South Carolina 9 On August 5, 2013 (78 FR 47191) and effective analysis to assess how the State and downwind states. Any such future action, such October 4, 2013, EPA designated 29 areas in 16 as area designations under any NAAQS, will be based on their own administrative records and the states as nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2 10 NAAQS based on violating monitors using air For the definition of spatial scales for SO2, EPA’s analyses of information that becomes quality data for the years 2009–2011, but did not, please see 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, section 4.4 available at those times. Future available at that time, designate other areas in the country. (‘‘Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Design Criteria’’). For further information may include, and is not limited to, On July 12, 2016 (81 FR 45039), effective September discussion on how EPA applies these definitions monitoring data and modeling analyses conducted 12, 2016, and December 13, 2016 (81 FR 89870), with respect to interstate transport of SO2, see pursuant to EPA’s DRR and information submitted effective January 12, 2017, EPA published a final EPA’s notice of proposed rulemaking on to EPA by states, air agencies, and third-party rule establishing air quality designations for 65 Connecticut’s SO2 transport SIP. 82 FR 21351, stakeholders such as citizen groups and industry areas in 24 states for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS 21352, 21354 (May 8, 2017). representatives. including seven nonattainment areas, 41 11 EPA established a non-binding technical 13 A ‘‘Design Value’’ is a statistic that describes attainment/unclassifiable areas, and 17 assistance document to assist states and other the air quality status of a given location relative to unclassifiable areas. On January 9, 2018 (83 FR parties in their efforts to characterize air quality the level of the NAAQS. The DV for the primary 1098) effective April 9, 2018, EPA designated six through air dispersion modeling for sources that 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is the 3-year average of areas as nonattainment; 23 areas as unclassifiable; emit SO2 titled, ‘‘SO2 NAAQS Designations annual 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour and the rest of the areas covered by this round in Modeling Technical Assistance Document. This values for a monitoring site. The interpretation of all states, territories, and tribal lands as attainment/ draft document was first released in spring 2013. the primary 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS including the unclassifiable. No areas in South Carolina were Revised drafts were released in February and data handling conventions and calculations designated as nonattainment in these actions. See August of 2016 (see https://www.epa.gov/sites/ necessary for determining compliance with the https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/ production/files/2016-06/documents/ NAAQS can be found in Appendix T to 40 CFR part sulfur-dioxide-designations-regulatory-actions. so2modelingtad.pdf). 50.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16802 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

of SO2 emissions. South Carolina noted actual and projected downward trends downwind air quality in other states that federal regulations and competition of SO2 emissions in South Carolina, with respect to the 2010 1-hour SO2 from lower natural gas prices resulted in trends in SO2 DVs for South Carolina’s NAAQS is by using information in four coal-fired electric generating units monitors and other states’ monitors EPA’s National Emissions Inventory (EGUs) within the State either shutting within 50 km of the South Carolina (NEI).14 The NEI is a comprehensive and down or switching to cleaner fuels. The border, DRR modeling results, and detailed estimate of air emissions for State identified these units and established federal and State control criteria pollutants, criteria pollutant summarized the history of the measures affecting SO2. The State based precursors, and hazardous air pollutants shutdowns and switches to cleaner its conclusions for Prong 2 on emissions from air emissions sources that is fuels. South Carolina also included SO2 trends of SO2 in South Carolina and in updated every three years using emissions trends for the Southeast from the Southeast and established federal information provided by the states and 2000–2016 and noted that there is a and State control measures which other information available to the EPA. consistent downward trend. reduce SO2 emissions. EPA’s evaluation EPA used the 2014 NEI (version 2), the Based on this weight of evidence of South Carolina’s submission is most recently available, complete, and analysis, the State concluded that detailed in sections III.B, C, and D. quality assured dataset of the NEI. Table emissions within South Carolina will 1 shows that point sources in South B. EPA’s Evaluation Methodology not contribute significantly to Carolina contribute approximately 89 nonattainment or interfere with EPA believes that a reasonable percent of the State’s total SO2 maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 starting point for determining which emissions, followed by nonpoint NAAQS in any other state. The State sources and emissions activities in sources at six percent and fires at four based its conclusions for Prong 1 on the South Carolina are likely to impact percent.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF 2014 NEI (VERSION 2) SO2 DATA FOR SOUTH CAROLINA BY SOURCE CATEGORY

Emissions Percent of Category total SO2 (tpy) emissions

Point ...... 46,913.26 89 Nonpoint ...... 2,986.99 6 Fire ...... 2,300.06 4 Onroad ...... 546.07 1 Nonroad ...... 47.85 0

SO2 Emissions Total ...... 52,794.23 100

SC DHEC provided NEI data for the are located within the ‘‘urban scale,’’ characterize air quality for stationary years 2008, 2011, and 2014, which i.e., within 50 km of one or more state sources via either data collected at showed a decrease in SO2 emissions in borders. ambient air quality monitors sited to the State of approximately 73 percent capture the points of maximum from 2008 to 2014. SC DHEC notes in TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF 2014 NEI concentration, or air dispersion its submission that the largest sources of (VERSION 2) SO2 DATA FOR SOUTH modeling. EPA’s assessment of SO2 SO2 emissions in South Carolina are CAROLINA BY SOURCE TYPES emissions from fuel combustion at power plants and other industrial South Carolina’s point sources located Emissions within approximately 50 km of another facilities that burn fossil fuels. Category (tpy) According to the NEI data in the State’s state and their potential impact on submission and the 2014 NEI version 2 Fuel Combustion: EGUs (All Fuel neighboring states is informed by all Types) ...... 27,799.38 (shown in Table 2), the majority of SO2 available data at the time of this Fuel Combustion: Industrial Boilers/ 16 emissions in South Carolina originate Internal Combustion Engines (All rulemaking. from fuel combustion at point sources.15 Fuel Types) ...... 10,243.87 As discussed in section I.B., many air Fuel Combustion: Commercial/Insti- In 2014, the total SO2 emissions from agencies used air dispersion modeling tutional (All Fuel Types) ...... 41.40 fuel combustion point sources in South Fuel Combustion: Residential (All to characterize air quality in the vicinity Carolina comprised approximately 72 Fuel Types) ...... 128.74 of large SO2 emitting sources to identify percent of the total SO2 emissions in the Industrial Processes (All Cat- the maximum 1-hour SO2 State. Because emissions from the other egories) ...... 8,963.50 Mobile Sources (All Categories) ..... 2,602.33 concentrations in ambient air which listed source categories are more Fires (All Types) ...... 2,363.13 informed EPA’s round 2 and 3 SO2 dispersed throughout the State, those Waste Disposal ...... 648.48 designations. These designations were categories are less likely to cause high Solvent Processes ...... 0.12 based on EPA’s application of the ambient concentrations when compared Miscellaneous (Non-Industrial) ...... 3.30 nationwide analytical approach to, and

to a point source on a ton-for-ton basis. SO2 Emissions Total ...... 52,794.23 technical assessment of, the weight of Therefore, EPA believes that it is evidence for each area, including but appropriate to focus the analysis on SO2 EPA’s current implementation not limited to available air quality emissions from fuel combustion at strategy for the 2010 1-hour SO2 monitoring data and air quality South Carolina’s point sources which NAAQS includes the flexibility to modeling results. The 2010 1-hour SO2

14 EPA’s NEI is available at https://www.epa.gov/ combustion data is not included in the point source factors found in this proposed rulemaking, but may air-emissions-inventories/national-emissions- fuel combustion data and related calculations. not be identical to the approach taken in this or any inventory. 16 EPA notes that the evaluation of other states’ future rulemaking for South Carolina, depending on 15 Residential fuel combustion is considered a satisfaction of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 available information and state-specific nonpoint source, and thus, residential fuel 1-hour SO2 NAAQS can be informed by similar circumstances.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16803

standard is violated at an ambient air state. SC DHEC confirms in its DHEC provided a summary of the air quality monitoring site (or in the case of submission that South Carolina’s SIP dispersion modeling results for the five dispersion modeling, at an ambient air contains adequate provisions to prevent modeled sources: Century Aluminum of quality receptor location) when the 3- sources and other types of emissions South Carolina 20 (Century Aluminum); year average of the annual 99th activities within the State from International Paper-Eastover Mill (IP percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour contributing significantly to Eastover); Resolute FP US INC average concentrations exceeds 75 ppb, nonattainment in any other state with (Resolute); Santee Cooper Cross as determined in accordance with respect to the 2010 1-hour SO2 standard. Generating Station (Santee Cooper Appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. EPA’s To evaluate South Carolina’s Cross); and SCE&G Wateree Station preferred modeling platform for satisfaction of prong 1, EPA assessed the (SCE&G Wateree). IP Eastover and regulatory purposes is AERMOD State’s implementation plan with SCE&G Wateree were modeled together. 17 (Appendix W of 40 CFR part 51). In respect to the following factors: (1) SO2 Of these five sources, one source most modeling analyses, the impacts of ambient air quality and emissions (Resolute) is within 50 km of another the actual emissions for one or more of trends for South Carolina and state (North Carolina) at approximately the recent 3-year periods (e.g., 2012– neighboring states; (2) potential ambient 7 km using the nearest property 2014, 2013–2015, 2014–2016) were impacts of SO2 emissions from certain boundary to North Carolina and considered, and in some cases the facilities in South Carolina on modeled a maximum 2010 1-hour SO2 modeling was of currently effective neighboring states based on available air DV of 69 ppb. SC DHEC notes that limits on allowable emissions in lieu of dispersion modeling results; (3) State Resolute used a modeling grid which or as a supplement to modeling of actual statutes and SIP-approved regulations extended approximately 4 km into emissions. that address SO2 emissions; and (4) North Carolina. A summary of the The available air dispersion modeling federally enforceable regulations that modeling results for Resolute, including of large SO2 sources can support reduce SO2 emissions. A detailed supplemental data EPA has reviewed as transport related conclusions about discussion of South Carolina’s SIP part of the Agency’s analysis, is shown whether sources in one state are submission with respect to each of these in Table 3 of section III.C.1.b of this potentially causing or contributing to factors follows.18 EPA proposes that action. violations of the 2010 1-hour SO2 these factors, taken together, support the b. EPA Analysis standard in other states. While Agency’s proposed determination that AERMOD was not designed specifically South Carolina’s SIP adequately For the SO2 air dispersion modeling to address interstate transport, the 50- prohibits emissions that will factor, EPA evaluated the DRR modeling km distance that EPA recommends for significantly contribute to data in South Carolina’s June 25, 2018, use with AERMOD aligns with the nonattainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 submission for sources in the State and urban monitoring scale, and thus, EPA NAAQS in another state. EPA’s supplemented this data with available, believes that the use of AERMOD proposed conclusion is based, in part, existing DRR modeling results for provides a reliable indication of air on the fact that the Agency does not sources in the adjacent states of Georgia quality for transport purposes. have information indicating that there and North Carolina that are within 50 21 As described in this section, EPA are violations of the 2010 1-hour SO2 km of the South Carolina border. The proposes to conclude that an assessment NAAQS in the surrounding states. In purpose of evaluating modeling results of South Carolina’s satisfaction of the addition, the downward trends in SO2 in adjacent states within 50 km of the prong 1 and 2 requirements under emissions and DVs for air quality South Carolina border is to ascertain section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for monitors in the State, combined with whether these areas are attaining the the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS may be federal and State regulations and 2010 1-hour SO2 standard and, if not, reasonably based upon evaluating the statutes affecting SO2 emissions of whether any nearby sources in South downwind impacts of SO2 emissions South Carolina’s sources, further Carolina are contributing to a NAAQS from fuel combustion at South support EPA’s proposed conclusion. violation. In addition, EPA identified Carolina’s point sources located within South Carolina SO2 emission sources 1. SO2 Air Dispersion Modeling approximately 50 km of another state emitting greater than 100 tons of SO2 in and upon any regulations intended to a. State Submission 2017 that are not subject to the DRR and address fuel combustion at South In its June 25, 2018, SIP revision, SC are located up to 50 km from South Carolina’s point sources. DHEC summarized how each of the Carolina’s border to evaluate whether the SO emissions from these sources C. EPA’s Prong 1 Evaluation— State’s sources subject to the DRR 2 could interact with SO emissions from Significant Contribution to elected to comply with this rule by 2 the nearest source in a neighboring state Nonattainment either taking a federally-enforceable Prong 1 of the good neighbor limit or using either modeling or monitoring to characterize SO air Electric & Gas (SCE&G) McMeekin Station; and provision requires states’ plans to 2 WestRock CP LLC (formerly RockTenn). See Docket prohibit emissions that will quality around the source. Of the eight ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0003. Thus, there is no significantly contribute to sources in the State subject to the DRR, available air dispersion modeling under the DRR for three accepted federally-enforceable these sources. nonattainment of a NAAQS in another 20 permit limits and five sources Century Aluminum was formerly known as 19 Alumax of South Carolina. 17 EPA established a draft non-binding technical conducted dispersion modeling. SC 21 Appendix A.1—titled, ‘‘AERMOD (AMS/EPA assistance document to assist states and other Regulatory Model)’’ of Appendix W to 40 CFR part 18 interested parties in their efforts to characterize air EPA has reviewed South Carolina’s 51—is appropriate for SO2 in instances where quality through air dispersion modeling for sources submission, and where new or more current steady-state assumptions for transport distances up that emit SO2 titled, ‘‘SO2 NAAQS Designations information has become available, is including this to 50 km occur. While not designed specifically to Modeling Technical Assistance Document.’’ This information as part of the Agency’s evaluation of address interstate transport, the 50-km distance draft document was first released in spring 2013. this submission. which EPA recommends for use with AERMOD Revised drafts were released in February and 19 South Carolina’s DRR sources which accepted aligns with the urban monitoring scale, and thus, August of 2016 (see https://www.epa.gov/sites/ federally-enforceable permit limits to exempt out of EPA believes that the use of AERMOD provides a production/files/2016-06/documents/ the DRR requirements are: Duke Energy Carolinas reliable indication of SO2 air quality for transport so2modelingtad.pdf). LLC—W.S. Lee Steam Station; South Carolina purposes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16804 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

in such a way as to contribute North Carolina. All other areas within Three sources in Georgia (Georgia Power significantly to nonattainment in that 50 km of Resolute are contained within Company—Plant McIntosh (Plant state. South Carolina’s borders. As a result, no McIntosh), Georgia-Pacific Consumer Table 3 provides a summary of the further analysis of any other Products—Savannah River Mill modeling results for Resolute, the one neighboring states is necessary for (Savannah River Mill), International modeled DRR source in South Carolina assessing the impacts of the interstate Paper—Savannah (IP-Savannah)) 22 and which is located within 50 km of transport of SO2 pollution from two sources in North Carolina (Allen another state (North Carolina). The Resolute. Steam Station—Duke Energy Carolinas, modeling analyses for Resolute resulted Table 4 provides a summary of the LLC (Duke-Allen) 23 and Duke Energy’s in no modeled violations of the 2010 1- modeling results for DRR sources in Marshall Steam Station (Duke- 24 hour SO2 NAAQS within the 50-km area other neighboring states which are Marshall)). The predicted maximum surrounding the facility and no located within 50 km of South Carolina impacts from the model did not violate violations of the standard within the and which elected to provide air the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for any of modeling domain which extends into dispersion modeling under the DRR: the five sources.25

TABLE 3—SOUTH CAROLINA SOURCES WITH DRR MODELING LOCATED WITHIN 50 km OF ANOTHER STATE

Approximate distance from Other facilities included in 2010 1-hour Model grid extends into DRR source County SO2 Model DV source to modeling (ppb) another state? adjacent state

Resolute ...... York ...... 7 km ...... Yes—Duke-Allen (NC); Winthrop 69 * Yes—into NC (western portion of University; General Chemicals, Union County in North Caro- LLC; Guardian Industries; lina) Spring Industries—Leroy Plant.

* Resolute’s 2010 1-hour SO2 modeled DV is based on 2012–2014 actual emissions for Resolute and all North Carolina permitted facilities within 50 km of the source, and allowable emissions for all South Carolina permitted facilities within 50 km of the source.

TABLE 4—OTHER STATE’S SOURCES WITH DRR MODELING LOCATED WITHIN 50 km OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Approximate distance from Other facilities included in 2010 1-hour SO2 model DV Model grid extends into DRR source County (state) source to (ppb) another state? South Carolina modeling border

Plant McIntosh Effingham Less than 5 Effingham County Power 71.6 for both Plant McIntosh Yes—into SC (western por- (Modeled (GA). km. (GA); SCE&G-Jasper Gen- and Savannah River Mill tion of Jasper County, SC). with Savan- erating Station (SC)— (based on 2012–2014 ac- nah River (based on allowable/poten- tual emissions for Plant Mill). tial to emit (PTE) emis- McIntosh). sions). Savannah Effingham Less than 5 Effingham County Power 71.6 for both Plant McIntosh Yes—into SC (western por- River Mill (GA). km. (GA); SCE&G-Jasper Gen- and Savannah River Mill *. tion of Jasper County, SC). (Modeled erating Station (SC)—. with Plant McIntosh). IP—Savannah Chatham (GA) Less than 5 None ...... 66 (based on 2011–2013 ac- Yes—into SC (western por- km. tual and allowable/PTE tion of Jasper County, SC). emissions). Duke-Allen ..... Gaston (NC) .. 5 km ...... Duke-Marshall ...... 46.6 (based on 2013–2015 Yes—into SC (York County actual SO2 emissions). and portions of Cherokee, Union, Chester, Lancaster, and Chesterfield Counties in SC). Duke-Marshall Catawba (NC) 53 km ...... Duke-Allen ...... 68 (based on 2013–2015 ac- Yes—into SC (small portion tual SO2 emissions). of York and Cherokee Counties in SC).

* Savannah River Mill’s 2010 1-hour SO2 modeled DV is based on 2012–2014 actual emissions for three primary power boilers and allowable/ PTE emissions for 13 emissions units at Savannah River Mill. (For more details, see pp. 67–68 of EPA’s Technical Support Document: Chapter 10 Proposed Round 3 Area Designations for the 2010 1-Hour SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Georgia located at https:// www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-08/documents/10_ga-so2-rd3-final.pdf.)

22 Georgia Power’s Plant Kraft is a DRR source https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017- 24 Given that distances are approximate, the located less than 5 km from the South Carolina 08/documents/10_ga-so2-rd3-final.pdf. Duke-Marshall facility is included in Table 4 with border which has shut down as of October 13, 2015, 23 The Duke-Allen facility did not meet the DRR an approximate distance of 53 km from the South and the operating permit was formally revoked on emission threshold of 2,000 tons or more annually. Carolina border. However, North Carolina elected to characterize the November 9, 2016. The DRR modeling results for 25 Georgia’s Plant McIntosh and Savannah River area around the source through air dispersion Georgia’s DRR round 3 sources may be found at: modeling. Mill were modeled together as shown in Table 4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16805

As mentioned previously, EPA finds and 4 of this action, EPA assessed the characterized under the DRR 26 that that it is appropriate to examine the potential impacts of SO2 emissions from emitted greater than 100 tpy of SO2 in impacts of SO2 emissions from stationary sources not subject to the 2017 and are located within 50 km of stationary sources in South Carolina in DRR and located up to 50 km from the State’s border. All three of the distances ranging from zero km to 50 km South Carolina’s borders to evaluate identified sources were located along from the sources. Therefore, in addition trends in area-wide air quality. Table 5 the border of South Carolina and North to those sources addressed in Tables 3 lists sources in South Carolina not Carolina.

TABLE 5—SOUTH CAROLINA NON-DRR SO2 SOURCES EMITTING GREATER THAN 100 tpy NEAR NEIGHBORING STATES

Approximate Approximate distance to 2017 Annual distance to nearest Nearest neighboring state SO2 source & Closest neighboring 2017 emissions South Carolina source SO2 emissions South Carolina state neighboring (tons) border state SO2 (>100 tons of SO2) (km) source (km)

Milliken & Co. Mag- 697 5.5 North Carolina...... 23 Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC—Cliffside nolia Plant. Steam Station (858 tons). Guardian Industries ... 103 22.5 North Carolina ...... 53 Duke—Allen (354 tons). WestRock CP LLC .... 1,480 44 North Carolina ...... 68 Pilkington North America, Inc. (Pilkington) (383 tons).

Currently, EPA does not have conclusion that sources in South federally enforceable conditions monitoring or modeling data suggesting Carolina do not significantly contribute established in title V permits. that North Carolina is impacted by SO to nonattainment of the 2010 1-hour SO 2 2 3. SO Ambient Air Quality emissions from the Milliken & Co. NAAQS in any other state. 2 Magnolia Plant or WestRock CP LLC. a. State Submission 2. SO2 Emissions Trends With regard to the WestRock facility, In its June 25, 2018, SIP submission, a. State Submission EPA believes that the 68-km distance SC DHEC illustrated graphically that the between the WestRock facility in South As part of its SIP submission, South DVs from 2008 through 2017 at nine out Carolina and the Pilkington facility, the Carolina presented SO2 emissions of 10 monitors in South Carolina in nearest source in North Carolina with trends both statewide (for the years EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) 29 SO2 emissions greater than 100 tpy, 2008–2014) and for the State’s title V (‘‘AQS monitors’’) have remained well makes it unlikely that SO2 emissions sources (for the years 2008–2016). below the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS

from WestRock could interact with SO2 Statewide SO emissions have since 2008.30 The one monitor with data emissions from Pilkington in such a way 2 decreased by approximately 73 percent above the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS as to contribute significantly to from 197,136 tpy in 2008 to 52,782 tpy from 2008 to 2010 attained the standard nonattainment in North Carolina. 28 in 2014, and SO2 emissions from in 2011, and the DVs for this monitor Allowable SO2 emissions from the South Carolina’s title V sources have sharply decreased between 2011 to Guardian Industries facility were decreased by approximately 88 percent 2017. SC DHEC notes that the State’s included in South Carolina’s modeling from 191,058 tpy in 2008 to 22,422 tpy AQS monitors are all attaining the 2010 27 of the Resolute DRR source, which in 2016. 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and the DVs at was addressed in Table 3. This these monitors show a consistent modeling did not show any violations of b. EPA Analysis downward trend. In addition, SC DHEC the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS within 50 EPA reviewed the statewide and title noted that the highest monitored DV in km of the South Carolina border, and V source SO2 emissions trends data the State for the 2014–2016 time period thus, indicates that Guardian Industries provided by South Carolina and agrees is 29 ppb, which is 39 percent of the does not significantly contribute to that the data show a significant decline 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. nonattainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 (73 and 88 percent, respectively, as SC DHEC also included a figure NAAQS in any other state. noted earlier). Based on the emissions displaying AQS monitors located in The modeling results in Tables 3 and trends information in South Carolina’s South Carolina and in other states 4 predict no violations of the 2010 1- submission, EPA believes that these within 50 km of the South Carolina hour SO2 NAAQS within 50 km of the declining SO2 emissions may suggest border. This figure depicts a total of 14 South Carolina border, and thus, EPA that South Carolina does not AQS monitors (seven South Carolina believes that these results, weighed significantly contribute to monitors with DVs; four monitors in along with the other factors in this nonattainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 other states with DVs; and three AQS document and the Agency’s analysis of NAAQS in any other state, particularly monitors in North Carolina that were the South Carolina sources addressed in given that SO2 emissions limits for established to characterize the air Table 5, support EPA’s proposed South Carolina’s title V sources are quality around specific sources subject

26 One source, Westrock CP, LLC accepted a production/files/2017-08/documents/38sc_so2_rd3- 29 EPA’s AQS contains ambient air pollution data permit limit to exempt out of being subject to the final.pdf. collected by EPA, state, local, and tribal air DRR. 28 EPA notes there is a slight difference in the pollution control agencies. See https:// 27 See pp.81–82 and p.92 of EPA’s Technical www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values. 2014 NEI value for South Carolina’s SO2 emissions 30 Support Document: Chapter 37 Intended Round 3 between what SC DHEC provided based on version Three of the 10 monitors located in South Area Designations for the 2010 1-Hour SO Primary Carolina shown in the figure on p.8 of the State’s 2 1 of the NEI (52,782 tpy) and the value that EPA National Ambient Air Quality Standard for South June 25, 2018, SIP submission (named ‘‘DHEC,’’ Carolina located at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/ relied upon from version 2 of the NEI (52,794 tpy). ‘‘Powdersville,’’ and ‘‘York’’) have shut down.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16806 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

to EPA’s DRR to inform the Agency’s 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for 2017. SC DHEC certified AQS monitoring data has future round 4 designations for the 2010 also provided the highest monitored become available for South Carolina and 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in lieu of modeling SO2 DVs for the years 2014–2016 at the surrounding states to inform the (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘DRR AQS monitors anywhere in Florida, 2015–2017 DVs. EPA has summarized monitors’’). Of the 11 monitors with Georgia, and North Carolina (i.e., 81, 60, the DVs from 2012 to 2017 for AQS DVs, 10 monitors have had DVs at or and 23 ppb, respectively).31 SC DHEC monitors in South Carolina within 50 notes that the nearest SO2 just below the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS km of another state in Table 6 and for since the 2009–2011 DV time period, nonattainment area is the Nassau AQS monitors in the surrounding states 32 and all DVs have been below the County partial area in Florida, which of Georgia and North Carolina within 50 standard since the 2013–2015 DV is over 150 km from the South Carolina km of South Carolina in Table 7 using border. period. Two of the North Carolina DRR relevant data from EPA’s AQS DV monitors within 50 km of South b. EPA Analysis reports for recent and complete 3-year Carolina have annual 99th percentile 1- Since the time of development of periods. hour SO2 concentrations above the 2010 South Carolina’s SIP submission,

TABLE 6—2010 1-HOUR SO2 DVS FOR AQS MONITORS IN SOUTH CAROLINA WITHIN 50 km OF ANOTHER STATE’S BORDER

Approximate AQS site 2010–2012 2011–2013 2012–2014 2013–2015 2014–2016 2015–2017 distance to state County code DV DV DV DV DV DV border (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (km)

Greenville ...... 450450008 * ND * ND * ND 3 2 2 37 (NC) Oconee ...... 450730001 * ND * ND * ND 3 2 2 3 (GA) * ND indicates ‘‘No Data’’ due to monitor startup or shutdown (operated less than three years), data quality issues, or incomplete data.

As shown in Table 6, the 2015, 2016, Carolina border. Currently, there are no site code 130511002, the DVs similarly and 2017 DVs for the two monitoring AQS monitors indicating a violation of show a downward trend, excluding sites in South Carolina (Greenville and the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS located those time periods for which there is no Oconee Counties) within 50 km of within 50 km of South Carolina in the data to determine a DV. Also, the most another state’s border have remained surrounding states of Georgia and North recent DVs for 2015–2017 are well well below the 2010 1-hour SO2 Carolina. Further, the DVs for the below the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. NAAQS. monitors in Table 7 have declined since Thus, EPA believes that these data Table 7 shows that there are three 2013 for Georgia’s Chatham County support EPA’s proposed conclusion that AQS monitors in Georgia (Chatham and monitor with AQS site code 130511002 South Carolina does not significantly Richmond Counties) and one AQS and since 2012 for North Carolina’s contribute to nonattainment of the 2010 monitor in North Carolina (Mecklenberg Mecklenberg County monitor. For 1-hour SO NAAQS in any other state. County) with 3-year DVs which are Georgia’s Richmond County monitor 2 located within 50 km of the South and Chatham County monitor with AQS

TABLE 7—2010 1-HOUR SO2 DVS FOR AQS MONITORS WITHIN 50 km OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN SURROUNDING STATES

Approximate AQS site 2010– 2011– 2012– 2013– 2014– 2015– distance to SC State County code 2012 DV 2013 DV 2014 DV 2015 DV 2016 DV 2017 DV border (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (km)

Georgia ...... Chatham ...... 130511002 68 79 78 70 52 48 3 Chatham ...... 130510021 74 66 *ND *ND *ND 32 2 Richmond ...... 132450091 * ND * ND * ND 61 60 52 6 North Carolina ...... Mecklenberg ...... 371190041 14 10 7 7 5 5 20 * ND indicates ‘‘No Data’’ due to monitor startup or shutdown (operated less than three years), data quality issues, or incomplete data.

As previously discussed, EPA’s three or more years of complete data to characterize the air quality in the definitions of spatial scales for SO2 determine the DVs for these monitors. associated source areas. The Buncombe monitoring networks indicate that However, EPA evaluated the available, County monitor in North Carolina was distances up to 50 km from a stationary annual 99th percentile SO2 sited in the vicinity of the Asheville source would be useful for assessing concentration data for these monitors. Steam Electric Plant—Duke Energy trends in area-wide air quality. Thus, No sources in South Carolina elected Progress, Inc (Duke-Asheville), a DRR EPA also evaluated monitoring data to establish monitors under the DRR. source. Though a single maximum 1- provided to date for DRR monitors However, Table 8 lists three DRR hour concentration is not directly located in states adjacent to South sources in North Carolina within 50 km comparable to the 2010 1-hour SO2 Carolina within 50 km of the State’s of the South Carolina border which NAAQS, which is in the form of the 3- border. These DRR monitors do not have elected to establish SO2 monitors to year average of the 99th percentile of

31 EPA notes that Florida is not adjacent to South 32 The term ‘‘partial area’’ in this instance refers Carolina. to when EPA has designated a portion a county nonattainment for a NAAQS.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16807

daily maximum 1-hour SO2 values, EPA County monitors in North Carolina. Solid Waste Authority emitted 13.12, notes that the highest concentration With respect to the Haywood County 13.12, and 12.88 tons of SO2 in 2015, observed at the Buncombe County monitor, there is only one source in 2016, and 2017, respectively. The monitor in 2017 was 16.6 ppb, which is South Carolina within 50 km of the Santee Cooper Myrtle Beach facility approximately 78 percent below the State’s border in the direction of the emitted 0.02, 0.01, and 0.03 tons of SO2 level of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Haywood County monitor. This source, in 2015, 2016, and 2017, respectively. The other two DRR monitors in North Milliken Enterprise Plant, is located EPA believes that the Horry County Carolina within 50 km of South approximately 12.5 km from the South Solid Waste Authority and the Santee Carolina—the Brunswick and Haywood Carolina border and emitted 4.25, 4.25, Cooper Myrtle Beach facility are not County monitoring sites—both exceeded and 0.05 tons of SO2 in 2015, 2016, and contributing to the exceedances at the the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS based on 2017, respectively. EPA believes that the Brunswick County monitor due to the one year of complete data for 2017. For Milliken Enterprise Plant is not sources’ distances of approximately 79 2018, only the Haywood County contributing to the exceedances at the km and 85 km, respectively, from the monitoring site exceeded the 2010 1- Haywood County monitor due to the monitor. Thus, after careful review of hour SO2 NAAQS. The Brunswick and source’s distance of approximately 72.5 the State’s assessment, supporting Haywood County monitoring sites are km from the monitor and the declining documentation, available monitoring sited in the area of maximum SO2 emissions trend from 2015 to 2017. data, and EPA’s analysis suggesting that concentration for the DRR sources With respect to the Brunswick County there are no sources in South Carolina named CPI USA North Carolina— monitor, there are two sources in South within 50 km of the Brunswick and Southport Plant (CPI) and Evergreen Carolina within 50 km of the State’s Haywood County DRR monitors which Packaging Group– Canton Mill border in the direction of the Brunswick could be contributing to the (Evergreen), respectively. County monitor. The two sources, Horry exceedances at the Brunswick and EPA evaluated whether there are any County Solid Waste Authority and Haywood County DRR monitors, EPA sources in South Carolina within 50 km Santee Cooper Myrtle Beach, are located proposes to conclude that these of the State’s border which could approximately 31 km and 37 km, monitoring data do not provide potentially be contributing to the respectively, from the South Carolina evidence of South Carolina contributing exceedances in 2017 and 2018 at the border in the direction of the Brunswick significantly to 2010 1-hour SO2 Brunswick County and Haywood County monitor. The Horry County violations in the neighboring states.

TABLE 8—2010 1-HOUR SO2 99TH PERCENTILE CONCENTRATIONS FOR ROUND 4 DRR MONITORS WITHIN 50 km OF SOUTH CAROLINA LOCATED IN SURROUNDING STATES

2017 99th 2018 99th Approximate percentile percentile distance to SC County (state) Round 4 monitored source AQS site code concentration concentration border (ppb) (ppb) (km)

Buncombe (NC) ...... Duke-Asheville ...... 370210037 16.6 9.8 32 Brunswick (NC) ...... CPI ...... 370190005 82.5 55.1 50 Haywood (NC) ...... Evergreen ...... 370870013 206.8 213.4 48

4. SIP-Approved Regulations and State Rain Program, enacted to reduce acid maintenance of the NAAQS, the State Statutes Addressing SO2 Emissions deposition by reducing SO2 and NOX has a SIP-approved major source new emissions from fossil fuel-fired power a. State Submission source review (NSR) program. South plants. SC DHEC also notes that South Carolina’s SIP-approved nonattainment South Carolina identified State Carolina’s Pollution Control Act, SC NSR regulation is Regulation 61–62.5, statutes and SIP-approved measures Code Section 48–1–10 et seq., and State Standard No. 7.1—Nonattainment New which help ensure that SO2 emissions Agency Rule Making and Adjudication Source Review, which applies to the in the State do not significantly of Contested Cases, SC Code Section 1– construction of any new major contribute to nonattainment of the 2010 23–10 et seq., provide for control of SO2 stationary source or major modification 33 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in any other state. emissions in the State. at an existing major stationary source in an area designated as nonattainment. SC DHEC lists the following SIP- b. EPA Analysis approved South Carolina regulations The State’s SIP-approved prevention of which establish emission limits and EPA believes that South Carolina’s significant deterioration (PSD) other control measures for SO2: statutes and SIP-approved measures regulation, Regulation 61–62.5, Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7, which establish emission limits, Standard No. 7—Prevention of Prevention of Significant Deterioration; permitting requirements, and other Significant Deterioration, applies to the Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7.1, control measures for SO2 effectively construction of any new major Nonattainment New Source Review; address emissions of SO2 from sources stationary source or major modification Regulation 61–62.96, Nitrogen Oxides in the State. For the purposes of at an existing major stationary source in (NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Budget ensuring that SO2 emissions at new an area designated as attainment or Trading Program; Regulation 61–62.97, major sources or major modifications at unclassifiable or not yet designated. Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) existing major sources in South Carolina Regulation 61–62.1, Section II—Permit Trading Program; and Regulation 61– do not contribute significantly to Requirements governs, among other 62.1, Definitions and General nonattainment or interfere with things, the preconstruction permitting of Requirements. In addition, SC DHEC modifications and construction of minor promulgated Regulation 61–62.72, Acid 33 These South Carolina statutes are not approved stationary sources in South Carolina. Rain, to comply with the EPA’s Acid into the State’s implementation plan. These major (i.e., PSD and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16808 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

nonattainment NSR (NNSR)) and minor likely contributing to other states’ federal measures that control SO2 NSR rules ensure that SO2 emissions ability to attain or maintain the 2010 1- emissions in the State. due to major modifications at existing hour SO NAAQS; SO emissions from 2 2 2. EPA Analysis major stationary sources, modifications South Carolina sources not subject to at minor stationary sources, and the the DRR which emitted over 100 tons of In North Carolina v. EPA, the D.C. construction of new major and minor SO2 in 2017 are not likely interacting Circuit explained that the regulating sources in South Carolina will not with SO2 emissions from the nearest authority must give prong 2 contribute significantly to source in a bordering state in such a ‘‘independent significance’’ from prong nonattainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 way as to contribute significantly to 1 by evaluating the impact of upwind NAAQS in neighboring states. nonattainment in North Carolina; state emissions on downwind areas that, annual 99th percentile 1-hour SO while currently in attainment, are at risk 5. Federally Enforceable Regulations 2 concentrations at the Buncombe County of future nonattainment. North Carolina Addressing SO Emissions in South 2 DRR monitor in North Carolina are well v. EPA, 531 F.3d at 910–911 (D.C. Cir. Carolina below the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS; and 2008). For the prong 2 analysis, EPA a. State Submission current South Carolina statutes and SIP- evaluated the emissions trends provided SC DHEC listed the following EPA approved measures and federal by South Carolina for the State and the rules which reduce SO emissions from emissions control programs adequately Southeast, evaluated air quality data, 2 various sources: Acid Rain Nitrogen control SO2 emissions from sources and assessed how future sources of SO2 Oxides Emission Reduction Program; within South Carolina. are addressed through existing SIP- PSD/NNSR; Cap and Trade Programs for Based on the analysis provided by approved and federally enforceable South Carolina in its SIP submission regulations. Given the continuing trend SO2 under 40 CFR part 96; Regional Haze; Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle and EPA’s analysis of the factors of decreasing SO2 emissions from Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel described in section III.C, EPA proposes sources within South Carolina and the Sulfur Control Requirements; Mercury to find that sources within South fact that all areas in other states within and Air Toxics Standards; and the Carolina will not contribute 50 km of the South Carolina border have Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. The significantly to nonattainment of the DVs attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 State notes that the overall effect of 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in any other NAAQS, EPA believes that evaluating these rules has been a 56 percent state. whether these decreases in emissions can be maintained over time is a reduction in SO2 emissions nationally D. EPA’s Prong 2 Evaluation— from 2010 to 2016. reasonable criterion to ensure that Interference With Maintenance of the sources within South Carolina do not b. EPA Analysis NAAQS interfere with its neighboring states’ EPA believes that the federal control Prong 2 of the good neighbor ability to maintain the 2010 1-hour SO2 provision requires state plans to measures for SO2 which South Carolina NAAQS. lists in the State’s June 2018 submission prohibit emissions that will interfere Regarding SO2 air quality trends in with maintenance of a NAAQS in effectively address emissions of SO2 the southeastern United States, EPA from sources in the State and help another state. notes that this region of the country has experienced an 82 percent decrease in ensure that SO2 emissions from South 1. State Submission Carolina do not contribute significantly the annual 99th percentile of daily In its June 25, 2018, SIP submission, to nonattainment of the 2010 1-hour SO maximum 1-hour averages between 2 SC DHEC states that South Carolina’s NAAQS in another state. 2000 and 2017 based on 24 monitoring SIP contains adequate provisions to sites, and the most recently available 6. Conclusion prevent sources and emissions activities data for 2017 indicates that the mean EPA proposes to determine that South within South Carolina from interfering value at these sites was approximately Carolina’s June 25, 2018, SIP with maintenance of the 2010 1-hour 14 ppb.34 When this trend is evaluated submission satisfies the requirements of SO2 NAAQS in any other state based on alongside the monitored SO2 prong 1 of CAA section the downward trend in SO2 emissions concentrations within South Carolina as 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). This proposed in the State and the Southeast and on well as the SO2 concentrations recorded determination is based on the following federal and state control measures. As at regulatory monitors in the considerations: DVs for South Carolina’s discussed in section III.A, SC DHEC surrounding states of Georgia and North AQS SO2 monitors within 50 km of included statewide SO2 emissions Carolina shown in Tables 6 and 7 of this another state’s border have remained trends in its SIP submittal which show document, EPA believes that emissions well below the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS that SO2 emissions have declined since trends in South Carolina due to sources from 2015–2017; DVs for Georgia’s and approximately 2005 and are continuing from within the State are not North Carolina’s regulatory monitors to decline. SC DHEC included a figure significantly different than the overall within 50 km of South Carolina’s border showing SO2 emissions trends in the decreasing monitored SO2 concentration have 2017 DVs below the 2010 1-hour Southeast from 2000 to 2016 and trend in the Southeast. With respect to SO2 NAAQS; modeling for the one indicated that there is a consistent air quality data trends, the current South Carolina DRR source within 50 downward trend in SO2 emissions over 2015–2017 DVs for AQS SO2 monitors km of another state’s border estimates this time period. The State noted that both in South Carolina within 50 km of impacts below the 2010 1-hour SO2 these SO2 emissions reductions are another state’s border and in Georgia NAAQS; modeling for DRR sources in primarily due to federal regulations and North Carolina within 50 km of the surrounding states of Georgia and requiring pollution control devices and South Carolina’s border are below the North Carolina within 50 km of South the decreased use of coal for electricity. 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Further, Carolina indicates that the areas around In addition, as discussed in sections modeling results for DRR sources within these sources do not violate the 2010 1- III.C.4 and III.C.5, SC DHEC has statutes 50 km of South Carolina’s border both hour SO2 NAAQS; downward SO2 and SIP-approved measures which emissions trends in South Carolina may address sources of SO2 emissions in 34 See https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/sulfur- suggest that the State’s sources are not South Carolina and there are also dioxide-trends.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16809

within the State and in the states of maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 • Is not subject to requirements of Georgia and North Carolina demonstrate NAAQS in any other state. Section 12(d) of the National attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO 2 IV. Proposed Action Technology Transfer and Advancement NAAQS, and thus, demonstrate that Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because South Carolina’s largest point sources of In light of the above analysis, EPA is application of those requirements would SO2 are not expected to interfere with proposing to approve South Carolina’s be inconsistent with the CAA; and maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO June 25, 2018, SIP submission as 2 • Does not provide EPA with the NAAQS in another state. demonstrating that South Carolina’s SIP discretionary authority to address, as As discussed in sections III.C.4 and has adequate provisions prohibiting any appropriate, disproportionate human III.C.5, EPA believes that federal and source or other type of emissions health or environmental effects, using State regulations and statutes that both activity in the State from emitting any practicable and legally permissible directly and indirectly reduce emissions air pollutant in amounts that will methods, under Executive Order 12898 of SO2 in South Carolina help ensure contribute significantly to that the State does not interfere with nonattainment or interfere with (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). maintenance of the NAAQS in another maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 In addition, this proposed action for state. SO2 emissions from future major NAAQS in another state. South Carolina does not have Tribal modifications and new major sources V. Statutory and Executive Order implications as specified by Executive will be addressed by South Carolina’s Reviews Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, SIP-approved major NSR regulations 2000) because it does not have described in section III.C.4. In addition, Under the CAA, the Administrator is substantial direct effects on an Indian South Carolina has a SIP-approved required to approve a SIP submission Tribe. The Catawba Indian Nation that complies with the provisions of the minor NSR permit program addressing Reservation is located within the Act and applicable Federal regulations. small emission sources of SO2. The boundary of York County, South permitting regulations contained within See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba these programs are designed to ensure Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code that emissions from these activities do EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local not interfere with maintenance of the environmental laws and regulations NAAQS in the State or in any other the CAA. This action merely proposes to apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation] state. approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose and Reservation and are fully 3. Conclusion additional requirements beyond those enforceable by all relevant state and local agencies and authorities.’’ EPA proposes to determine that South imposed by state law. For that reason, Carolina’s June 25, 2018, SIP this proposed action: However, EPA has determined that this • submission satisfies the requirements of Is not a significant regulatory action proposed rule does not have substantial prong 2 of CAA section subject to review by the Office of direct effects on an Indian Tribe because 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). This determination is Management and Budget under this proposed action is not approving based on the following considerations: Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, any specific rule, but rather proposing SO2 emissions statewide from 2008 to October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, to determine that South Carolina’s 2014 in South Carolina have declined January 21, 2011); already approved SIP meets certain • significantly; current South Carolina Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 CAA requirements. EPA notes that these statutes and SIP-approved measures and FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory proposed actions will not impose federal emissions control programs action because SIP approvals are substantial direct costs on Tribal adequately control SO2 emissions from exempted under Executive Order 12866; governments or preempt Tribal law. sources within South Carolina; South • Does not impose an information Carolina’s SIP-approved PSD and minor collection burden under the provisions List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 source NSR permit programs will Environmental protection, Air U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); address future large and small SO2 pollution control, Incorporation by • Is certified as not having a sources; current DVs for AQS SO2 reference, Intergovernmental relations, monitors both in South Carolina within significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities Particulate Matter, Reporting and 50 km of another state’s border and in recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur Georgia and North Carolina within 50 under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 oxides. km of South Carolina’s border are below U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS; and Does not contain any unfunded Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. modeling for DRR sources within 50 km mandate or significantly or uniquely Dated: April 11, 2019. of South Carolina’s border both within affect small governments, as described the State and in Georgia and North in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Mary S. Walker, Carolina demonstrates that South of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. • Carolina’s largest point sources of SO2 Does not have Federalism [FR Doc. 2019–07921 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] are not expected to interfere with implications as specified in Executive BILLING CODE 6560–50–P maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2 Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, NAAQS in another state. Based on the 1999); analysis provided by South Carolina in • Is not an economically significant its SIP submission and EPA’s regulatory action based on health or supplemental analysis of the factors safety risks subject to Executive Order described in section III.C and III.D of 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); this document, EPA proposes to find • Is not a significant regulatory action that emission sources within South subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Carolina will not interfere with 28355, May 22, 2001);

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16810 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION statute, its text, structure, and legislative etc.) must be accompanied by a written AGENCY history, the Agency concludes that the comment. The written comment is CWA is best read as excluding all considered the official comment and 40 CFR Part 122 releases of pollutants from a point should include discussion of all points [EPA–HQ–OW–2019–0166; FRL–9991–72– source to groundwater from NPDES you wish to make. EPA will generally OW] program coverage, regardless of a not consider comments or comment hydrologic connection between the contents located outside of the primary Interpretive Statement on Application groundwater and jurisdictional surface submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or of the Clean Water Act National water. The Interpretive Statement other file sharing system). For Pollutant Discharge Elimination provides the EPA’s full analysis and additional submission methods, the full System Program to Releases of rationale supporting its interpretation EPA public comment policy, Pollutants From a Point Source to and is available below and at https:// information about CBI or multimedia Groundwater www.epa.gov/npdes/releases-point- submissions, and general guidance on source-groundwater. Concurrently with making effective comments, please visit AGENCY: Environmental Protection issuing its interpretation of the CWA, https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ Agency (EPA). the Agency is soliciting additional commenting-epa-dockets. ACTION: Notice of availability of public input regarding what may be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: interpretive statement and request for needed to provide further clarity and Scott Wilson, Office of Wastewater comment. regulatory certainty on this issue. Management, Water Permits Division SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection DATES: Comments must be received or (MC4203M), Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) is issuing an postmarked on or before June 7, 2019. Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Interpretative Statement addressing ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Washington, DC 20460; telephone whether the Clean Water Act (‘‘the identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– number: (202) 564–6087; email address: CWA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’) National Pollutant OW–2019–0166, at https:// [email protected]. Discharge Elimination System www.regulations.gov. Follow the online SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (‘‘NPDES’’) permit program applies to instructions for submitting comments. I. General Information releases of a pollutant from a point Once submitted, comments cannot be source to groundwater. This edited or removed from Regulations.gov. A. Does this action apply to me? Interpretative Statement reflects the EPA may publish any comment received Tribes, states, local governments, the EPA’s consideration of the public to its public docket. Do not submit regulated community, and citizens comments received in response to its electronically any information you interested in federal jurisdiction over February 20, 2018 Federal Register consider to be Confidential Business activities that may release pollutants to notice, as summarized immediately Information (CBI) or other information groundwater may be impacted by this below. Informed by those comments and whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Interpretive Statement. Potentially based on a holistic analysis of the Multimedia submissions (audio, video, affected entities include:

Category Examples of potentially affected entities

States, Tribes, and Territories ...... State, Tribal, and Territorial water quality agencies and NPDES permitting authorities that may need to de- termine whether sources of pollutants should be addressed by standards or permitting actions. Federal Agencies ...... Federal agencies with projects or other activities that may have releases that affect groundwater with con- nections to surface waters. Industry ...... Industries that may have releases that affect groundwater with connections to surface waters.

This table is not intended to be www.regulations.gov that will also II. February 2018 Request for Public exhaustive, but rather provides a guide contain copies of this Federal Register Comment for readers regarding entities likely to be notice and the Interpretive Statement. On February 20, 2018, EPA requested affected by EPA’s interpretation of the The public docket does not include public comment regarding whether EPA scope of the CWA NPDES program. Confidential Business Information (CBI) should review and potentially revise or Other types of entities not listed in the or other information whose disclosure is clarify its previous statements table could also be affected. If you have restricted by statute. The official public concerning the applicability of the CWA questions regarding the effect of this docket is the collection of materials that NPDES permit program to pollutant action on a particular entity, please is available for public viewing at the releases from point sources that reach consult the person listed in the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, jurisdictional surface waters via preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 groundwater that has a direct hydrologic CONTACT section. Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. connection to a jurisdictional surface B. How can I get copies of this The EPA Docket Center Public Reading water (the ‘‘direct hydrologic document and other related Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 connection theory’’). 83 FR 7126, 7128 information? You may access this p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding (Feb. 20, 2018). EPA asked for specific document electronically at https:// legal holidays. The telephone number comment on questions related to CWA www.epa.gov/npdes/releases-point- authority, other programs that address for the Public Reading Room is (202) source-groundwater or at https:// these releases, what issues needed 566–1744, and the telephone number for www.federalregister.gov. EPA has further clarification, and what format the Water Docket is (202) 566–2426. established an official public docket for EPA should pursue if it chose to revise receiving comments under Docket ID or clarify its position. Id. EPA received No. EPA–HQ– OW–2019–0166 which is over 50,000 comments in response to its accessible electronically at http:// request. Comments addressed the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16811

specific questions raised by EPA as well releases to groundwater within the Interpretive Statement is intended to as other pertinent topics. EPA received authority of the CWA. advise the public on how EPA interprets comments from a wide audience the relevant provisions of the CWA. III. Interpretive Statement representing state governments, local This Interpretive Statement conveys governments, tribes, industry, Interpretive Statement to EPA’s regional offices, states, and the public the Agency’s reading of the environmental organizations, academia, Subject: Application of the Clean applicability of sections 301 and 402 of and private citizens. See EPA Docket Water Act National Pollutant Discharge the CWA to releases of pollutants to No. EPA–HQ–OW–2018–0063, available Elimination System Program to Releases groundwater. It contains the Agency’s at https://www.regulations.gov/docket of Pollutants From a Point Source to most comprehensive analysis of the ?D=EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0063. Groundwater. Some commenters opposed the direct CWA’s text, structure, legislative From: Matthew Z. Leopold (signed hydrologic connection theory on history, and judicial decisions that has and dated April 12, 2019), General programmatic and legal grounds. These been lacking in prior Agency statements Counsel. comments raised concerns regarding the on this issue. EPA thus herein provides David P. Ross (signed and dated April activities that might be impacted if a clear guidance that balances the statute, 12, 2019), Assistant Administrator for NPDES permit is required for a release case law, and the need for clarity on the Water. to groundwater with a direct hydrologic scope of the CWA NPDES coverage, To: Regional Administrators, Regions connection to jurisdictional surface which has been recently expanded by I–X. water, including aquifer recharge, leaks judicial decision to potentially reach a This Interpretive Statement sets forth from sewage collection systems, septic new set of releases to groundwater that the Environmental Protection Agency’s system discharges, treatment systems EPA has not historically regulated in the (‘‘EPA’’ or ‘‘the Agency’’) interpretation such as constructed wetlands, spills and NPDES program. This Interpretive of the Clean Water Act (‘‘the CWA’’ or accidental releases, manure Statement provides important clarity to ‘‘the Act’’) National Pollutant Discharge management and coal ash impoundment inform future permitting decisions and Elimination System (‘‘NPDES’’) permit seepage. These commenters also raised other actions; it neither alters legal program’s applicability to releases of implementation concerns, including rights or obligations nor changes or how a direct hydrologic connection pollutants from a point source to creates law. would be defined and where monitoring groundwater that subsequently migrate In February 2018, the Agency sought or the point of compliance would be or are conveyed by groundwater to public comment on whether the NPDES determined. Commenters opposed to the jurisdictional surface waters. For the permit program applies to releases of direct hydrologic connection theory reasons explained below, EPA pollutants to groundwater and whether raised a range of legal arguments, concludes that the Act is best read as the Agency should revise or clarify its including that the theory was not excluding all releases of pollutants from position on this issue. See 83 FR 7126, grounded in the statutory text, pointing a point source to groundwater from 7128 (Feb. 20, 2018). Informed by those in particular to the absence of the term NPDES program coverage and liability comments and based on a holistic ‘‘groundwater’’ from sections under Section 301 of the CWA, analysis of the statute, its text, structure, authorizing the NPDES program and regardless of a hydrologic connection and legislative history, the Agency providing excerpts from the Act’s between the groundwater and a concludes that the best, if not the only, legislative history. jurisdictional surface water. See 33 reading of the CWA is that Congress Other commenters supported the U.S.C. 1311(a), 1342. intentionally chose to exclude all direct hydrologic connection theory, This Interpretive Statement is the first releases of pollutants to groundwater raising concerns based on the prior instance in which the Agency has from the NPDES program, even where examples of environmental impacts issued guidance focused exclusively on pollutants are conveyed to jurisdictional from releases to groundwater with a whether NPDES permits are required for surface waters via groundwater. direct hydrologic connection to releases of pollutants to groundwater Congress purposely structured the CWA jurisdictional surface water, and the that reach surface water. As described to give states the responsibility to importance of the authority to regulate further below, there is a mixed record of regulate such releases under state or prevent those releases pursuant to the prior Agency statements addressing this authorities. And, as discussed further CWA. These commenters asserted that issue and a split in the federal circuit below, other federal statutes contain the CWA’s goal of protecting surface courts regarding the application of the explicit provisions that regulate the waters encompassed releases to NPDES permit program to releases of release of pollutants into groundwater to groundwater that could reach pollutants to groundwater that reach provide significant federal authority to jurisdictional surface waters, and that jurisdictional surface waters. Recent address groundwater pollution not groundwater itself does not need to be judicial decisions addressing this issue provided by the NPDES permitting jurisdictional under the CWA in order contribute to an evolving and program. In accordance with Congress’s to regulate discharges that pass through increasingly confusing legal landscape intent, state and federal authorities are groundwater and ultimately may reach in which permitting and enforcing collectively available to provide surface water. agencies, potentially regulated parties, protection for ground and surface water EPA has considered these comments, and the public lack clarity on when the quality in those instances where direct as well as the text, structure and NPDES permitting requirement set forth CWA permitting authority is not legislative history of the CWA, and in sections 301 and 402 of the CWA may applicable. concludes that the interpretation be triggered by releases of pollutants to During the pendency of EPA’s review expounded in the Interpretative groundwater. The absence of a of the public comments received, two Statement below is the best, if not the dedicated EPA statement on the best petitions for certiorari were filed with only, reading of the CWA, is more reading of the CWA has generated the Supreme Court which posed the consistent with Congress’s intent than confusion in the courts and uncertainty question of whether the CWA applies to other interpretations of the Act, and best for EPA regional offices and states releases of pollutants from a point addresses the question of NPDES permit implementing the NPDES program, source to groundwater that migrates to program applicability for pollutant regulated entities, and the public. This surface water. See Petition for Writ of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16812 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Certiorari, Cty. of Maui v. Hawai’i I. Factual Background included aquifer recharge, leaks from Wildlife Fund, et al. (‘‘County of Maui’’), It is a fundamental principle of sewage collection systems, septic No. 18–260 (Aug. 27, 2018); Petition for hydrology that many groundwaters and system discharges, treatment systems Writ of Certiorari, Kinder Morgan surface waters are linked through the such as constructed wetlands, spills and Energy Partners, L.P. v. Upstate Forever hydrologic cycle. As the Agency has accidental releases, manure (‘‘Kinder Morgan’’), No. 18–268 (Aug. previously explained, the ‘‘hydrologic management, and coal ash 28, 2018). Consistent with the United cycle involves the continual movement impoundment seepage. States’ recommendation set forth in an of water between the earth and the Septic systems, for example, generally amicus brief filed at the Court’s request, atmosphere through evaporation and operate by discharging liquid effluent the Supreme Court recently granted the precipitation.’’ EPA 440/6–90–004, into perforated pipes buried in a leach petition for writ certiorari in County of Citizen’s Guide to Ground-Water field, chambers, or other special units Maui, an appeal of the Ninth Circuit’s Protection (1990). Rain and snow fall to designed to slowly release the effluent broad reading of the CWA. Cty. of Maui, the earth, and the resulting water runs into soil. The soil accepts, treats, and No. 18–260 (S. Ct. cert granted on Feb. into surface waters, evaporates, is disperses wastewater as it percolates 19, 2019). Issuing this statement absorbed by plant roots, or infiltrates the through the soil, but can in certain provides necessary clarity on the ground’s surface and moves downward circumstances ultimately enter Agency’s interpretation of the statute to the saturated zone, ‘‘the area in which groundwater. Over 26 million homes in given the mixed record of prior Agency all interconnected spaces in rocks and the United States employ septic systems statements and a split in the federal soil are filled with water,’’ also known to treat and dispose of household waste. circuit courts regarding this issue. as groundwater. Id. at 1. In areas where As the Agency has explained, The interpretation contained herein the saturated zone occurs at the ‘‘[r]ecycled water from a septic system differs from the direct hydrological ground’s surface, groundwater can help replenish groundwater connection theory, expressed in the discharges into surface waters, supplies; however, if the system is not United States amicus brief filed in the eventually evaporating into the working properly, it can contaminate Ninth Circuit County of Maui atmosphere to form precipitation and nearby waterbodies.’’ See EPA, Septic proceeding, and the theories advanced begin the hydrologic cycle again. Id. Systems and Surface Water, https:// by the parties in that case. The Agency The nature of the connection between www.epa.gov/septic/septic-systems-and- does not agree with the respondents’ groundwater and surface water is highly surface-water. But even well- and Ninth Circuit’s view that the CWA’s dependent on local climate, topography, functioning septic systems can contribute pollutants such as nutrients NPDES requirements can apply when a geology and the type of groundwater to groundwater. In addition to pollutant released from a point source formation at issue. Because of the often- household waste disposal, releases to migrates to navigable waters through slow movement of groundwater, groundwater are also employed as part groundwater. The differences between pollutants tend to remain concentrated of green infrastructure projects, the direct hydrological connection in the form of a plume. The speed and including the management of theory and today’s interpretation, and concentration at which pollutants move stormwater. These projects release EPA’s explanation for why the Agency through groundwater depend on the stormwater and recycled wastewater to is modifying and clarifying its amount and type of pollutant, its the ground to recharge depleted aquifers interpretation, are detailed below. While solubility and density, and the speed of and prevent or reduce runoff to surface the Agency disagrees with the reasoning the surrounding groundwater. The amount of a pollutant that is released waters. In arid western states of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in County experiencing low rainfall, states and of Maui, as well as the reasoning of the into groundwater that will eventually reach surface water also varies and is municipalities use such surface Fourth Circuit in its Kinder Morgan infiltration of recycled wastewaters not decision, for reasons discussed further dependent on both the characteristics of the pollutant itself as well as site- only to replenish groundwater supplies, below, it will nonetheless apply the but also to mitigate salt water intrusion decisions of those courts in their specific factors. In addition, the travel time and distance between polluted or abate land subsidence that can occur respective circuits until further where groundwater is overly depleted. clarification from the Supreme Court. groundwater and surface water can allow for the reduction of the impacts of To date, neither EPA nor states have See Hawai’i Wildlife Fund v. Cty. of generally required NPDES permits for Maui, 886 F.3d. 737 (9th Cir. 2018); contamination on the surface water due to natural processes. These processes these types of activities, and in the Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan select instances where NPDES permits Energy Partners, L.P., 887 F.3d 637, 652 include, for example, dilution, oxidation, biological degradation (which have been required for discharges from (4th Cir. 2018). Thus, the Agency’s a point source that reach jurisdictional interpretation set forth herein applies at can render pollutants less toxic), and the binding of materials to soil particles surface waters via groundwater, they this time only outside of the Fourth and have been based on site-specific factors. Ninth Circuits.1 such that pollutants are adsorbed by surrounding soil before reaching surface II. The Clean Water Act 1 Neither the Ninth Circuit decision nor Fourth water. Many commenters responding to The objective of the CWA is ‘‘to Circuit decision prohibits application of the restore and maintain the chemical, Agency’s interpretation expressed in this action in EPA’s February 2018 Federal Register those circuits. See National Cable Telecomms Ass’n notice identified activities that have not physical, and biological integrity of the v. Brand X internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967, 982 (2005) generally been required to obtain an Nation’s waters.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1251(a). In (‘‘A court’s prior judicial construction of a statute NPDES permit and might be impacted if order to meet that objective, Congress trumps an agency construction otherwise entitled to declared two national goals: (1) ‘‘that Chevron deference only if the prior court decision a permit were required for a release to holds that its construction follows from the groundwater with a hydrologic the discharge of pollutants into the unambiguous terms of the statute and thus leaves connection to jurisdictional surface navigable waters be eliminated by no room for agency discretion.’’). As explained 1985;’’ and (2) ‘‘that wherever herein, by not applying this interpretation in the waters. Activities listed by commenters Ninth and Fourth Circuits, the Agency is simply attainable, an interim goal of water choosing to maintain the status quo pending further the Agency intends to follow with notice and quality which provides for the clarification by the Supreme Court, after which time comment rulemaking. protection and propagation of fish,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16813

shellfish, and wildlife and provides for Where there is a discharge of a III. EPA’s Interpretation of the Clean recreation in and on the water be pollutant from a point source to a water Water Act National Pollutant Discharge achieved by July 1, 1983. . . .’’ Id. of the United States, termed herein a Elimination System Program’s § 1251(a)(1)–(2). The CWA approaches jurisdictional surface water, NPDES Applicability to Releases of Pollutants restoration and protection of the permits generally require permittees to to Groundwater That May Reach Nation’s waters as a partnership meet numeric or narrative effluent Jurisdictional Surface Waters between states and the federal limitations. Id. §§ 1311(a), 1342(a). The CWA’s definition of the government, assigning certain functions Effluent limitations are defined as ‘‘any ‘‘discharge of [a] pollutant,’’ 33 U.S.C. to each in striking the balance of the restriction established by a State or the 1311(a), includes ‘‘any addition of any statute’s overall regulatory scheme. Administrator on quantities, rates, and pollutant to navigable waters from any Congress expressly recognized the role concentrations of chemical, physical, point source,’’ 33 U.S.C. 1362(12)(A). that states would continue to exercise in biological, and other constituents which Because groundwater is not a ‘‘navigable preventing, reducing, and eliminating are discharged from point sources into water[],’’ see 33 U.S.C. 1362(7), the pollution: ‘‘It is the policy of Congress navigable waters, the waters of the CWA does not regulate discharges to to recognize, preserve, and protect the contiguous zone, or the ocean, including groundwater as such. But the question primary responsibilities and rights of schedules of compliance.’’ Id. of whether a ‘‘discharge’’ within the States to prevent, reduce, and eliminate § 1362(11). statute’s meaning has occurred when a pollution, to plan the development and Courts have observed that nonpoint pollutant is released from a point use (including restoration, reservation, source pollution—the broad category of source, travels through groundwater, and enhancement) of land and water other forms of water pollution that do and ultimately migrates to navigable resources[.]’’ Id. § 1251(b). As the not fall within the point source waters has generated confusion and Supreme Court has explained, the definition and not defined under the uncertainty.2 statute ‘‘anticipates a partnership Act—can be understood as ‘‘all water Commenters to EPA’s February 2018 between the States and the Federal quality problems not subject to Section Federal Register notice rely primarily Government,’’ toward a shared objective 402,’’ the portion of the statute requiring on one of two interpretive possibilities of restoring and maintaining the NPDES permits. Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. for addressing this question. One integrity of the Nation’s waters. Gorsuch, 693 F.2d 156, 166 (D.C. Cir. approach is reflected in the court of Arkansas v. Oklahoma, 503 U.S. 91, 101 1982). In addition to the NPDES appeals’ decisions in County of Maui (1992). permitting program, as another means of and Kinder Morgan. In those cases, the accomplishing the Act’s objective, To accomplish the Act’s broad courts interpreted Section 1362(12)(A) Congress reserved to states their national objective, Congress established as applying to discharges from a point exclusive role in regulating nonpoint respective roles for the federal source to navigable waters where the source pollution. Am. Farm Bureau government and for states. As one pollutant has travelled to the navigable Fed’n v. EPA, 792 F.3d 281, 289 (3rd means of accomplishing the Act’s water over or through another medium. Cir. 2015) (‘‘States in turn regulate objective, Congress prohibited any On this view, to qualify as a discharge nonpoint sources. There is significant ‘‘discharge of any pollutant’’ to ‘‘to navigable waters,’’ a discharge via input and oversight from the EPA, but ‘‘navigable waters’’ or to the groundwater must, in the Ninth Circuit, it does not regulate nonpoint sources ‘‘contiguous zone or the ocean’’ unless be ‘‘fairly traceable’’ back to the point directly.’’); see also Or. Natural Desert source and more than de minimis, Cty. it is authorized by the statute, generally Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 550 F.3d 778, by a NPDES permit. 33 U.S.C. 1311(a) of Maui, 886 F.3d at 746 n.2, and in the 780 (9th Cir. 2008) (‘‘The CWA’s Fourth Circuit, ‘‘must be sufficiently (‘‘Except as in compliance with this disparate treatment of discharges from section and sections 1312, 1316, 1317, connected to navigable waters,’’ Kinder point sources and nonpoint sources is Morgan, 887 F.3d at 651. Those courts 1328, 1342, and 1344 of this title, the an organizational paradigm of the discharge of any pollutant by any and commentators who have endorsed Act.’’). these variations on a similar approach person shall be unlawful.’’). The Act While the point and nonpoint source have differed in describing the type of defines navigable waters as ‘‘the waters distinction is the quintessential inquiry connection that qualifies under the of the United States, including the related to the discharge of pollutants to territorial seas.’’ Id. § 1362(7). EPA’s surface waters, as explained further CWA, but they generally agree that a regulations have never defined ‘‘waters below, this inquiry is not relevant as ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’ may occur of the United States’’ to include applied to groundwater. Rather, the text, when a pollutant has been added to a groundwater. structure, and legislative history of the navigable water via groundwater with The statute defines ‘‘discharge of a CWA demonstrate Congress’s intent to some connection to the navigable water. A second interpretive approach is pollutant’’ as ‘‘any addition of any leave the regulation of groundwater reflected in the Sixth Circuit’s decision pollutant to navigable waters from any wholly to the states under the Act. See, in Kentucky Waterways Alliance v. point source’’ or ‘‘any addition of any e.g., Village of Oconomowoc Lake v. pollutant to the waters of the contiguous Dayton Hudson Corporation, 24 F.3d Kentucky Utilities Co., 905 F.3d 925 (6th zone or the ocean from any point source 962, 965 (7th Cir. 1994) (‘‘[T]he Clean 2 This Interpretative Statement addresses the other than a vessel or other floating Water Act does not attempt to assert applicability of the CWA NPDES permitting craft.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1362(12). A point national power to the fullest . . . . requirements to the release of pollutants from a source is defined as ‘‘any discernible, Congress elected to leave [regulation of point source to groundwater that reach confined, and discrete conveyance, groundwaters] to state law[.]’’); Tenn. jurisdictional surface waters through hydrologically connected groundwater. It describes the movement including but not limited to any pipe, Clean Water Network v. TVA, 905 F.3d of pollutants to and through groundwater as having ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, 436, 439 (6th Cir. 2018) (‘‘[T]he CWA is been released from a point source. When the term discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, restricted to regulation of pollutants ‘‘discharge’’ is used herein to reference pollutants concentrated animal feeding operation, discharged into navigable waters . . . being added to a surface water by or through groundwater, this does not connote or imply that or vessel or other floating craft, from leaving the states to regulate pollution a ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’ or ‘‘discharge’’ has which pollutants are or may be of non-navigable waters’’ such as occurred under the CWA. See 33 U.S.C. 1362(12) discharged.’’ Id. § 1362(14). groundwater.). (‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’), 1362(16) (‘‘discharge’’).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16814 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Cir. 2018). In that case, the court read 26, 35 (1990) (‘‘[W]e are not guided by of any pollutant.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1342(a). the relevant statutory language as a single sentence or member of a The definition of discharge of a applying only where pollution has been sentence, but look to the provisions of pollutant refers to ‘‘any addition of any added directly to navigable waters ‘‘by the whole law, and to its object and pollutant to navigable waters from any virtue of a point-source conveyance,’’ policy.’’). While no single provision of point source,’’ or ‘‘any addition of any rather than through some other the CWA expressly addresses whether pollutant to the waters of the contiguous mechanism (such as groundwater). Id. at pollutants discharged from a point zone or the ocean from any point 934. Under this interpretation, source that reach jurisdictional surface source.’’ Id. § 1362(12) (emphasis sometimes described as the ‘‘terminal waters through groundwater are subject added). The Act thus explicitly refers to point source’’ theory, any intermediary to NPDES permitting requirements, the addition of any pollutant to three of between the point source and the when analyzing the statute in a holistic the four categories of waters referred to navigable water means that a pollutant fashion, Congress’s intent becomes throughout the statute; the addition of has not been discharged ‘‘to [the] evident: Congress did not intend for the any pollutant to groundwater—the navigable water[] from [the] point NPDES program to address any fourth category—is notably absent. source.’’ pollutant discharges to groundwater, Congress specified which sections of the EPA’s interpretation differs from these even where groundwater may be Act applied to which categories of two theories. The Agency’s view is that hydrologically connected to surface waters: groundwater, navigable waters, the best, if not the only, reading of the waters. Relevant legislative debate contiguous zone waters, and the ocean. statute is that all releases to confirms that Congress fully understood See, e.g., id. § 1254(a)(5) (setting forth groundwater are excluded from the the hydrologic connections that exist provisions aimed at monitoring the scope of the NPDES program, even between groundwater and surface water, quality of ‘‘the navigable waters and where pollutants are conveyed to yet chose this jurisdictional line to ground waters and the contiguous zone jurisdictional surface waters via strike the balance between state and and the oceans’’); § 1314(a)(2) (requiring groundwater. This interpretation is federal responsibility for protection of that the Administrator shall publish appropriately tailored to releases to the Nation’s waters. information on the ‘‘factors necessary to groundwater. On this view, because the Congress was explicit where it restore and maintain the chemical, CWA clearly evinces a purpose not to intended the Act to apply to physical, and biological integrity of all regulate groundwater, and because groundwater. It included references to navigable waters, ground waters, waters groundwater is extensively regulated groundwater in provisions aimed at of the contiguous zone, and the under other statutory regimes, discussed providing information, guidance, and oceans’’). In other words, ‘‘when further below in section VI.B, any funding to states, to enable them to Congress wanted certain provisions of circumstance in which a pollutant is regulate pollutant discharges to the CWA to apply to groundwater, it released from a point source to groundwater. Explicit reference to stated so explicitly.’’ Umatilla groundwater is categorically excluded groundwater, by contrast, is absent in Waterquality Protective Ass’n. v. Smith from the CWA’s coverage. The the operative regulatory sections of the Frozen Foods, 962 F. Supp. 1312, 1318 interposition of groundwater between a Act. Further, Congress refers to (D. Or. 1997). point source and the navigable water groundwaters exclusively as one unified Congress also elected to leave thus may be said to break the causal category of waters; the Act is devoid of groundwater out of the definition of chain between the two, or alternatively any indication that Congress viewed ‘‘effluent limitations’’ and related may be described as an intervening releases of pollutants to groundwater as provisions. Effluent limitations are cause. Today’s interpretation pertains to susceptible to different treatment under defined as ‘‘any restriction established releases to groundwater and thus leaves the Act based on the presence or by a State or the Administrator on in place the Agency’s case-by-case absence of a connection to surface quantities, rates, and concentrations of approach to determining whether water. The legislative history is chemical, physical, biological, and other pollutant releases to jurisdictional unambiguous that Congress was aware constituents which are discharged from surface waters that do not travel through of the potential for releases to point sources into navigable waters, the groundwater require an NPDES permit. groundwater to reach surface water, and waters of the contiguous zone, or the Whether a permit is required for such a nonetheless rejected proposed ocean, including schedules of release is necessarily a fact-specific amendments seeking to require NPDES compliance.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1362(11) inquiry, informed by the point source permits for discharges to groundwater. (emphasis added). Similarly, section definition and an analysis of intervening As with nonpoint source pollution, the 304(g), establishing the requirement that factors. statute’s structure and references to EPA publish certain guidelines to assist In the Agency’s view, the text, groundwater therein are reflective of states in implementing their NPDES structure, and legislative history of the Congress’s intent to leave regulation of program, provides that these guidelines CWA, as well as the better-reasoned releases of pollutants to groundwater will apply to control discharges to every judicial decisions, support the legal with the states. form of water except groundwater. See conclusion that Congress intended to A. The operative, enforceable id. § 1314(g) (providing that, for the exclude all releases of pollutants to provisions of the Clean Water Act that purposes of assisting states in carrying groundwater from NPDES program make up the NPDES permitting program out NPDES programs, EPA shall publish coverage, regardless of a hydrologic neither reference nor contemplate guidelines ‘‘to control and prevent the connection or conveyance to releases to groundwater. discharge into the navigable waters, the jurisdictional surface water. When The foundational definitional terms contiguous zone, or the ocean’’). attempting to interpret a statute, a court and provisions that establish the NPDES The absence of groundwater in the or agency cannot look to one single program extend only to discharges of sections of the statute foundational to word or phrase, but instead must look pollutants to navigable waters, waters of the NPDES permitting program is to the text as a whole. See Star the contiguous zone, and the ocean, i.e., meaningful: ‘‘[a] familiar principle of Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., discharges to jurisdictional surface statutory construction . . . is that a 137 S. Ct. 1002, 1010 (2017); Dole v. waters. The Act provides that a NPDES negative inference may be drawn from United Steelworkers of Am., 494 U.S. permit may be issued ‘‘for the discharge the exclusion of language from one

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16815

statutory provision that is included in to enforcement, title IV, the section on Several bills pending before the Committee other provisions of the same statute.’’ permits and licenses, then ground water is provided authority to establish Federally Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557, 578 suddenly missing. That is a glaring approved standards for groundwaters which (2006). Here, Congress elected not to inconsistency which has no point. If we do permeate rock, soil, and other subsurface formations. Because the jurisdiction include groundwater in the definition of not stop pollution of ground waters through seepage and other means, ground water gets regarding groundwaters is so complex and ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’—the critical into navigable waters, and to control only the varied from State to State, the Committee did definition in determining whether a navigable water and not the ground water not adopt this recommendation. NPDES permit is required—nor did makes no sense at all. The Committee recognizes the essential Congress include groundwater in the link between ground and surface waters and definition of ‘‘effluent limitations,’’ a 118 Cong. Rec. 10,666 (1972), 1 Leg. the artificial nature of any distinction. Thus primary vehicle in implementing the Hist. 589 (remarks of Rep. Aspin) the Committee bill requires in section 402 NPDES permitting requirement. See (emphasis added). The amendments that each State include in its program for were rejected by a vote of 86 to 34. Id. approval under section 402 affirmative Umatilla, 962 F. Supp. at 1318 controls over the injection or placement in (‘‘[T]hroughout the CWA, Congress at 597. The failure of a proposed wells of any pollutants that may affect appeared to have four categories of amendment ‘‘strongly militates against a ground water. This is designed to protect waters in mind—‘navigable waters,’ the judgment that Congress intended a ground waters and eliminate the use of deep contiguous zone, the ocean, and ‘ground result that it expressly declined to well disposal as an uncontrolled alternative waters.’ Only the first three of these . . . enact.’’ Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paying to toxic and pollution control. are included within the definition of Co., 419 U.S. 186, 200 (1974). The importance of groundwater in the ‘discharge of a pollutant,’ indicating that hydrological cycle cannot be underestimated. The only section in the extensive Although only about 21.5 percent of our Congress did not consider discharges to NPDES permitting provisions where domestic, industrial[,] [and] agricultural groundwater to be discharges that discharges to groundwater are supply comes directly from wells, it must be would trigger the NPDES contemplated is section 402(b)(1)(D), remembered that rivers, streams and lakes requirement.’’). which sets forth the requirements for themselves are largely supplied with water Congress’s intent to deliberately leave EPA approval of state programs to from the ground—not surface runoff. groundwater out of the definition of assume NPDES authority. This section S. Rep. No. 414, 92d Cong., 1st. Sess. ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’ is confirmed requires that to approve a state- at 73 (1971), 2 Legislative History of the by the legislative history of the Act. In submitted NPDES program, the Water Pollution Control Act a hearing before the House Public Works Administrator must determine that Amendments of 1972, at 1491 (emphasis Committee, Representative Leslie Aspin adequate authority exists within the added); see also 118 Cong. Rec. 10667 recommended that the term ‘‘ground state to ‘‘control the disposal of (1972), 1 Leg. Hist. 591 (remarks of Rep. water’’ be added to the operative NPDES pollutants into wells.’’ 33 U.S.C. Clausen) (opposing amendment to provisions so that discharges to 1342(b)(1)(D). The Fifth Circuit found require NPDES permits for discharges to groundwater also would be covered by this provision significant in rejecting groundwater and stating that the House the statute, explaining that ‘‘[s]ometimes EPA’s prior view that it had authority to committee had ‘‘recognized the need for a navigable water and ground-water regulate groundwater pollution resulting control of disposal of pollutants into source run into each other, or come from deep-well disposal, observing that wells in order to protect our ground close to each other, so that seepage from ‘‘[t]he simple requirement of waters. Therefore, in section polluted ground-water source could § 402(b)(1)(D) that state permit programs 402(b)(1)(D) we provided that the pollute the navigable water[;] . . . [t]o have adequate authority to issue permits Administrator shall approve a State say that the Federal Government can which control the disposal of pollutants program unless he determines that regulate the ecology of one, but not the into wells, which is not fleshed out authority does not exist to control the other, is silly and counterproductive.’’ elsewhere in the Act or mirrored in any disposal of pollutants into wells.’’). Water Pollution Control Legislation– of the sections setting forth the The legislative history makes evident 1971 (Proposed Amendments to Administrator’s powers, is entirely that Congress declined to extend Existing Legislation): Hearings before consistent’’ with Congress’s intention to coverage of the NPDES program to the H. Comm. on Pub. Works, 92nd ‘‘stop short of establishing federal discharges to groundwater and did so Cong. 793 (1971) (remarks of Rep. controls over groundwater pollution.’’ with the understanding that releases of Aspin) (emphasis added). Exxon Corp. v. Train, 554 F.2d 1310, pollutants to groundwater often reached Representative Aspin went on to 1324 (5th Cir. 1977). jurisdictional surface water and could propose an amendment to regulate affect its quality. For example, at a 1971 The legislative history of 402(b)(1)(D) groundwater under the NPDES program hearing before the Senate Public Works illuminates Congress’s intent in the by amending Title IV of the statute to Committee, then EPA Administrator CWA to require states, but not the include explicit references to William Ruckelshaus requested that federal government, to regulate deep groundwater and adding the term EPA be granted authority to regulate well disposal, which is consistent with ‘‘ground waters’’ to the definition of groundwater quality, explaining the its intent to leave regulation of all ‘‘discharge of pollutant’’ found in basis for that request as follows: pollutant discharges to groundwater to Section 502(12). He explained that these The only reason for the request for Federal amendments were necessary given the states. The Senate Committee on Public Works report explains that, like the authority over ground waters was to assure likelihood that polluted groundwater that we have control over the water table in House, the Senate Committee rejected would contaminate jurisdictional such a way as to insure that our authority surface waters: amendments to impose federal over interstate and navigable streams cannot regulation over groundwater but be circumvented, so we can obtain water The amendment brings ground water into included the provision in section quality by maintaining a control over all the the subject of the bill, into the enforcement 402(b)(1)(D) requiring states to maintain sources of pollution, be they discharged of the bill. Ground water appears in this bill programs to regulate deep well disposal directly into any stream or through the in every section, in every title except title IV. ground water table. It is under the title which provides EPA can to encourage states to carry out such study ground water. It is under the title regulation. Specifically, the report Water Pollution Control Legislation– dealing with definitions. But when it comes explained that: 1971 (Proposed Amendments to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16816 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Existing Legislation): Hearings before provisions described below are from POTWs, after adequate treatment, the H. Comm. on Pub. Works, 92nd reflective of Congress’s intent that states are returned to the groundwater. 33 Cong. 230 (1971) (statement of Hon. retain responsibility for addressing U.S.C. 1282(b)(2). This is an example of William Ruckelshaus, Administrator, groundwater pollution, and that the ‘‘Congress employ[ing] the power of the EPA) (emphasis added). This statement, federal government’s role would be to federal purse to encourage protection by before the same Senate Committee that provide resources, both in the form of the states of underground waters.’’ rejected amendments to extend the information, funding or other support, Exxon, 554 F.2d at 1323. Notably, this scope of the NPDES program at the time for states to take on this issue. These provision also links the quantity of of the passage of the Act, supports the resources and incentives for state available groundwater to ‘‘ecological conclusion that Congress was aware that programs, like the NPDES program, are preservation and recreational use of contaminated groundwater could reach an important component of the CWA, surface water bodies,’’ 33 U.S.C. jurisdictional surface waters and but one in which states retain regulatory 1282(b)(2), indicating Congress’s nonetheless chose to leave releases to decision-making and authority and elect decision to explicitly acknowledge and groundwater to state regulation in the to what extent they chose to utilize account for the connection between CWA paradigm. As the Fifth Circuit federal support. groundwater and jurisdictional surface observed in analyzing this legislative Groundwater is first mentioned in the waters when it chose to do so. history, throughout the ensuing debate statute in Title I, setting forth ‘‘Research Title III of the CWA, ‘‘Standards and ‘‘there is not the slightest hint that any and Related Programs.’’ This Title Enforcement,’’ also contains several Member thought the bill would grant contains several provisions directing provisions related to groundwater, each the Administrator any power to regulate EPA to address groundwater pollution of which set forth non-regulatory deep-well disposal or any other form of through information gathering and information gathering requirements and groundwater pollution. Instead, all the coordination with states, as opposed to provisions for guidance or funding to evidence points to precisely the through binding regulatory states. Section 304(a)(1) of the statute opposite understanding.’’ Exxon, 554 requirements found elsewhere in the requires that the Administrator develop F.2d at 1329; see also Kelley on behalf Act. See, e.g., 33 U.S.C. 1252, 1254. and publish water quality criteria, on, in of Michigan v. United States, 618 F. During the debate on the amendment to pertinent part, the kind and extent of Supp. 1103, 1107 (W.D. Mich. 1985) regulate discharges to groundwater identifiable effects on health and (acknowledging the ‘‘unmistakably clear through the NPDES program, welfare ‘‘which may be expected from legislative history . . . demonstrat[ing] Representative Donald H. Clausen, a the presence of pollutants in any body that Congress did not intend the Clean member of the House Committee on of water, including ground water.’’ 33 Water Act to extend federal regulatory Public Works and sponsor of the House U.S.C. 1314(a)(1). Section 304(a)(2) and enforcement authority over bill, noted in explaining his opposition requires that the Administrator develop groundwater contamination’’). to the amendment that ‘‘it was and publish information on the factors B. Explicit references to groundwater determined by the committee that there necessary to restore and maintain the are found in sections of the Act that was not sufficient information on chemical, physical, and biological serve to provide information, guidance, ground waters to justify the types of integrity of all navigable waters and assistance, or funding to states in controls that are required for navigable ground waters. Id. § 1314(a)(2). Neither regulating groundwater, and in sections waters.’’ 118 Cong. Rec. 10667 (1972), 1 Section 304(a)(1) nor section 304(a)(2), of the Act addressing state programs to Leg. Hist. 591 (remarks of Rep. Clausen). however, create compliance obligations control nonpoint source pollution. He explained that the Committee for individual dischargers. E. I. Du Pont The Act’s provisions explicitly recognized the need for additional de Nemours & Co. v. Train, 430 U.S. addressing groundwater can be placed information and research ‘‘both in 112, 119 n.6 (1977) (‘‘There is no into two groups. Analysis of these two determining the effect of underground provision for compliance with § 304, the groups of statutory references reinforces disposal of pollutants and the migration guideline section.’’). Rather, EPA’s role Congress’s intent to leave regulation of of such pollutions.’’ Id. Thus, the in executing Section 1314(a) is to groundwater—no matter how Committee drafted ‘‘broad research’’ provide guidance to states. City of hydrologically connected to surface powers for EPA under Title I of the Albuquerque v. Browner, 865 F. Supp. water—to the states. First, the Act statute, and, based on that research, in 733, 738 (D.N.M. 1993) (‘‘Section 304(a) contains forward-looking sections aimed the future, ‘‘Congress might have a basis of the Act requires EPA to develop at gathering information that could for determining the need and criteria for water quality that reflect the inform subsequent legislation and appropriately extending the controls of latest scientific knowledge, and to current state efforts to regulate H.R. 11896 as they apply to navigable provide those criteria to the States as discharges to groundwater. Indeed, ‘‘a waters to ground waters if needed.’’ Id. guidance.’’). As the Fifth Circuit clear pattern of congressional intent Congress also included non-regulatory observed, ‘‘the absence of other with respect to groundwaters emerges provisions focused on the protection of provisions in the Act . . . for upon close examination of those groundwater in Title II of the Act, in transforming this information into sections of the Act that deal with the which Congress authorized EPA to make enforceable limitations, strongly subject. That pattern is one of grants to states for the construction of suggests that Congress meant to stop information gathering and publicly owned treatment works short of establishing federal controls encouragement of state efforts to control (POTWs). Of relevance here, Congress over groundwater pollution, at least for groundwater pollution—but not of included a provision in section 202 the time being.’’ Exxon, 554 F.2d at direct federal control over groundwater authorizing increased funding for 1325. pollution.’’ See Exxon, 554 F.2d at 1322. construction of POTWs if states provide These provisions providing for Second, the Act contains sections a certificate indicating that the quantity support to states to regulate addressing state programs to manage of available groundwater will be groundwater arise in the context of nonpoint source pollution, evidencing ‘‘insufficient, inadequate, or unsuitable general informational support to states Congress’s intent to retain states’ lead for public use, including the ecological (sections 102, 104, and 304) and funding role with respect to both nonpoint preservation and recreational use of tied to protection of groundwater related source and groundwater pollution. The surface water bodies,’’ unless effluents to discharges from a specific type of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16817

facility (section 202). 33 U.S.C. 1252, comprehensive nonpoint source between isolated groundwater and 1254, 1282, 1314. Significantly, pollution control program.’’ Id. groundwater with a direct hydrologic Congress also explicitly included § 1329(h)(5)(D). In addition, section 319 connection to jurisdictional surface groundwater in provisions addressing contains a groundwater-specific grant waters. Viewed through this legal lens, states’ programs for control of nonpoint provision in 319(i), ‘‘Grants for the statements discussed below in source pollution. These provisions, Protecting Groundwater Quality,’’ for section (A) are highly relevant, and including sections 208, 304(f), and 319, the purpose of assisting states in supportive of the interpretation of the together make up the portions of the Act ‘‘carrying out groundwater quality statute explained in this Interpretive in which Congress addressed nonpoint protection activities’’ that will ‘‘advance Statement. source pollution—not through the State toward implementation of a A selection of these prior statements regulatory requirements, but through comprehensive nonpoint source identified by commenters are support for state programs. Id. §§ 1288, pollution control program.’’ Id. summarized below. Many commenters 1314(f), 1329. § 1329(i)(1). Activities that could be observed that lack of consistent and Section 208 of the statute is an supported by the grants include comprehensive direction from EPA on example of a provision where Congress activities ‘‘to protect the quality of this issue has led to inconsistent was concerned about nonpoint source groundwater and to prevent interpretation across the country and pollution impacting groundwater, contamination of groundwater from has created uncertainty for regulated which it was aware could also reach nonpoint sources of pollution.’’ Id. entities and the public. Even where the surface water. That section requires that (emphasis added). This and the other Agency stated an interpretation, the states submit to EPA ‘‘areawide waste provisions discussed in this section, Agency has not issued regulations or treatment management plans,’’ which aimed at equipping states with guidance focused clearly on this issue. must include a process to control the information and funding needed to Thus, courts have attempted to fill this disposal of pollutants on land or in enact programs to protect groundwater void, but have issued conflicting subsurface excavation to ‘‘protect both quality, stand in contrast to the sections decisions about whether these releases ground and surface water quality.’’ Id. of the statute, discussed above, that set are covered by the CWA. EPA’s § 1288(a), (b)(2)(K) (emphasis added). forth enforceable limitations as well as adoption of a precise position on this The statute provides that areawide the NPDES permitting and related issue and thorough explanation of the waste treatment management plans shall provisions and contain no explicit reasons why the Agency’s position is include a process to identify mine- mention of groundwater. the best, if not the only, reading of the related sources of pollution, such as CWA will provide certainty to EPA staff, surface and underground mine runoff, IV. Comments Regarding Prior Agency state permitting authorities, and and the plans must also set forth Statements regulated entities as to how EPA procedures and methods to control The Agency has for the first time interprets the statute. those sources of runoff. Id. § 1288(a), conducted a public process, initiated by A. Commenters’ Citation of Examples of (b)(2)(G). Thus, Congress viewed EPA’s February 2018 Federal Register Prior Agency Statements Indicating underground mine runoff, i.e., seepage notice, regarding prior Agency Discharges to Groundwater Are Outside to groundwater that could reach statements addressing this issue, and, in the Scope of the NPDES Program jurisdictional surface waters, as best conjunction with that process, has dealt with for CWA purposes through an conducted a more-substantial review of In addressing EPA’s request for areawide waste treatment management its prior statements than previously comment on potential clarification of plan for controlling nonpoint source undertaken by the Agency. As the the Agency’s prior statements, pollution, rather than through the Agency stated in that notice, ‘‘most of commenters pointed to certain instances regulatory program under NPDES. See these statements were collateral to the in which the Agency stated that also id. § 1314(f) (directing the Agency central focus of a rulemaking or discharges to groundwater are not to issue guidelines for identifying and adjudication.’’ 83 FR at 7127. In fact, subject to the CWA, without any evaluating types of nonpoint sources of most of these statements do not include qualification. For example, in a 1973 pollutants, including ‘‘the disposal of any explanation for the Agency’s EPA Office of General Counsel pollutants in wells or in subsurface previous interpretation of the Act. As memorandum, EPA considered whether excavations’’). described above, EPA is now clearly certain discharges to wells are subject to Congress’s intent to treat releases to stating its position on this issue in a the NPDES program and stated that groundwater as analogous to nonpoint comprehensive manner that is ‘‘[u]nder § 502(12) the term ‘discharge of sources, subject to control by states, is consistent with the text and legislative a pollutant’ is defined so as to include further evidenced by analyzing section history of the CWA. only discharges into navigable waters 319 of the statute, entitled ‘‘Nonpoint As commenters pointed out, there (or the contiguous zone or the ocean). source management programs.’’ Section have been a range of prior statements by Discharges into ground waters are not 319 was added to the statute in 1987 the Agency that align with the legal included.’’ Memorandum from the U.S. and includes requirements and related position articulated in this Interpretive EPA Acting Deputy Gen. Counsel to the funding provisions directed at states to Statement. For example, in a number of U.S. EPA Region IX Reg’l Counsel 2–3 control pollution from nonpoint sources documents discussed below, the Agency (Dec. 13, 1973). The Agency did not to navigable waters. Id. § 1329 has stated simply that discharges to include any language indicating that, at (codifying Water Quality Act of 1987, groundwater are not subject to the CWA, that time, it viewed groundwaters as Pub. L. 100–4, 319, 100 Stat. 7, 52). without any qualification. The Agency distinguishable based on their Section 319 authorizes the has reexamined these statements in light connection to jurisdictional surface Administrator to give priority in making of what the Agency views as the more waters. Notably, this memorandum was grants where States have implemented appropriate legal question at issue issued close-in-time to the passage of or are proposing to implement programs here—whether the CWA categorically the CWA amendments creating the to ‘‘carry out ground water quality excludes releases of pollutants to NPDES program and reflects the protection activities which the groundwater from coverage under the Agency’s initial view of the statute’s Administrator determines are part of a Act—without drawing a distinction text, which has not been amended in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16818 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

pertinent part since that time. See also that ‘‘[w]hile a number of States have hydrological connection, i.e., the ground Ground Water Pollution from incorporated ground water discharges water) that needs an NPDES permit. Subsurface Excavations, EPA–430/9– into their NPDES permits and Id. at 1–7. The NPDES Manual does 73–012 at 131–35 (1973) (EPA report pretreatment requirements, there is no not elaborate on this statement or explaining that subsurface excavations, national requirement to do so’’). provide guidance on how this e.g., lagoons, pits, basins, etc., used to Commenters also cited to instances in interpretation should be implemented. store or dispose of pollutants can permitting proceedings where EPA contaminate groundwater and that indicated that NPDES permits are not B. Commenters’ Citation of Examples of contamination can reach surface waters, required for discharges to groundwater, Prior Agency Statements Indicating without mentioning regulation under without also referring to the direct Discharges to Groundwater With a NPDES as one of several identified hydrologic connection theory. In a Direct Hydrologic Connection to Surface methods to address this contamination). response to comments document on an Water are Subject to NPDES Commenters also pointed out that, in NPDES pesticide general permit, EPA Requirements its brief in Kelley on behalf of Michigan explained that one commenter As described in the February 2018 v. United States, the United States requested that the permit ensure that Federal Register notice soliciting public argued that discharges to groundwater, discharges do not affect groundwater. comment on this issue, EPA has per se, are excluded from the CWA, and EPA, Response to Public Comments, articulated its previous position that applied that view to discharges to EPA NPDES Pesticide General Permit at discharges to groundwater with a direct groundwater with a direct hydrologic xxii (Oct. 31, 2011). EPA responded and hydrologic connection to jurisdictional connection to jurisdictional surface clarified that ‘‘the Clean Water Act’s surface waters are subject to the CWA. waters. 618 F. Supp. 1103 (W.D. Mich. NPDES program, under which EPA 83 FR at 7127 (‘‘EPA has previously 1985). In that case, Michigan alleged issued the [pesticide general permit], is stated that pollutants discharged from that certain toxic chemicals were for the control of discharges to waters of point sources that reach jurisdictional released into the ground at a U.S. Coast the United States. Generally, discharges surface waters via groundwater or other Guard facility, that the chemicals to groundwater are not regulated under subsurface flow that has a direct contaminated the groundwater the NPDES program; rather, discharges hydrologic connection to the underlying the facility, and that the to groundwater are regulated under Safe jurisdictional water may be subject to plume of contamination migrated and Drinking Water Act along with any CWA permitting requirements.’’). was discharged to a jurisdictional surface water. In its brief, the United additional protections that may be Commenters noted that the Agency has, States argued that ‘‘Michigan cannot incorporated in FIFRA regulations.’’ Id. in several public documents, including make these claims under the Clean EPA did not qualify this statement with rulemakings, permits, letters, and briefs Water Act since the Act does not any discussion of discharges to filed on EPA’s behalf by the Department regulate pollutant discharges onto soil groundwater with a direct hydrologic of Justice, indicated that NPDES permits or into underlying ground water.’’ U.S. connection to surface water. See also are required for discharges to Mem. In Supp. of Rule 12(b) Mot. & In EPA, Fact Sheet, Draft General Permits groundwater that have a direct The Alternative for Summ. J. at 5, Kelley for Stormwater Discharges Systems from hydrologic connection to jurisdictional on behalf of Michigan v. United States, Small Municipal Separate Sewer surface waters. See, e.g., id. (listing No. G83–630, 618 F. Supp. 1103 (W.D. Systems in Massachusetts at 18 (Sept. Agency statements in several Mich. 1985). 30, 2014) (‘‘NPDES permits are rulemaking preambles); Federal Commenters also pointed to a policy applicable for point source discharges to Appellees’ Response Brief at 48, Greater document issued during the Clinton waters of the U.S.; discharges to Yellowstone Coal. v. Lewis, No. 09– administration which explicitly stated groundwater are not addressed in the 35729, 628 F.3d 1143 (9th Cir. 2010) that it was unclear whether the CWA NPDES program and as such are not (‘‘Groundwater is not directly regulated regulated discharges to groundwater addressed by this permit.’’). by the Clean Water Act . . . . with a direct hydrologic connection to Finally, commenters also noted that Nonetheless, EPA has consistently jurisdictional surface water. President EPA has not comprehensively explained interpreted the Act to cover discharges Clinton’s Clean Water Initiative sought its previous interpretation in a key into groundwater that have a direct to update the CWA and stated that it document that permit writers and hydrologic connection to surface was ‘‘presently unclear whether a regulated entities frequently look to for water.’’); Final General NPDES Permit discharge to the ground or to ground guidance on the NPDES program. EPA’s for Concentrated Animal Feeding water that rapidly moves into surface NPDES Permit Writers’ Manual (NPDES Operations (CAFO) in Idaho ID–G–01– water through a ‘direct hydrologic Manual) describes the statutory and 0000, 62 FR 20,178 (1997) (‘‘[T]he Clean connection’ between the point of regulatory framework of the NPDES Water Act does not give EPA the discharge and the surface water is program and examines technical authority to regulate groundwater subject to NPDES regulation.’’ President considerations for developing NPDES quality through NPDES permits. The Clinton’s Clean Water Initiative at 104, permits. U.S. EPA, NPDES Permit only situation in which groundwater EPA 800–R–94–001 (Feb. 1994). To Writers’ Manual vii (2010). While the may be affected by the NPDES program address this, EPA suggested that the NPDES Manual is designed as a is when a discharge of pollutants to ‘‘CWA should be amended to . . . comprehensive reference on the surface waters can be proven to be via [c]onfirm and clarify that a point source program for permit writers, it only groundwater . . . the permit discharge to ground or to ground water briefly mentions EPA’s prior requirements . . . are intended to that has a direct hydrological interpretation: protect surface waters which are connection with surface waters is contaminated via a groundwater The CWA does not give EPA the authority subject to regulation as a NPDES point to regulate ground water quality through (subsurface) connection.’’); EPA, source discharge . . . .’’ Id. at 105; see NPDES permits. If a discharge of pollutants Memorandum from Director, Office of also EPA 100–R–93–001 at 1–27, Final to ground water reaches waters of the United Solid Waste to Waste Management Comprehensive State Ground Water States, however, it could be a discharge to the Division Directors (1995) (‘‘In addition, Protection Guidance (Dec. 1992) (stating surface water (albeit indirectly via a direct such groundwater discharges are subject

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16819

to CWA jurisdiction, based on EPA’s extensive legal arguments both EPA’s interpretation here departs interpretation that discharges from point supporting the Agency’s previous direct from the position the Agency took in the sources through groundwater where hydrologic connection theory, and as a County of Maui amicus brief on the there is a direct hydrologic connection basis for rejecting that theory. Some application of the definition of to nearby surface waters of the United commenters recommending the Agency ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’ to releases of States are subject to the prohibition retain the direct hydrologic connection pollutants into groundwater. The against unpermitted discharges, and theory cited to the purpose of the statute amicus brief, as well as the commenters thus are subject to the NPDES and the definition of ‘‘discharge of a urging the Agency to retain the direct permitting requirements.’’); EPA, In the pollutant’’ as requiring that the Agency hydrologic connection theory, failed to Matter of Bethlehem Steel Corp, UIC construe the statute as covering releases take into account Congress’s unique Appeal Nos. 85–8 & 86–13 (1989) (EPA of pollutants to groundwater that reach treatment of groundwater in the CWA ‘‘declines to exercise CWA jurisdiction jurisdictional surface waters through a when interpreting the definition of over injection wells (except those that direct hydrologic connection. They discharge of a pollutant. The Agency’s inject into ground water with a argued that the definition of ‘‘discharge previous interpretation that a release of physically and temporally direct of a pollutant’’ is broad, and asks only a pollutant from a point source to hydrologic connection to surface whether the pollutant travels from a groundwater that is conveyed to water).’’). However, each of these point source to a jurisdictional surface jurisdictional surface waters could be statements is included in preambles to water; if so, a NPDES permit is required. the functional equivalent of a release to rules or in permits where the complex Commenters in favor of the Agency’s jurisdictional surface waters thus was jurisdictional issue of releases of rejection of the direct hydrologic premised on viewing releases of pollutants to groundwater were not the connection theory asserted that the pollutants to groundwater through the central focus. In other words, these theory is atextual and inconsistent with NPDES point source paradigm rather statements were collateral to the central the overall statutory scheme and than viewing such releases in light of issues addressed in the documents in legislative history of the Act. Some of Congress’s specific approach to which they are included. these commenters offered an alternative groundwater under the CWA. Commenters highlighted one theory of jurisdiction that limits the In arguing that the direct hydrologic preamble—to a proposed rule that scope of the CWA to discharges of a connection theory is consistent with the applied to only one category of pollutant from a point source or series Act, the Agency’s County of Maui dischargers—in which EPA discussed of point sources that carry the pollutant amicus brief, like some commenters, its prior interpretation in some detail. In directly into the water of the United recognized that Congress drew a line a proposed rule revising the NPDES States. In other words, they asserted that between regulation of discharges to permit requirements and effluent pollution must pass through an groundwater and regulation of limitation guidelines for CAFOs, EPA unbroken chain of point sources for a discharges to jurisdictional surface proposed national requirements for ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’ to have water. EPA’s amicus brief asserted that certain CAFOs to address potential occurred, sometimes referred to as the Maui ‘‘emphatically is not a case about discharges to jurisdictional surface ‘‘terminal point source’’ theory. The the regulation of groundwater’’ and waters via groundwater that has a direct Agency’s position articulated herein ‘‘[i]nstead it is about the regulation of hydrologic connection to jurisdictional differs from both the direct hydrologic discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States.’’ Brief for the United surface waters. 66 FR 2960 (Jan. 12, connection theory and the terminal 2001). In the preamble to this proposed States as Amicus Curiae at 21. However, point source theory, as explained below. rule, EPA explained its interpretation of this approach takes insufficient account EPA believes its reading of the statute— the Act as applying to these types of of the explicit treatment of groundwater which is based on the statute as a whole discharges. Id. at 3015–20. Notably, EPA under the CWA, as reflected in the and not a single definition viewed in did not engage in a detailed analysis of statute’s text, structure, and legislative isolation—is most consistent with the Act’s text, structure, and legislative history. In the Agency’s view, releases Congress’s intent. It is also carefully history in the 2001 preamble that has to groundwater should not be tailored to the specific issue of releases now led the Agency to the position distinguished based on the connection of pollutants to groundwater which has articulated in this Interpretive (or lack thereof) between groundwater generated confusion among courts, Statement. Moreover, EPA did not and jurisdictional surface waters. The finalize these proposed requirements for states, regulated entities, and the public. text, a holistic analysis of the statute, certain CAFOs and explained in the Many environmental organizations and the legislative history indicate that preamble to the final rule that ‘‘the that commented on EPA’s February Congress’s intent was to categorically factors affecting whether such 2018 Federal Register notice urged the exclude groundwater from coverage of discharges are occurring . . . are so Agency to retain the direct hydrologic the permitting provisions of the Act and variable from site to site that a national connection theory articulated in prior to leave regulation of groundwater to the technology-based standard is Agency statements. The Agency notes states, irrespective of the type of inappropriate.’’ 68 FR 7176, 7216 (Feb. that it is maintaining several elements of groundwater formation and whether it 12, 2003).3 that position—that groundwater is not a allows for discharge to jurisdictional water of the United States and that surface waters or the directness of such C. Rationale for the Agency’s Rejection groundwater is not a point source. The a conveyance. The direct hydrologic of Commenters’ Alternative Agency’s brief before the Ninth Circuit connection theory upsets the careful Interpretations of the CWA in the County of Maui proceeding stated balance that Congress struck between Commenters to EPA’s February 2018 that it ‘‘[did] not contend that the states and the federal government by Federal Register notice offered groundwater is a point source, nor [did pushing a category of pollutant it] contend that groundwater is a water discharges from the state-regulated 3 In reviewing this regulation, the Second Circuit of the United States regulated by the paradigm to the point source, federally did note that NPDES authorities still had the power Clean Water Act.’’ Brief for the United to impose groundwater related requirements on a controlled, program. case-by-case basis. Waterkeeper Alliance v. EPA, States as Amicus Curiae at 2, Cty. Of The County of Maui amicus brief, and 399 F.3d 486, 514 & n. 26, 515 (2d Cir. 2005). Maui, No. 15–17447, 886 F.3d. 737. some commenters urging that EPA

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16820 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

retain the direct hydrologic connection unnecessary to posit a categorical rule CWA to leave regulation of all releases theory, also erred by improperly with respect to fact patterns such as of pollutants to groundwater to states, in equating releases of pollutants to those described in footnote 4 in this pursuit of the overall objective of the groundwater with releases of pollutants Interpretive Statement because, as statute. In addition, views about the from a point source to surface water that explained above, the statute general purpose of the Act should not occur above ground. The statute and its categorically excludes releases to and override Congress’s evident intent not to legislative history indicate that Congress from groundwater from the permitting regulate discharges to groundwater of intended for all discharges to requirements of the Act irrespective of any kind. As the Supreme Court has groundwater to be left to state regulation the directness of the hydrological explained, ‘‘the textual limitations upon and control, ending any potential for connection.5 a law’s scope are no less a part of its federal permitting obligations once the Finally, the County of Maui amicus ‘purpose’ than its substantive pollutant enters groundwater, regardless brief and some commenters improperly authorizations.’’ Rapanos v. United of any future contribution of any rely on the broad goal of the Act to States, 547 U.S. 715, 752 (2006) modicum of pollutants to jurisdictional justify applying the definition of (plurality op.). Further, excluding these surface waters. Thus, the statute does ‘‘discharge of a pollutant’’—which releases from the scope of the NPDES not support analogizing pollutants exclusively addresses point source program does not equate to no discharged from a point source to discharges to navigable, ocean, and protection for ground and surface groundwater that migrate to contiguous zone waters—to releases of waters; rather, as described further jurisdictional surface water to pollutants to groundwater. The brief below, states will continue to exercise ‘‘discharges of pollutant[s] [that] have argues that reading the statute as their authority over these waters as will moved from a point source to navigable excluding discharges from a point other federal programs. waters over the surface of the ground or source to groundwater ‘‘would allow Some commenters placed significance by some other means.’’ Brief for the dischargers to avoid responsibility on a statement in the government’s United States as Amicus Curiae at 14, simply by discharging pollutants from a County of Maui amicus brief that the Cty. Of Maui, No. 15–17447, 886 F.3d. point source into jurisdictional surface direct hydrologic connection theory was 737. waters through any means that was not the Agency’s ‘‘longstanding position.’’ As the Act’s legislative history in direct.’’ Brief for the United States as Brief for the United States as Amicus particular demonstrates, Congress Amicus Curiae at 20. This position fails Curiae at 5. However, as the full suite recognized the complex and highly- to give sufficient weight to the structure of public comments reveal, there have localized nature of releases to and legislative history of the statute in fact been a range of prior statements groundwater, that additional research indicating that Congress intended in the by the Agency, some of which align and understanding of the interactions with this Interpretive Statement, that between surface and groundwater are regulations for concentrated animal feeding the Agency has now considered in its needed, and determined that states, operations (CAFOs) prohibit discharges from analysis for the first time. Lack of rather than EPA, are best positioned to manure storage lagoons unless the lagoon is consistent and comprehensive direction properly designed and the discharge is the result of from EPA on this issue has led to regulate such releases. Today’s a 24-hour, 25-year storm. See 40 CFR part 412. EPA interpretation pertains to releases to has taken action against CAFOs with discharges inconsistent interpretation across the groundwater and thus leaves in place that do not satisfy these requirements. See United country and has created uncertainty for the Agency’s case-by-case approach to States v. Meadowvale Dairy, No. 5:16-cv-4016, regulated entities. Even where the ECF–2, at *10 (N.D. Iowa 2017) (Complaint alleging Agency has stated an interpretation, the determining whether pollutant releases that an ‘‘inspection at Meadowvale North . . . to jurisdictional surface waters that do observed manure laden process wastewater flowing Agency has not issued regulations nor not travel through groundwater require from the northern portion of [the basin] into formal guidance focused on and an NPDES permit. Whether a permit is Unnamed Tributary East’’). explaining the basis for the position. As required for such a release is necessarily 5 The Agency recognizes that the Sixth Circuit noted above, this Interpretive Statement recently adopted and applied a rationale similar to contains the Agency’s most a fact-specific inquiry, informed by the the terminal point source theory. In Kentucky point source definition and an analysis Waterways Alliance, the Sixth Circuit rejected comprehensive analysis of the CWA’s of intervening factors. EPA and environmental groups’ argument that coal ash text, structure, legislative history and authorized states have exercised that ponds that released pollutants into groundwater judicial decisions that has been lacking 4 which flowed through a karst network to a in prior Agency statements on this judgment on a case-by-case basis. It is jurisdictional surface water constituted a discharge of a pollutant under the statute. 905 F.3d 925 (6th issue. In so doing, today’s statement 4 For example, in the 2012 criminal case against Cir. 2018). The environmental groups argued that establishes a firm legal foundation for Robert Armstrong and RCA Oil and Gas LLC, the the releases required a NPDES permit, relying on regulatory decisions by EPA and states indictment states that the defendant ‘‘using a both the direct hydrologic connection theory, which administering CWA programs and clear backhoe, breached the wall of the reservoir causing the court rejected as contrary to the text and the wastewater to flow into Rockcamp Run.’’ United structure of the statute, and, in the alternative, guidance for the courts. States v. Armstrong, No. 2:12–cr–243, ECF–1, at *4 asserting that the discharge of coal ash pollutants Some commenters to EPA’s February (S.D. Ohio 2013). In the 2012 criminal case against from the karst formation was itself a point source 2018 Federal Register notice Chamness Technology Inc., Attachment A to the discharge. On the latter claim, the court determined highlighted certain factual scenarios, Plea Agreement states that a hose from a lagoon to that neither groundwater itself, nor groundwater such as movement of groundwater a rotating water irrigator became unhooked and was flowing through a karst network, is a point source. observed ‘‘discharging dark, foamy, and odiferous Id. at 932–33. The court recognized that through a sub-surface lava tube or karst liquid into a wooded draw which flowed groundwater ‘‘may indeed be a ‘conveyance,’ ’’ but network that may resemble formations downward into the Palestine Creek.’’ United States concluded that ‘‘karst . . . is neither discernible, which courts have found to be point v. Chamness Tech., Inc., No. 4:14–cr–149, ECF–8– discrete, nor confined.’’ Id. at 933. Application of sources. See Nat’l Groundwater Assoc. 1, at *2 (S.D. Iowa 2013). In the 2014 criminal case the Agency’s interpretation of the Act described against Freedom Industries, the Stipulation of Facts herein—that all releases from a point source to Comments at 2 (describing certain in the Plea Agreement states that the chemical at groundwater that reach a jurisdictional surface groundwater formations, such as ‘‘lava issue leaked from a tank, ‘‘breached containment, water are, as a legal matter, categorically outside of tube openings, cave or conduit openings including a dike wall, ran down the riverbank and the NPDES program—leads to the same result as the (including karst conduit networks), or discharged into the Elk River at two discernible, Sixth Circuit, but based on a different rationale. confined and discrete channels or fissures.’’ United Nothing in the Kentucky Waterwaters Alliance other geologic features’’ that ‘‘function States v. Freedom Industries, Inc., No. 2:14–cr–275, decision would preclude application of the as natural pipelines capable of ECF–9, at *23–*24 (S.D. W.Va. 2016). EPA’s Agency’s interpretation within the Sixth Circuit. transporting water, effluents, and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16821

contaminants from one point to another groundwater is hydrologically legislative history of the Act gives not point and behave similarly to manmade connected to jurisdictional surface ‘‘the slightest hint that any Member pipes conveying fluids’’). In accordance waters. Other courts, including the thought the bill would grant the with EPA’s interpretation of the statute, Fourth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Administrator any power to regulate because releases of pollutants from a Appeals, have cited the broad, deep-well disposal or any other form of point source to groundwater are protective goals of the Act, and applied groundwater pollution.’’ Id. at 1329 categorically excluded from the scope of in isolation the definition of ‘‘discharge (emphasis added). the NPDES program, even if those of a pollutant’’ to releases of pollutants In Rice v. Harken Exploration Co., the pollutants reach jurisdictional surface from point sources to groundwater that Fifth Circuit addressed a factual waters, it is immaterial whether migrate to jurisdictional surface waters. scenario where the plaintiff’s Oil pollutants subsequently travel through Upon this premise, these courts have Pollution Act (OPA) claim was groundwater in a manner resembling then found that, upon meeting the premised on pollutant discharges to point source discharges. EPA’s position courts’ respective tests for assessing the groundwater migrating to and polluting is that, in accordance with the best, if connectedness between the groundwater jurisdictional surface waters. In not the only, interpretation of the and jurisdictional surface waters, such analyzing the merits of that claim, the statute, releases to groundwater are not releases are subject to NPDES court relied on Exxon to determine subject to the point source analysis, i.e., requirements. The Agency believes that whether the OPA’s requirements the CWA Section 301(a) prohibition, these interpretations departed from the governing discharges to ‘‘navigable because the statute does not cover such text and history of the CWA, and finds waters of the United States’’ apply to releases. Accordingly, groundwater the decisions of the Fifth and Seventh discharges to groundwater that reach cannot be deemed a point source. Circuit more persuasive and true to such surface waters. There, the plaintiffs Given the indications in both the text Congress’s intent in enacting the statute. alleged that groundwater under their of the statute as well as the legislative The decisions of other circuits which land was contaminated by pollutants history that Congress intended to have taken a different approach than the discharged by Harken Exploration’s oil categorically leave regulation of Fourth and Ninth Circuit—taking a and gas operations, and that those groundwater to the states, these factual holistic view of the statute and pollutants seeped from the groundwater distinctions are of no legal significance. accounting for the legislative history— into several bodies of surface water, in Applying the commenters’ theory that are informative. In the 1977 Exxon v. violation of the OPA. Rice v. Harken releases to groundwater are excluded Train decision, the Fifth Circuit Exploration Co., 250 F.3d 264, 265–66, because the physical characteristics of conducted an extensive analysis of the 270 (5th Cir. 2001). groundwater are dissimilar to what text, structure, and legislative history of Due to the lack of case law construing some courts have found to be point the statute, and held that the Act did not the term ‘‘navigable waters of the United States’’ in the OPA context, the court’s sources is unnecessary. The numerous give EPA authority to regulate certain analysis focused on cases construing the provisions in the Act linking releases of pollutants into groundwater. scope of the CWA, given the court’s groundwater to nonpoint source There, EPA had asserted authority to view that the use of the term ‘‘navigable pollution, and the absence of discussion require NPDES permits for subsurface waters’’ in both statute was analogous. of groundwater in any of the regulatory disposal into deep wells where an entity Id. at 267–68 (‘‘The legislative history of sections of the CWA, provide ample already had a permit for surface the OPA and the textually identical support that in establishing the NPDES discharge. 554 F.2d at 1319. The Agency did not argue that a permit was required definitions of ‘navigable waters’ in the program Congress intended to leave because disposal was an addition of a OPA and the CWA strongly indicate that regulation of all releases of pollutants to pollutant to ‘‘navigable waters,’’ id. at Congress generally intended the term groundwater, akin to nonpoint source 1318 n.17, but instead that its authority ‘navigable waters’ to have the same pollution, to the states.6 was premised on the presence of an meaning in both the OPA and the V. Case Law existing jurisdictional surface water CWA.’’). The court recognized that ‘‘[i]n Exxon, we held that the legislative Over the 46-year history of the CWA, discharge, id. at 1320. In analyzing the history of the CWA belied any intent to numerous courts have grappled with the question of EPA’s authority over deep impose direct federal control over any question that EPA addresses with this well disposal, the court noted that ‘‘EPA has not argued that the wastes disposed phase of pollution of subsurface interpretation. Many courts, including of into wells here do, or might, ‘migrate’ waters.’’ Id. at 269. However, the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuit from groundwaters back into surface acknowledging that Exxon addressed Courts of Appeals, have looked to both waters that concededly are within its the specific question of CWA regulation the language of the Act and the regulatory jurisdiction,’’ and thus, the of deep-well disposal, the court legislative history and determined that court ‘‘express[ed] no opinion on what explained that ‘‘[t]his Court has not yet the Act excludes from its regulatory the result would be if that were the state decided whether discharges into requirements all pollutant discharges to of facts.’’ Id. at 1312 n.1. groundwater that migrate into protected groundwater, regardless of whether that However, in holding that EPA’s surface waters are covered’’ under the assertion of authority was unsupported CWA or the OPA. Id. at 271. Relying on 6 While not the conclusion reached herein, some courts have resolved these issues by deeming by the text and legislative history of the its CWA analysis in Exxon, and the releases of pollutants that have seeped into statute, the court made two observations analogous absence of any indication that groundwater and subsequently reached surface that are relevant to the broader question Congress intended to regulate any type waters to be nonpoint source pollution. See Sierra of regulation of any discharges to of groundwater under the OPA, the Fifth Club v. El Paso Gold Mines, Inc., 421 F.3d 1133, 1141 n. 4 (10th Cir. 2005) (‘‘Groundwater seepage groundwater. First, that the court’s Circuit held that ‘‘a generalized that travels through fractured rock would be construction was true ‘‘to Congress’ assertion that covered surface waters nonpoint source pollution which is not subject to intention not to interfere with existing will eventually be affected by remote, NPDES permitting.’’); Penn Environment v. PPG state controls over groundwater’’ gradual, natural seepage from the Indus., Inc., 964 F. Supp. 2d 429, 455–56 (W.D. Pa. 2013) (‘‘[A] discharge occurring through the generally, given the complex, state- contaminated groundwater’’ was outside migration of groundwater and soil runoff . . . specific nature of groundwater the scope of the OPA in order ‘‘to represents ‘nonpoint source’ pollution.’’). regulation. And second, that the respect Congress’s decision to leave the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16822 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

regulation of groundwater to the States.’’ cannot be pursued at all costs ‘‘because surface waters require a NPDES program Id. at 272. the CWA precludes federal regulation in certain instances, adopting EPA’s In Village of Oconomowoc Lake v. over non-navigable-water pollution and historical direct hydrological Dayton Hudson Corporation, the over nonpoint-source-pollution.’’ Ky. connection approach. Kinder Morgan, Seventh Circuit squarely addressed the Waterways Alliance, 905 F.3d at 937. 887 F.3d at 652. In that decision, the issue of point source discharges that The court explained: court did not address any of the reach jurisdictional surface waters It is true that Congress sought to protect legislative history discussed herein, nor through groundwater, and concluded navigable waters with the CWA . . . But it did the court acknowledge or address that ‘‘[n]either the Clean Water Act nor also imposed several textual limitations on the decisions of the Fifth or Seventh the EPA’s definition [of waters of the the means used to reach that goal. Had it Circuit. United States] asserts authority over wished to do so, Congress could have Rather, in analyzing whether gasoline ground waters, just because these may prohibited all unpermitted discharges of all from a ruptured underground pipeline pollutants to all waters. But it did not go so be hydrologically connected with that undisputedly leached from surface waters.’’ 24 F.3d at 965. In that far. Instead, Congress chose to prohibit only the discharge of pollutants to ‘‘navigable groundwater into navigable waters case, a municipality in Wisconsin filed waters from any point source.’’ required a NPDES permit, the Fourth a CWA citizen suit claiming that a Circuit framed its inquiry as only Id.; see also, e.g., Prairie Rivers NPDES permit was required for a waste whether, first, the discharge was from a Network v. Dynegy Midwest Generation, retention pond at a Target Stores point source, id. at 649–50, and second, distribution center, due to potential LLC, No. 18–CV 2148, slip op. at 14 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 14, 2018) (Applying the whether there was a direct hydrological seepage of waste into groundwater, connection between the groundwater which could reach jurisdictional surface Seventh Circuit’s decision in Village of Oconomowoc to hold that ‘‘[i]f the and jurisdictional surface water, a fact- waters. Id. at 963, 965. specific determination. Id. at 651. The In analyzing the facts before it, the discharge is made into groundwater, and the pollutants somehow later find court cited to the broad purpose of the Seventh Circuit explicitly recognized Act to restore and maintain the the possibility that ‘‘water from the their way to navigable surface waters via a discrete hydrological connection, the chemical, physical, and biological pond will enter the local ground waters, integrity of the Nation’s waters, and thence underground aquifers that CWA is still not implicated, because the offending discharge was made into asserting that ‘‘the statute established a feed lakes and streams that are part of regime of zero tolerance for unpermitted the ‘waters of the United States.’ ’’ Id. at groundwater, which is not subject to the CWA’’); Cape Fear River Watch v. Duke discharges of pollutants.’’ Id. at 652. The 965. The court also recognized, court reasoned that ‘‘if the presence of however, that ‘‘the Clean Water Act Energy Progress, 25 F. Supp. 3d 798, 810 (E.D.N.C. 2014) (‘‘Congress did not a short distance of soil and ground does not attempt to assert national water were enough to defeat a claim, power to the fullest,’’ and intentionally intend for the CWA to extend federal polluters easily could avoid liability does not apply to all waters. Id. Based regulatory authority over groundwater, under the CWA by ensuring that all on the text of the statute and the same regardless of whether that groundwater discharges pass through soil and ground compelling legislative history analyzed is eventually or somehow water before reaching navigable waters.’’ by the Fifth Circuit and discussed ‘hydrologically connected’ to navigable Id. The court ultimately concluded that above, the court concluded that ‘‘[t]he surface waters.’’); Umatilla, 962 F. ‘‘an alleged discharge of pollutants, omission of ground waters from Supp. at 1318 (observing that ‘‘the reaching navigable waters located 1000 regulations is not an oversight,’’ as CWA’s NPDES program should apply to feet or less from the point source by ‘‘Congress elected to leave the subject groundwater to adequately protect means of ground water with a direct [of groundwater regulation] to state surface water,’’ but concluding that ‘‘the law[.]’’ Id. Thus, there was no law as written, as intended by Congress, hydrological connection to such cognizable CWA claim based on and as applied in Oregon for over two navigable waters, falls within the scope decades does not regulate even of the CWA.’’ Id. at 652. In reaching this discharges to ground water that may 7 reach jurisdictional surface waters. Id. hydrologically-connected holding, however, the court failed to Most recently, the Sixth Circuit groundwater’’); 26 Crown Assocs., LLC consider Congress’s intent, evident from concluded, in two related cases v. Greater New Haven Reg’l Water the text, structure, and legislative addressing pollutants from coal ash Pollution Control Auth., No. 3:15-cv- history of the Act, to treat groundwater ponds that seeped into groundwater that 1439, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106989, *24 and nonpoint source discharges subsequently reached jurisdictional (D. Conn. 2017) (noting that ‘‘if the differently under the Act, by leaving surface waters, that the NPDES Clean Water Act were to apply as a their regulation to states.8 permitting requirements do not apply to routine matter to the discharge of 7 releases to groundwater. In Kentucky pollution onto the ground that ends up One judge dissented from the panel’s holding, finding that there was no Clean Water Act violation Waterways Alliance v. Kentucky seeping into the ground water, then because the discharge of pollutants from the pipe Utilities Co., the Sixth Circuit held that Congress’s purpose to limit the scope of had been repaired, and that the continued migration the ‘‘text and statutory context of the the Clean Water Act [to point source through groundwater was not a ‘‘discharge of a CWA’’ make clear that the statute ‘‘does discharges] would be easily thwarted.’’). pollutant’’ under the Act. Kinder Morgan, 887 F.3d at 662–63 (Floyd, J. dissenting). The dissent not extend to reach this form of In contrast, the circuit and district recognized that ‘‘[t]his kind of migration of pollution.’’ 905 F.3d at 933. In court decisions concluding that certain pollutants through the natural movements of Tennessee Clean Water Network v. TVA, releases to groundwater are subject to groundwater amounts to nonpoint source the court reversed a district court NPDES requirement have often left pollution,’’ and that, ‘‘[w]hile there is no doubt this kind of nonpoint source pollution affects the decision adopting the direct hydrologic unaddressed the text, structure, and quality [of] navigable waters, Congress deliberately theory, finding that ‘‘any alleged legislative history of the Act pointing to chose not to place nonpoint source pollution within leakages into the groundwater are not a Congress’s intent to exclude all the CWA’s reach.’’ Id. violation of the CWA.’’ 905 F.3d at 444. discharges to groundwater from the 8 On September 12, 2018, in Sierra Club v. Virginia Electric Power Co., the Fourth Circuit The Sixth Circuit recognized the NPDES program. The Fourth Circuit applied its decision in Kinder Morgan to another statute’s broad goal of protecting the recently held that point source releases fact pattern involving the addition of pollutants to Nation’s waters, but held that this goal to groundwater that reach jurisdictional jurisdictional surface waters through groundwater.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16823

Applying a similar analysis, in its surface waters,’ ’’ while the connection jurisdictional surface water to require a decision in County of Maui, the Ninth in its own case was undisputed. Id. NPDES permit. See, e.g., Tenn. Clean Circuit explained: However, these are factual distinctions Water Network v. TVA, 273 F. Supp. 3d We assume without deciding that that should not affect the ultimate 775, 827 (M.D. Tenn. 2017) (holding groundwater here is neither a point source outcome. While it is accurate that in that ‘‘[a]s long as a connection [between nor a navigable water under the CWA. Hence, both Rice and Village of Oconomowoc, groundwater and surface water] is it does not affect our analysis that some of the courts looked to whether a shown to be real, direct, and immediate, our sister circuits have concluded that connection to jurisdictional surface there is no statutory, constitutional, or groundwater is not a navigable water. We are waters existed, this factual inquiry and policy reason to require that every twist not suggesting that the CWA regulates all observation does not alter the courts’ and turn of its path be precisely groundwater. Rather, in fidelity to the statute, we are reinforcing that the Act regulates ultimate interpretations of the CWA and traced’’), rev’d 905 F.3d 436 (6th Cir. point source discharges to a navigable water, OPA, and their recognition of the line 2018); McClellan Ecological Seepage and that liability may attach where a point Congress drew with respect to pollutant Situation v. Weinberger, 707 F. Supp. source discharge is conveyed to a navigable discharges to groundwater. 1182, 1196 (E.D. Cal. 1998) (discharges water through groundwater. In Rice, the court observed that ‘‘[i]n to groundwater are subject to CWA Cty. of Maui, 886 F.3d at 746 n.2 light of Congress’s decision not to regulation if ‘‘the groundwater is (citations omitted). The court also regulate ground waters under the CWA/ naturally connected to surface waters’’ rejected the direct hydrological OPA,’’ it was ‘‘reluctant to construe the (emphasis added)); vacated on other connection theory espoused by the OPA in such a way as to apply to grounds, McClellan Ecological Seepage United States as amicus, as ‘‘it reads two discharges onto land, with seepage into Situation v. Perry, 47 F.3d 325 (9th Cir. words into the CWA (‘direct’ and groundwater, that have only an indirect, 1995). ‘hydrological’) that are not there.’’ Id. at remote, and attenuated connection with These decisions expand the Act’s n.3. Then, despite the court’s claim of an identifiable body of ‘navigable coverage beyond what Congress ‘‘fidelity to the statute,’’ it ultimately waters.’ ’’ Rice, 250 F.3d at 272. envisioned, potentially sweeping into determined, without any grounding in However, while the court’s reluctance the scope of the statute commonplace the statute’s text, that point source was stated in relation to the facts in that and ubiquitous activities such as discharges to groundwater that reach case, its ultimate interpretation was releases from homeowners’ backyard jurisdictional surface water are subject based on Congress’s intent: ‘‘[w]e must septic systems that find their way to to NPDES permitting requirements construe the OPA in such a way as to jurisdictional surface waters through where they are fairly traceable back to respect Congress’s decision to leave the groundwater. The interpretations the point source and more than de regulation of groundwater to the States.’’ adopted by the Ninth Circuit and Fourth minimis. Id. at 749. The court also left Id. (emphasis added). Similarly, though Circuits both contravene Congress’s ‘‘for another day the task of determining the facts before the Seventh Circuit intent to leave regulation of all releases when, if ever, the connection between a addressed only a potential hydrologic of pollutants to groundwater to states point source and a navigable water is connection between groundwater and under the CWA, and, as a practical too tenuous to support liability under jurisdictional surface water, the court’s matter, stretch the Act’s carefully the CWA,’’ thus expanding the scope of determination was unequivocal: constructed program of regulation of the Act to cover any release of ‘‘Neither the Clean Water Act nor the point sources beyond a point that pollutants to groundwater that reaches a EPA’s definition [of navigable waters] Congress would recognize. A holistic jurisdictional surface water. Id. asserts authority over ground waters, reading of the CWA leads to the The Ninth Circuit stated that its just because these may be conclusion that releases of pollutants to decision was consistent with Rice and hydrologically connected with surface groundwater are categorially excluded Village of Oconomowoc, despite waters.’’ 24 F.3d at 965. from the NPDES program, and thus, reaching the opposite conclusion about The tests adopted by the Ninth and Congress did not intend for discharges the proper scope of the Act. The court’s Fourth Circuits and certain district from point sources that reach basis for claiming consistency with Rice courts create a confusing patchwork of jurisdictional surface waters through judicial interpretations, which the was that the Fifth Circuit, in its analysis hydrologically connected groundwater Agency has concluded lack support in of the facts in that case, ‘‘required some to require a NPDES permit. It follows the text, structure, and legislative evidence of a link between discharges that neither EPA nor the courts need history of the Act. As the Supreme and contamination of navigable waters.’’ engage with specific factual questions of Court has explained, ‘‘an administrative Id. With respect to the Village of traceability via subsurface hydrogeology agency’s power to regulate in the public Oconomowoc decision, the Ninth that are currently required by certain interest must always be grounded in a Circuit asserted that the Seventh Circuit court decisions such as County of Maui valid grant of authority from Congress,’’ and Kinder Morgan. ‘‘only considered allegations of a and ‘‘in [its] anxiety to effectuate the ‘potential [rather than an actual] congressional purpose,’’ an agency VI. Policy Considerations Supporting connection between ground waters and ‘‘must take care not to extend the scope EPA’s Interpretation of the statute beyond the point where There is sufficient legal authority to In that case, the court recognized the precedent in Kinder Morgan that the addition of a pollutant into Congress indicated it would stop.’’ See address releases of pollutants to navigable waters via groundwater can violate FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco groundwater that subsequently reach Section 301(a) if the plaintiff can show a direct Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 161 (2000) (internal jurisdictional surface waters at both the hydrological connection between the ground water citations omitted). While the Ninth state and federal level without and navigable waters. 903 F.3d 403, 409 (4th Cir. 2018). The court went on to hold that a coal-fired Circuit adopted a ‘‘fairly traceable’’ expanding the CWA’s regulatory reach power plant that stored coal ash on site in a landfill standard, rejecting EPA’s prior ‘‘direct beyond what Congress envisioned. and in settling ponds was not liable under CWA hydrologic connection’’ test, and the Consistent with Congress’s intent in Section 301(a) for discharges of arsenic that leached Fourth Circuit imposed a 1,000 foot structuring the CWA, states may from the coal ash into groundwater and ultimately into a nearby river because the settling ponds did distance limitation, other courts have regulate groundwater quality in the not constitute ‘‘point sources’’ under the CWA. Id. adopted other variations on when manner best suited to their particular at 411. groundwater is sufficiently connected to circumstances. This interpretation will

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16824 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

continue to give states primacy for shall be ‘‘construed as impairing or in state regulatory programs, in the statutes regulating ubiquitous groundwater any manner affecting any right or below, Congress provided for a clear discharges from sources such as septic jurisdiction of the States with respect to federal role. Review of the explicit tanks which are known to affect the waters (including boundary waters) provisions addressing discharges to jurisdictional surface water quality in of such States.’’ Id. groundwater in these statutes makes some instances. Beyond state programs, Several commenters on the Agency’s clear that Congress can and does three other federal statutes, the Safe February 2018 Federal Register notice directly address the issue of Drinking Water Act (‘‘SDWA’’), the described state laws and regulations that groundwater quality in specific federal Resource Conservation and Recovery prohibit or limit discharges of pollutants programs. It is also equally clear that Act (‘‘RCRA’’), and the Comprehensive to groundwater. For example, the Congress tailored those programs to the Environmental Response, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency concerns over specific practices posing Compensation, and Liability Act stated in its comments that it ‘‘believes an endangerment to groundwater, while (‘‘CERCLA’’) will continue to provide Minnesota has adequate authority under also deferring to state regulation even in important protections for groundwater state law to address discharges outside those programs. Together these statutes, quality, and for surface waters impacted the scope of the NPDES or UIC along with the state programs described by releases to groundwater. programs.’’ Comments submitted by above, form a mosaic of laws and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regulations that provide mechanisms A. State Programs for Regulating (May 16, 2018) (Docket ID: EPA–HQ– and tools for EPA, states, and the public Discharges to Groundwater OW–2018–0063–0664), available at to ensure the protection of groundwater The CWA establishes a regulatory https://www.regulations.gov/document quality, and to minimize related impacts floor that protects the integrity of the ?D=EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0063-0664. to surface waters. Nation’s navigable waters and provides MPCA further stated that ‘‘state permits states with broad authority to adopt are developed to protect groundwater as 1. SDWA laws and regulations that are more a drinking water source [and] [t]hey also SDWA, enacted in 1974, two years protective than the federal standards. As ensure that surface water quality after the CWA, contains provisions explained above, the Act identifies the standards will be met.’’ Id. The specifically aimed at preventing certain preservation of state authority to attorneys general of West Virginia, types of groundwater contamination. regulate land and water resources Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, This statute is one of the vehicles within their borders as a primary aim of Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, through which Congress deliberately the Act and states that ‘‘[i]t is the policy Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, addressed the discharge of pollutants of the Congress to recognize, preserve, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming into groundwater, while also and protect the primary responsibilities submitted comments describing state recognizing the important role for states and rights of States to prevent, reduce, laws that protect intrastate water, to play in regulating groundwater and eliminate pollution, to plan the including groundwater, independent pollution. development and use (including from the CWA. Comments submitted by Pursuant to Section 1421 of SDWA, restoration, preservation, and West Virginia Attorney General, et al. EPA has established requirements for enhancement) of land and water (May 21, 2018) (Docket ID: EPA–HQ– state programs to regulate underground resources . . . .’’ 33 U.S.C. 1251(b). OW–2018–0063–0497), available at injection of fluids. See 42 U.S.C. 300h. Congress also declared as a national https://www.regulations.gov/document Specifically, under that section policy that states manage the major ?D=EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0063-0497. Congress required EPA to establish construction grant program and States that have not enacted state law- minimum requirements for effective implement the core permitting programs based programs that comprehensively state programs to prevent underground authorized by the Act, among other regulate discharges to groundwater injection which endangers drinking responsibilities. Id. continue to have wide latitude to do so water sources, defined under SDWA to The Act envisions that states will take under state law and the CWA. See 33 mean underground water which an active role in regulating discharges to U.S.C. 1251(b), 1370. EPA’s position supplies or can reasonably be expected waters within the state and expressly that the CWA does not regulate releases to supply any public water system. The provides states with authority to of pollutants to groundwater, regardless underground injection control (‘‘UIC’’) regulate beyond the Act’s regulatory of a connection to jurisdictional surface program under SDWA contains floor. The CWA states that, except as waters, does not preclude states from regulatory requirements for four classes expressly provided in the Act, nothing regulating these releases under state of wells; bans Class IV (shallow in the Act shall ‘‘preclude or deny the law. To the extent that there may be hazardous waste) wells; and by rule right of any State . . . to adopt or state laws that limit a state’s ability to authorizes most Class V wells. The rule enforce . . . any standard or limitation regulate beyond the federal floor, states authorizing Class V wells requires respecting discharges of pollutants, or remain free to modify these laws as they certain reporting, and requires that the . . . any requirement respecting control deem appropriate to regulate discharges wells are operated in ways that do not or abatement of pollution; except that in the state. cause movement of fluid that could . . . such State or political subdivision endanger underground sources of or interstate agency may not adopt or B. In Other Federal Statutes, Such as drinking water, and that the wells are enforce any effluent limitation, or other SDWA, RCRA, and CERCLA, Congress properly closed when they are no longer limitation, effluent standard, Explicitly Envisioned a Federal Role in being used. See 40 CFR 144.24, 82. prohibition, pretreatment standard, or Regulating Groundwater Quality The SDWA UIC program is one standard of performance which is less In addition to state programs for clearly designed and tailored by stringent than the effluent limitation, or regulating discharges into groundwater, Congress to address and protect other limitation, effluent standard, several federal statutes explicitly groundwater quality. While SDWA is prohibition, pretreatment standard, or address regulation of groundwater targeted to a specific type of possible standard of performance under this quality. Unlike in the CWA paradigm, contamination, i.e., discharges through chapter . . . .’’ Id. § 1370. Congress where the federal role is one of certain types of well injection that may further provided that nothing in the Act providing support to states to advance impact nearby drinking water sources,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16825

consistent with Congressional deference or to regulated units covered by specific Id. §§ 257.96–257.97. The remedy to states in the area of groundwater exclusions or exemptions from selected as a result of the corrective regulation generally, it also is groundwater monitoring, see, e.g., 40 action must be protective of human established primarily as a state program. CFR 264.90, 264.101(d), RCRA also health and the environment, control the The statute expressly requires EPA to provides EPA with authority to address sources of the releases to reduce or permit or provide for ‘‘consideration of waste management activities of eliminate further releases, remove from varying geologic, hydrological, or generators, transporters, owners or the environment as much of the historical conditions in different States operators of treatment, storage, or contamination as is feasible, and and different areas within a State,’’ and disposal facilities, past or present, that otherwise comply with all applicable to avoid, to the extent feasible, ‘‘may present an imminent and RCRA requirements. Id. § 257.97(b). requirements that would unnecessarily substantial endangerment to health or RCRA also contains corrective action disrupt state injection programs. 42 the environment,’’ 42 U.S.C. 6973(a). requirements for releases of regulated U.S.C. 300h(b)(3). The Agency has used this authority to substances from underground storage address releases of contaminants into tanks (‘‘USTs’’). Releases from USTs can 2. RCRA groundwater. occur due to corrosion of tank material, Like SDWA, in RCRA Congress chose RCRA non-hazardous waste facilities faulty installation, or inadequate to include provisions for federal are generally subject to EPA RCRA operating and maintenance procedures. regulation of discharges into standards in 40 CFR 257 or section 258. Owners and/or operators of USTs must groundwater, to protect groundwater These rules vary by unit type, and report releases and take corrective quality from the discharge of solid and several categories (with exceptions) are action in response, including releases to hazardous wastes. RCRA was enacted to subject to specific groundwater groundwater. See 42 U.S.C. 6991b(c); 40 ‘‘reduce the generation of hazardous monitoring and corrective action CFR part 280, subparts E & F. The term waste and to insure the proper requirements. These categories include ‘‘release’’ in relation to USTs is defined treatment, storage, and disposal of that facilities that manage coal combustion in RCRA to mean ‘‘any spilling, leaking, waste which is nonetheless generated, residuals in surface impoundments and emitting, discharging, escaping, so as to minimize the present and future landfills, as well as municipal solid leaching, or disposing from an threat to human health and the waste landfill units. See 42 U.S.C. underground storage tank into ground environment.’’ Meghrig v. KFC W, Inc., 6949a(c); 40 CFR 257.90–257.100 (coal water, surface water or subsurface 516 U.S. 479, 483 (1996). RCRA defines combustion residuals surface soils.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6991(8). Unlike the ‘‘disposal’’ as the ‘‘discharge, deposit, impoundments and landfills); id. CWA NPDES provisions, this provision injection, dumping, spilling, leaking, or §§ 258.50–258.58 (municipal solid in RCRA explicitly defines a release as placing of any solid waste or hazardous waste landfill units). being to groundwater as well as to waste into or on any land or water so EPA’s RCRA regulations addressing surface water; where Congress intended that such solid waste or hazardous coal combustion residuals (‘‘CCR’’) were for a provision to relate to both, it said waste or any constituent thereof may promulgated in 2015, with the impact of so clearly. enter the environment or be emitted into these facilities to groundwater as a the air or discharged into any waters, critical consideration underlying the 3. CERCLA including groundwater.’’ 42 U.S.C. regulations. See 80 FR 21302, 21326 CERCLA, also known as ‘‘Superfund,’’ 6903(3) (emphasis added). (Apr. 17, 2015) (Recognizing that is yet another example of Congress RCRA has several provisions that ‘‘approximately 63 percent of currently choosing to specifically address releases expressly address groundwater operating surface impoundments and of hazardous substances to groundwater, monitoring and remediation at landfills are unlined, and thus more which could reach and impact surface hazardous waste treatment, storage, and prone to leach contaminants into waters. CERCLA provides EPA with a disposal (‘‘TSD’’) facilities. RCRA and groundwater.’’). This rule specifically number of tools to address releases of EPA’s implementing regulations addresses ‘‘groundwater contamination hazardous substances, pollutants and explicitly require groundwater from the improper management of CCR contaminants, specifically where a monitoring for specified categories of in landfills and surface ‘‘hazardous substance is released or hazardous waste units. See id. § 6924(o), impoundments,’’ and ‘‘reflect[s] there is a substantial threat of such a (p); see also 40 CFR 264.90–264.99. In Congressional intent that protection of release into the environment’’ or where addition, the owner and/or operator of groundwater be a prime objective of any there is a release or substantial threat of a RCRA permitted hazardous waste new solid waste regulations.’’ Id. at release of any pollutant or contaminant facility is required to perform corrective 21396. To accomplish these objectives, which may present an imminent and action for all releases of hazardous the rule establishes specific substantial danger to the public health waste or constituents from any solid requirements for groundwater or welfare. 42 U.S.C. 9604(a)(1). waste management unit, including monitoring and remediation. 40 CFR CERCLA defines ‘‘environment’’ releases to groundwater. 42 U.S.C. 257.90–257.98. If monitoring detects a broadly, to include ‘‘ground water,’’ 6924(u), (v); 40 CFR 264.100–264.101. statistically significant concentration of ‘‘subsurface strata,’’ as well as ‘‘surface Facilities that have or should have had certain constituents in groundwater water.’’ Id. § 9601(8). Thus, under RCRA ‘‘interim status’’ (i.e., above background levels, the facility is CERCLA, EPA has clear authority to authorization to operate a TSD without required to undertake further, address releases into both groundwater a permit), and some facilities that had ‘‘targeted’’ monitoring to determine and surface waters. interim status, are subject to corrective whether concentrations of specific EPA’s CERCLA authorities provide a action orders under RCRA section contaminants exceed the rule’s variety of mechanisms for EPA to 3008(h). 42 U.S.C. 6928(h). Both RCRA groundwater protection standards address hazardous substances in permits and 3008(h) orders can thus (which, for most contaminants, are groundwater, through the ability to address releases resulting in based on EPA-established standards for address releases or threatened releases contaminated groundwater. drinking water). Id. §§ 257.98, 257.95. If of hazardous substances to the While these requirements may not contamination exceeding these levels is environment, issue orders, and recover apply to hazardous waste ‘‘generators’’ detected, corrective action is required. costs of clean-up. See 42 U.S.C. 9604,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16826 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

9606, 9607, 9621. In CERCLA, Congress ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY explicitly provided that in remedial AGENCY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– actions, the clean-up level for 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ groundwater must be that ‘‘which at 40 CFR Part 710 epa.gov. least attains Maximum Contaminant [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0320; FRL–9992–05] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Level Goals established under [SDWA] and water quality criteria established RIN 2070–AK21 I. Executive Summary under . . . the Clean Water Act’’ where A. Does this action apply to me? such goals or criteria are relevant and Procedures for Review of CBI Claims You may be affected by this action if appropriate under the circumstances of for the Identity of Chemicals on the you reported a confidential chemical the release or potential release.’’ Id. TSCA Inventory substance under the TSCA Inventory § 9621(d)(2)(A). EPA’s National AGENCY: Environmental Protection Notification (Active-Inactive) Contingency Plan regulations Agency (EPA). Requirements rule (hereinafter ‘‘Active- implementing CERCLA also provide ACTION: Proposed rule. Inactive rule’’) (Ref. 1) (40 CFR part 710, that ‘‘EPA expects to return usable subpart B) through a Notice of Activity ground waters to their beneficial uses SUMMARY: The 2016 amendments to the (NOA) Form A (Ref. 2) and sought to wherever practicable, within a Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) maintain an existing CBI claim for a timeframe that is reasonable given the require EPA to establish a plan to specific chemical identity. The particular circumstances of the site.’’ 40 review all confidential business following North American Industrial CFR 300.430(a)(1)(iii)(F). The information (CBI) claims for specific Classification System (NAICS) codes are determination of a ‘‘beneficial use’’ of chemical identity asserted in a Notice of not intended to be exhaustive, but rather groundwater is tied to state and local Activity (NOA) Form A. EPA is provides a guide to help readers classifications (unless the state proposing a rule to establish the plan, determine whether this action may classification is less stringent than the including the procedures for apply to them: EPA classification scheme), evidencing substantiating and reviewing these • Chemical manufacturing or EPA’s recognition of the state-specific claims. processing (NAICS code 325). • nature of groundwater regulation. See DATES: Comments must be received on Petroleum and Coal Products Preamble to the National Contingency or before June 24, 2019. Manufacturing (NAICS code 324). Plan, 55 FR 8733 (Mar. 8, 1990). The discussion in Unit III.A. and the ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, proposed regulatory text describe in Finally, as the Agency has recognized, identified by docket identification (ID) more detail the circumstances in which ‘‘CERCLA cleanup levels are designed to number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0320, by entities might be subject to this address all reasonably anticipated one of the following methods. proposed action. If you have any routes of exposure that may pose an • Federal eRulemaking Portal: questions regarding the applicability of actual or potential risk to human health https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the this action to a particular entity, consult or the environment.’’ EPA Office of online instructions for submitting the technical person listed under FOR Solid Waste and Emergency Response comments. Do not submit electronically FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Directive 9283.1–33 at 9. These routes of any information you consider to be Note that TSCA’s statutory definition exposure include ‘‘groundwaters as a Confidential Business Information (CBI) of ‘‘manufacture’’ includes importing. source of contamination to other media’’ or other information whose disclosure is Accordingly, the regulatory definition of including intrusion into surface waters. restricted by statute. • ‘‘manufacture’’ for this rule includes Id. In determining clean-up standards, Mail: Document Control Office importation. Since ‘‘manufacture’’ is CERCLA and the National Contingency (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention itself defined at 40 CFR 710.3(d) and at Plan require the identification of and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental TSCA section 3(9) (15 U.S.C. 2602(9)) to ‘‘applicable or relevant and appropriate Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania include ‘‘import,’’ it is clear that requirements,’’ 42 U.S.C. 9621(d); 40 Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. • importers are a subset of manufacturers. CFR 300.400(g), which, for remedying Hand Delivery: To make special All references to manufacturing in this discharges to groundwater that reaching arrangements for hand delivery or document should be understood to also surface water, could include CWA delivery of boxed information, please encompass importing. Where EPA’s requirements that are specifically follow the instructions at https:// intent is to specifically refer to domestic addressed at the receiving surface water. www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send- manufacturing or importing (both See Directive 9283.1–33 at 8 (‘‘Where comments-epa-dockets. Additional activities constitute ‘‘manufacture’’), groundwaters may impact surface water instructions on commenting or visiting this rule will do so expressly. quality, water quality criteria under the docket, along with more information sections 304 or 303 of the Clean Water about dockets generally, is available at B. What is the agency’s authority for Act, may be relevant and appropriate https://www.epa.gov/dockets. taking this action? standards[.]’’). Thus, both CERCLA and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For EPA is proposing this rule pursuant to EPA’s regulations and guidance clearly technical information contact: Scott M. the authority in TSCA section 8(b), 15 address and provide for remediation of Sherlock, Environmental Assistance U.S.C. 2607(b). See also the discussion not only discharges to groundwater, but Division (Mail code 7408M), Office of in Unit II.B. specifically impacts to surface water Pollution Prevention and Toxics, In addition, the Paperwork Reduction from polluted groundwater. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Dated: April 12, 2019. Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC requires Federal agencies to manage 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) information resources to reduce David P. Ross, 564–8257; email address: information collection burdens on the Assistant Administrator, Office of Water. [email protected]. public (including through the use of [FR Doc. 2019–08063 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] For general information contact: The automated collection techniques or BILLING CODE 6560–50–P TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 other forms of information technology);

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16827

increase program efficiency and reporting requirement at 40 CFR 710.39 Companies potentially affected by this effectiveness; and improve the integrity, to the substantiation requirements of the proposed rule fall into three groups of quality, and utility of information to all CBI review plan. The Agency is potential NOA Form A reporters who users within and outside an agency, proposing to require submitters to use made a CBI claim for a specific chemical including capabilities for ensuring EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX), the identity. The first group (Group (1)) dissemination of public information, Agency’s electronic reporting portal, for consists of those reporters who already public access to Federal Government reporting information. voluntarily submitted upfront CBI information, and protections for privacy substantiation as part of the NOA D. Why is the agency taking this action? and security (44 U.S.C. 3506). submission process, who therefore do TSCA section 2 expresses the intent of TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) requires EPA not need to take further action. The Congress that EPA carry out TSCA in a to promulgate a rule that establishes a second group (Group (2)) consists of reasonable and prudent manner and in plan to review all CBI claims to protect those reporters who will be able to use consideration of the impacts that any the specific chemical identities of the exemption offered under this action taken under TSCA may have on chemical substances on the confidential proposed rule by referencing a previous the environment, the economy, and portion of the TSCA Inventory that were substantiation, such as one submitted society. EPA is proposing to manage and asserted in an NOA Form A pursuant to through the 2016 Chemical Data leverage its information resources, the Active-Inactive rule. This proposed Reporting (CDR) rule (40 CFR part 711). including information technology, to rule is a follow-on regulation to the The third group (Group (3)) consists of require the use of electronic reporting to Active-Inactive rule that would require the remaining reporters who did not implement this proposed rulemaking in substantiation of CBI claims for specific submit prior chemical identity CBI a reasonable and prudent manner. chemical identity from any reporters substantiations and would be required who asserted such a claim as part of the C. What action is the agency taking? to provide full substantiation as NOA Form A submission, but did not proposed in this rule. The average Pursuant to TSCA sections 8(b)(4)(C) provide (voluntary) upfront incremental burden and cost estimates through (E), EPA is proposing to amend substantiation at that time. TSCA include rule familiarization, 40 CFR part 710 to establish a new section 8(b)(4)(C) further requires EPA recordkeeping and submission of subpart C that sets forth the Agency’s to promulgate this rule not later than applicable CBI substantiations (i.e., one- plan to review certain CBI claims to one year after the date that the Agency time form completion). For Group (1), protect the specific chemical identities published the first TSCA Inventory the burden and costs for this group are of substances on the confidential containing all ‘‘active’’ substance minimal and were not calculated portion of the TSCA Inventory. The CBI designations. EPA announced the because the reporters have already claims that would be reviewed under release of the updated TSCA Inventory voluntarily submitted upfront CBI this plan are those that were asserted on on February 19, 2019. To download the substantiation as part of the NOA NOA Form A’s filed in accordance with public version of the TSCA Inventory, submission process for the Active- the requirements in the Active-Inactive get more information about the TSCA Inactive rule and would not need to take rule (40 CFR part 710, subpart B). Inventory Notification (Active-Inactive) further action. For Group (2), the In accordance with TSCA section Requirements rule, or requirements to average burden and costs per company 8(b)(4)(D), EPA is proposing notify EPA going forward, go to https:// are estimated at 5.1 hours and $390, substantiation requirements for www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory. respectively per submission (involving manufacturers (including importers) on average four chemicals per and processors who filed NOA Form A’s E. What are the estimated incremental impacts of this action? company), for rule familiarization and with assertions that they seek to substantiation using a previous maintain CBI claims to protect the EPA has evaluated the potential costs reference. For Group (3), the average specific chemical identities of chemical of establishing the proposed reporting burden and costs per company are substances on the confidential portion requirements for manufacturers and estimated at 34.1 hours, and $2,641 of the TSCA Inventory. Manufacturers processors. An economic analysis titled respectively per submission (involving and processors who provided ‘‘Economic Analysis for the Proposed on average 27 chemicals per company), substantiations pursuant to the Rule: Procedures for Review of CBI for rule familiarization and full voluntary substantiation process in the Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on substantiation. An estimated 126 Active-Inactive rule NOA collection, or the TSCA Inventory’’ has been prepared companies would be expected to report, who identify a previous substantiation for the proposed rule, is available in the with an estimated 23 companies in for the claim made to EPA during the 5- docket, and is briefly summarized here Group (2), and 103 companies in Group year period ending on the substantiation (Ref. 3). The proposed rule requirements (3), resulting in an estimated total deadline specified by EPA, would be involve a one-time reporting effort with incremental burden and costs expected exempt from this requirement. EPA activities that are the same, or similar to over 60 days of 3,629 hours and would review each specific chemical those in the Active-Inactive rule. All $280,981 for this proposed rule (Ref. 3). identity CBI claim and substantiation, respondents would already have and approve or deny each claim submitted at least one NOA under the F. What should I consider as I prepare consistent with the procedures and Active-Inactive rule, and therefore my comments for EPA? substantive criteria in TSCA sections should know whether any actions are 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 8(b)(4) and 14 and 40 CFR part 2, necessary under this proposed rule. information to EPA through subpart B. Also included in this Moreover, an exemption included in regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark proposed rule are provisions clarifying this proposed rule would allow certain the part or all of the information that the duration of protection for approved submitters to reference a previously you claim to be CBI. For CBI in a CD– CBI claims, and providing for the submitted chemical identity CBI ROM or other electronic media that you publication of annual review goals and substantiation (in the last five years), in mail to EPA, mark the outside of the results. lieu of providing a full CBI media as CBI and then identify As described in Unit III.D., EPA is substantiation for the NOA Form A electronically within the media the proposing to apply the electronic chemical identity information. specific information that is claimed as

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16828 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

CBI. In addition to one complete version asserted in an NOA Form A. TSCA 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) further provides that if of the comment that includes requires that EPA promulgate this rule the information is approved for CBI information claimed as CBI, a copy of not later than one year after the status, then, except as otherwise the comment that does not contain the publication of the first TSCA Inventory provided in TSCA sections 8 and 14, information claimed as CBI must be containing all ‘‘active’’ substance EPA must protect such information from submitted for inclusion in the public designations (TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C)). disclosure for a period of 10 years, docket. Information so marked will not TSCA also requires the Agency to unless the claim is withdrawn, or EPA be disclosed except in accordance with implement the CBI review plan so as to becomes aware that the information procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2, complete all CBI claim reviews not later does not qualify for protection from subpart B. than five years after such TSCA disclosure, in which latter case EPA 2. Tips for preparing your comments. Inventory publication, with the must take the actions described in TSCA When preparing and submitting your possibility of a two-year extension section 14(g)(2) (i.e., to notify the comments, see the commenting tips at (TSCA section 8(b)(4)(E)). Since the claimant of EPA’s intent to disclose the https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ updated TSCA Inventory was released information). commenting-epa-dockets.html. on February 19, 2019, the deadline for 3. Completion of reviews. TSCA issuing a final rule is February 19, 2020, section 8(b)(4)(E) provides that the II. Background and the deadline for completing all the Agency must implement the review A. The TSCA Inventory and Active- CBI claim reviews is February 19, 2024. plan so as to complete all of the reviews Inactive Rule If EPA determines in the future to not later than five years after the date on invoke the 2-year extension under which the Agency has compiled the EPA is required under TSCA section TSCA, the deadline for completing all initial list of active substances. With 8(b) to compile and keep current a list the CBI claim reviews would then adequate public justification, the of chemical substances manufactured or become February 19, 2026. Agency may extend the deadline for processed in the United States. This list, Other types of CBI claims are outside completion of reviews for not more than the TSCA Chemical Substance the scope of the review plan under two years. Inventory (TSCA Inventory), is EPA’s TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) through (E), and 4. Posting of annual goals and comprehensive list of confidential and hence are outside the scope of this numbers of reviews completed. TSCA non-confidential substances proposed rule. Those claims are section 8(b)(4)(E) further requires that at manufactured or processed in the governed by other statutory and the beginning of each year, EPA publish United States for nonexempt regulatory provisions. Substantiation an annual goal for reviews and the commercial purposes (Ref. 4). EPA and review of CBI claims for other data number of reviews completed in the promulgated the Active-Inactive rule to elements in an NOA Form A are prior year. obtain the information necessary for governed by TSCA section 14(g) and 40 5. Record retention requirement. EPA to designate as ‘‘active’’ chemical CFR 710.37(b) and (c)(1). Substantiation TSCA section 8(b)(9)(B) provides that substances that had been manufactured and review of CBI claims for specific records relevant to compliance with this or processed for a nonexempt chemical identity in an NOA Form B— rule must be retained for a period of 5 commercial purpose during the 10-year a forward-looking reporting form years beginning on the last day of the time period ending on June 21, 2016. required when reintroducing an submission period. Respondents (manufacturers and ‘‘inactive’’ chemical substance into U.S. processors) reported these chemical commerce for a nonexempt commercial III. Summary of Proposed Rule substances through the process set forth purpose—are governed by TSCA section The TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D) and (E) in 40 CFR part 710, subpart B, by filing 8(b)(5) and 40 CFR 710.37(a)(2). provisions regarding the Review Plan an NOA Form A with EPA. Consistent TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D) provides the are prescriptive and the proposed rule with TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)(ii), parameters of the review plan for closely follows the statutory text. respondents who manufactured or specific chemical identity CBI claims A. What confidentiality claims for processed an active chemical substance asserted in NOA Form A’s. listed on the confidential portion of the 1. Requirement to provide specific chemical identities would be TSCA Inventory prior to June 22, 2016, substantiations. TSCA section substantiated under this rule? could seek to maintain an existing claim 8(b)(4)(D)(i) provides that in 1. CBI claims subject to for protection against disclosure of the establishing the review plan, EPA must substantiation. Subject to the specific chemical identity of the require all manufacturers and exemptions described in this unit, the substance as confidential by voluntarily processors to substantiate their CBI substantiation requirement in this filing an NOA Form A that included claims for specific chemical identities in proposed rule would apply to all CBI such request. Through this process accordance with TSCA section 14 and at claims for specific chemical identities established in 40 CFR 710.37(a), a time specified by EPA, unless the that manufacturers or processors manufacturers and processors secured manufacturer or processor has requested to maintain in NOA Form A’s an opportunity to maintain the previously substantiated the claim in a filed in accordance with the Active- confidential status of a specific submission made to EPA during the 5- Inactive rule. chemical identity on the confidential year period ending on the substantiation 2. Exemptions from substantiation portion of the TSCA Inventory. deadline specified by EPA. requirement. Pursuant to TSCA section 2. EPA review of confidentiality 8(b)(4)(D), EPA is proposing exemptions B. Statutory Requirements for the CBI claims and substantiations. TSCA from the requirement to submit new Review Plan section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii) requires that EPA substantiation in certain cases where the TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) requires EPA review each CBI claim and CBI claims have already been to promulgate a rule establishing a plan substantiation for a specific chemical substantiated in a recent submission to to review all CBI claims to protect the identity to determine if such claim EPA. The proposed exemptions would specific chemical identities of chemical qualifies for protection from disclosure. be available to manufacturers or substances on the confidential portion The Agency must then approve or deny processors who provided of the TSCA Inventory that were each claim. TSCA section substantiations for specific chemical

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16829

identity CBI claims either: (1) Pursuant CFR 711.30(e) (Chemical Data Reporting occurrence after which the claim is to the voluntary substantiation process rule). EPA nevertheless requests withdrawn. associated with the Active-Inactive rule, comment on the validity of making this f. Has EPA, another federal agency, or or (2) in another submission made to information public without further court made any confidentiality EPA less than five years before the notice, particularly where a claimant determination regarding information substantiation deadline that will be set may have previously submitted a associated with this chemical in the final rule. substantiation to EPA less than five substance? If you answered yes, explain For those manufacturers or processors years before the substantiation deadline the outcome of that determination and who filed voluntary substantiations that will be set in the final rule, but provide a copy of the previous with their NOA Form A’s pursuant to failed to report and identify that confidentiality determination or any the process set forth in the Active- previously-submitted substantiation to other information that will assist in Inactive rule, codified at 40 CFR EPA within the 90-day filing period. identifying the prior determination. 710.37(a)(1), no further action would be g. Is the confidential chemical required. Those persons would C. How would CBI claims be substance publicly known to have ever automatically be deemed exempt from substantiated? been offered for commercial distribution the substantiation requirement under EPA is proposing to require that non- in the United States? If you answered this proposed rule. exempt manufacturers and processors yes, explain why the information should EPA is proposing to require substantiate any CBI claim for a specific be treated as confidential. manufacturers and processors who wish chemical identity that they requested to 2. Certification Statement. An to establish eligibility for an exemption maintain in an NOA Form A by authorized official of a manufacturer or based upon any other recently- submitting answers to the questions processor substantiating a request to submitted substantiation to report and identified in Unit III.C.1, by providing maintain an existing claim of identify for EPA the following about the certification statement identified in confidentiality for specific chemical that recently-submitted substantiation: Unit III.C.2, and by requiring that the identity would be required to certify Submission date; submission type; and submission be signed and dated by an that the submission complies with the case number, transaction ID, or authorized official. requirements of the rule by signing and equivalent identifier that uniquely 1. Substantiation questions. a. Do you dating the following certification identifies the previous submission that believe that the information is exempt statement: includes the substantiation upon which from substantiation pursuant to TSCA ‘‘I certify that all claims for confidentiality the manufacturer or processor is relying. section 14(c)(2)? If you answered yes, made or sought to be maintained with this Previously submitted substantiations you must individually identify the submission are true and correct, and all might include, for example, those specific information claimed as information submitted herein to substantiate submitted pursuant to a regulatory up- confidential and specify the applicable such claims is true and correct. Any knowing front substantiation requirement (such exemption(s). and willful misrepresentation is subject to as 40 CFR 711.30(b)(1) or 40 CFR criminal penalty pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001. 720.85(b)(3)(iv)), the statutory b. Will disclosure of the information I further certify that it is true and correct that: substantiation requirement at TSCA likely result in substantial harm to your • My company has taken reasonable section 14(c)(3) (see 82 FR 6522, January business’s competitive position? If you measures to protect the confidentiality of the answered yes, describe with specificity information; 19, 2017), or the comment process • described in 40 CFR 2.204(e). the substantial harmful effects that I have determined that the information is would likely result to your competitive not required to be disclosed or otherwise B. When would substantiation be position if the information is made made available to the public under any other required? available to the public. Federal law; • I have a reasonable basis to conclude that EPA is proposing to require that all c. To the extent your business has disclosure of the information is likely to substantiations be filed not later than 90 disclosed the information to others cause substantial harm to the competitive days after the effective date of the final (both internally and externally), what position of my company; and rule. EPA is proposing the same filing precautions has your business taken? • I have a reasonable basis to believe that deadline for submissions identifying a Identify the measures or internal the information is not readily discoverable previously submitted substantiation for controls your business has taken to through reverse engineering.’’ purposes of establishing eligibility for protect the information claimed as an exemption. If a substantiation or confidential: Non-disclosure agreement D. How would information be submitted notice of prior CBI substantiation was required prior to access; access is to EPA? not filed within the 90-day filing period limited to individuals with a need-to- The proposed rule would require in accordance with all requirements of know; information is physically persons submitting substantiations or this proposed rule or voluntarily filed in secured; other internal control information on previously submitted accordance with all requirements of 40 measure(s). If yes, explain. substantiations to follow the electronic CFR 710.37(a)(1), EPA is proposing to d. Does the information appear in any reporting procedures set forth in the consider the confidentiality claim to be public documents, including (but not Active-Inactive rule at 40 CFR 710.39. deficient and would treat the specific limited to) safety data sheets, Any person submitting a substantiation chemical identity as not subject to a advertising or promotional material, under this proposed rule could claim confidentiality claim, such that EPA professional or trade publication, or any any part or all of the substantiation as may make the information public other media or publications available to confidential business information. without further notice. This treatment of the general public? If you answered yes, Submitters would be required to use unsubstantiated confidentiality claims explain why the information should be EPA’s electronic reporting portal, as deficient would be consistent with treated as confidential. Central Data Exchange (CDX), and EPA’s how EPA has handled unsubstantiated e. Is the claim of confidentiality web-based reporting tool, Chemical confidentiality claims in other intended to last less than 10 years? If so, Information Submission System (CISS). regulations, e.g., 40 CFR 710.37(a)(2) indicate the number of years (between Because all submitters under this and (b) (Active-Inactive rule) and 40 1–10 years) or the specific date/ proposed rule would have previously

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16830 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

filed NOA Form A’s under the Active- claim. The notice would be furnished by and deciding claims that were Inactive rule using these electronic certified mail (return receipt requested), voluntarily substantiated under the reporting procedures, EPA expects that by personal delivery, or by other means Active-Inactive rule (subject to the all submitters are already registered that allows verification of the fact and outcome of pending litigation involving with CDX and familiar with the date of receipt. EPA would not disclose that rule), or that appear to be clearly electronic reporting procedures. EPA is the specific chemical identity until the not entitled to protection from proposing mandatory electronic date that is 30 days after the date on disclosure based upon other information reporting because it is expected to allow which the submitter receives the denial available to the Agency. TSCA section for more efficient data transmittal, notice. Submitters can challenge EPA’s 14(i)(2) expressly permits EPA to support improved data quality, and denial of a CBI claim by commencing an review, require (re)substantiation of, minimize respondent burden and action to prevent disclosure in an and decide TSCA CBI claims before the reduce EPA administrative costs appropriate Federal district court. See effective date of such rules applicable to associated with information submission generally TSCA section 14(g) and 40 those claims as EPA may promulgate and recordkeeping. CFR 2.306(e). In instances where a CBI after June 22, 2016. EPA believes that claim is approved, EPA would so inform TSCA section 14(i)(2) clearly authorizes E. How would EPA review claims of the submitter, and the chemical the Agency to begin its reviews under confidentiality for specific chemical substance will be identified in TSCA section 8(b)(4) prior to identities? subsequent publications of the TSCA publication of this final rule, and that Consistent with how EPA handles the Inventory by a unique identifier doing so is appropriate in light of the review of other TSCA confidentiality assigned under TSCA section 14(g)(4), Congressionally-mandated timeline for claims, EPA would carefully consider in addition to the accession number, the completion of reviews. the facts provided in the generic name, and, if applicable, TSCA section 8(b)(4)(E)(ii)(I) provides substantiations, any pertinent premanufacture notice case number. that after an adequate public previously issued confidentiality Further information about the justification, the Agency may extend the determinations, and other reasonably assignment and application of unique five-year deadline for completion of available information that EPA finds identifiers for confidential chemical reviews for not more than two appropriate to determine the substances may be found in the Federal additional years. While the Agency does information’s entitlement to Register of June 27, 2018 (83 FR 30168). not currently anticipate a need for an confidential treatment. See 40 CFR extension, possible justifications for an 2.204(f), 2.205(d)(2) and 2.306. EPA F. Annual Review Goals and Results, extension might include, among other would apply the substantive criteria for Extension things, competing TSCA obligations confidentiality determinations set forth EPA is proposing to use the Agency’s which prevent the Agency from in 40 CFR 2.208 and 2.306(g), which website to publish its annual goal for completing the reviews within five provide in relevant part that information reviews completed under this review years, intervening events that divert the is entitled to confidential treatment for plan at the beginning of each calendar Agency’s resources from completing the the benefit of a particular business if: (a) year, starting with its goals for 2020, required reviews, or litigation involving The business has asserted a which the Agency anticipates would be the claim substantiation and review confidentiality claim which has not posted in February 2020 on the Agency process that may delay EPA’s expired by its terms, nor been waived web page. EPA is also proposing to track commencement of CBI claim reviews. nor withdrawn; (b) the business has the number of CBI reviews completed Should an extension become necessary, satisfactorily shown that it has taken under this review plan each year and is EPA is proposing to announce the reasonable measures to protect the proposing to use the Agency’s website extension and its justification to the confidentiality of the information, and to publish that number at the beginning public via a notice in the Federal that it intends to continue to take such of the following year, starting with the Register. measures; (c) the information is not, and number of reviews completed in 2020, has not been, reasonably obtainable which the Agency anticipates would be G. Duration of Protection From without the business’s consent by other posted on the Agency web page in Disclosure persons (other than governmental February 2021. These activities will TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) bodies) by use of legitimate means address the requirements of TSCA provides that specific chemical (other than discovery based on a section 8(b)(4)(E)(ii)(II). identities for which EPA has approved showing of need in a judicial or quasi- EPA intends to implement the CBI a CBI claim under TSCA section judicial proceeding); (d) no statute review plan described in this proposed 8(b)(4)(D) must be protected from specifically requires disclosure of the rule to complete reviews of all CBI disclosure for a period of 10 years, information; and (e) the business has claims for specific chemical identities unless, prior to the expiration of that satisfactorily shown that disclosure of not later than five years after the period, the claimant notifies EPA that the information is likely to cause publication of the first TSCA Inventory they are withdrawing the confidentiality substantial harm to the business’s containing all ‘‘active’’ substance claim, in which case the Agency cannot competitive position. designations based on NOA Form A’s, protect the information from disclosure; In instances where there are multiple as required under TSCA section or the Agency otherwise becomes aware NOA Form A’s asserting the 8(b)(4)(E)(i). Since the initial list of that the information does not qualify for confidentiality of the same chemical active substances published on February protection from disclosure, in which identity, the Agency may choose to 19, 2019, EPA intends to complete all case the Agency must take the actions review these NOA Form A’s together as reviews by February 19, 2024. EPA described in TSCA section 14(g)(2) (i.e., a matter of efficiency. intends the annual review goals to take to notify the claimant of EPA’s intent to In instances where a CBI claim is into consideration this target disclose the information). TSCA section denied, the Agency would notify the completion date, the number of claims 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) does not explicitly state submitter, in writing, of EPA’s intent to needing review, and available resources. when the 10-year period of protection disclose the specific chemical identity Before the effective date of this rule’s begins, but TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii) and of EPA’s reasons for denying the finalization, EPA may begin reviewing provides as a general matter that EPA’s

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16831

actions under the review plan must be date from which the 10-year period of within the documents that are included ‘‘in accordance with section 14.’’ Under protection will be calculated. in the docket, even if the referenced TSCA section 14(e)(1)(B)(i), as amended For example, if on July 1, 2016, a document is not physically located in on June 22, 2016, the duration of company addressing a CDR rule the docket. For assistance in locating protection from disclosure lasts ‘‘for a reporting requirement filed a report for these other documents, please consult period of 10 years from the date on a subject chemical substance and the technical contact listed under FOR which the person asserts the claim with asserted a CBI claim for the specific FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. chemical identity, and if EPA respect to the information submitted to 1. EPA. TSCA Inventory Notification the Administrator.’’ subsequently approved the company’s (Active-Inactive) Requirements Rule. Federal Notably, all specific chemical identity confidentiality claim, then the 10-year Register, 82 FR 37520, August 11, 2017 CBI claims subject to review under time period of protection from (FRL–9964–22). TSCA section 8(b)(4) and this proposed disclosure would begin on July 1, 2016. 2. EPA. Notice of Activity Form A; Final, If that company subsequently filed an 2017. rule had already been asserted by one or 3. EPA. Economic Analysis for the more persons prior to June 22, 2016, NOA Form A on January 1, 2018 and sought to maintain the confidentiality Proposed Rule: Procedures for Review of CBI resulting in the placement of the Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on the chemical substance on the confidential claim for that specific chemical identity, TSCA Inventory—RIN 2070–AK21—Office of portion of the TSCA Inventory. Pursuant and if EPA subsequently approved that Pollution Protection and Toxics. Washington, to TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)(ii) and the claim, the 10-year period of protection DC, February 2019. Active-Inactive rule, manufacturers and from disclosure would continue to run 4. EPA. TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory. 2018. https://www.epa.gov/tsca- processors submitting NOA Form A’s from July 1, 2016, and would not restart on the date of NOA filing. If a second inventory/how-access-tsca-inventory. were only permitted to indicate that 5. EPA. ICR No. 2594.01 Information they seek to maintain an existing claim company then filed an NOA Form A on February 1, 2018 seeking to maintain a Collection Request for TSCA Review Plan for protection against disclosure of the CBI Substantiation Supporting Statement for specific chemical identity of the CBI claim for that same specific a Request for OMB Review under the chemical substance. TSCA section chemical identity, and the second Paperwork Reduction Act. February 2019. 8(b)(4)(C) describes these requests to company’s claim were approved, the 10- year period of protection from VI. Statutory and Executive Order maintain existing claims as ‘‘claims . . . Reviews asserted pursuant to [TSCA section disclosure would still run from July 1, 8(b)(4)(B)],’’ and TSCA section 2016. In cases where an NOA Form A Additional information about these 8(b)(4)(D)(i) refers to ‘‘manufacturers or was the first submission to assert the statutes and Executive Orders can be processors asserting claims under CBI claim for a specific chemical found at https://www.epa.gov/laws- [TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)]’’ (emphasis identity after June 22, 2016, the 10-year regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. period of protection for an approved added). Thus, EPA believes Congress A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory claim would begin on the date of that intended that the filing date of the Planning and Review and Executive NOA filing. request seeking to maintain the CBI Order 13563: Improving Regulation and claim (i.e., the filing date of the NOA H. What are the record retention Regulatory Review. Form A) may function as the date of requirements? This action is a significant regulatory claim assertion for purposes of EPA is proposing to require that action that was submitted to the Office determining the period of protection persons subject to the finalized rule of Management and Budget (OMB) for from disclosure. However, in cases retain records that document any review under Executive Orders 12866 where the same specific chemical information reported to EPA. The (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and identity was subject to a CBI claim in proposed rule would require such 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). another submission filed on or after records to be retained for a period of 5 Any changes made in response to OMB June 22, 2016, EPA believes it would be years beginning on the last day of the recommendations have been incongruous to effectively re-start the submission period, which is consistent documented in the docket for this action 10-year period of protection from with the statutory mandate in TSCA as required by section 6(a)(3)(E) of disclosure based upon the subsequent section 8(b)(9)(B). Executive Order 12866. submission of a request (i.e., an NOA Form A) seeking to maintain that claim. IV. Request for Comments B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Accordingly, EPA proposes to interpret EPA is seeking public comment on all Regulations and Controlling Regulatory the date of assertion for purposes of aspects of this proposed rule, including Costs calculating the duration of protection filing requirements, the exemptions This action is expected to be subject under TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) as process, annual goal setting, duration of to the requirements for regulatory the date of submission of the first filing protection from disclosure, Agency actions specified in Executive Order in which the specific chemical identity reviews, economic burden, and the 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017). was claimed as CBI after June 22, 2016. scope of the substantiation questions EPA prepared an analysis of the This interpretation would impact the described in Unit III.C and referenced in estimated costs and benefits associated calculation of the period of protection the proposed regulatory text at section with this action (Economic Analysis, from disclosure where there are 710.45, as well as other issues discussed Ref. 3), which is available in the docket multiple submitters of the NOA Form A in this document. and is summarized in Unit I.E. that are asserting confidentiality claims on the same specific chemical identity, V. References C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) as well as where one or more submitters The following is a listing of the The information collection activities of information to EPA outside the documents that are specifically in this proposed rule have been context of the NOA Form A has asserted referenced in this document. The docket submitted for approval to the Office of a specific chemical identity includes these references and other Management and Budget (OMB) under confidentiality claim after June 22, information considered by EPA, the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 2016. Companies will be notified of the including documents that are referenced Information Collection Request (ICR)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16832 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

document that the EPA prepared has D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) the states, or on the distribution of been assigned EPA ICR number ICR No. Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, power and responsibilities among the 2594.01 and OMB Control No. 2070– 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that this various levels of government. NEW (Ref. 5). You can find a copy of the action will not have a significant G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is economic impact on a substantial and Coordination With Indian Tribal briefly summarized here. number of small entities. The small Governments The reporting requirements identified entities subject to the requirements of in the proposed rule would provide EPA this action are manufacturers (including This action does not have tribal with information necessary to evaluate importers) and processors of chemical implications as specified in Executive confidentiality claims and determine substances. EPA estimates that a total of Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, whether the claims qualify for 126 companies are expected to be 2000). It will not have substantial direct protection from disclosure. impacted by this proposed rule, of effects on tribal governments, on the Manufacturers and processors who which 121 are identified as small relationship between the Federal provided substantiations pursuant to the entities. Given the estimated per government and the Indian tribes, or on voluntary substantiation process in the submission burden and costs range from the distribution of power and Active-Inactive rule NOA collection 5.1 hours and $390 (for Group (2)) to responsibilities between the Federal would be exempt from the proposed 34.1 hours and $ 2,640 (for Group (3)), government and Indian tribes. Thus, substantiation requirements. EPA would as presented in Unit 1.E. EPA has E.O. 13175 does not apply to this action. review each specific chemical identity determined that all 121 of the identified H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of CBI claim and substantiation, and small entities considered in this Children From Environmental Health approve or deny each claim consistent analysis will experience an impact of Risks and Safety Risks with the procedures and substantive less than 1% of revenues. criteria in TSCA sections 8(b)(4) and 14 In the affected universe of small EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 and 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. entities, there are two groups of entities (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), as Respondent’s obligation to respond: affected by this proposed rule (Groups applying only to those regulatory Mandatory. (2) and (3)), based on the extent of actions that concern health or safety Frequency of response: Once per substantiation information involved in risks, such that the analysis required chemical. the submission. Entities of Group (3) are under section 5–501 of Executive Order Estimated total number of potential expected to incur the highest burden 13045 has the potential to influence the respondents: 126. under this proposed rule, as they are regulation. This action is not subject to Estimated total burden: 3,629 hours required to submit full confidentiality Executive Order 13045 because it does (one time). Burden is defined at 5 CFR substantiations (each submission not establish an environmental standard 1320.3(b). involving an average of 27 chemicals intended to mitigate health or safety Estimated total costs: $ 280,981 (one per entity) in response to the regulatory risks. time), includes no annualized capital requirements. As a conservative I. Executive Order 13211: Actions investment or maintenance and approach, in this small entity analysis Concerning Regulations That operational costs. the higher unit cost from Group (3), as Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Under PRA, an agency may not the most affected group, is applied to all Distribution, or Use conduct or sponsor, and a person is not small entities. Details of this analysis required to respond to, a collection of are included in the accompanying This action is not a ‘‘significant information unless it displays a Economic Analysis for this proposed energy action’’ as defined in Executive currently valid OMB control number. rule (Ref. 3). Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, The OMB control numbers are 2001), because it is not likely to have a displayed either by publication in the E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act significant adverse effect on energy Federal Register or by other appropriate (UMRA) supply, distribution, or use. means, such as on the related collection This action does not contain an J. National Technology Transfer and instrument or form, if applicable. The unfunded mandate as described in Advancement Act (NTTAA) display of OMB control numbers for UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does certain EPA regulations is consolidated not significantly or uniquely affect small Since this action does not involve any in 40 CFR part 9. governments. The action is not expected technical standards, NTTAA section Submit your comments on the to impose enforceable duty on any state, 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not Agency’s need for this information, the local or tribal governments, and the apply to this action. accuracy of the provided burden requirements imposed on the private K. Executive Order 12898: Federal estimates and any suggested methods sector are not expected to result in Actions To Address Environmental for minimizing respondent burden to annual expenditures of $100 million or Justice in Minority Populations and EPA using the docket identified at the more for the private sector. As such, Low-Income Populations beginning of this proposed rule. You EPA has determined that the may also send your ICR-related requirements of UMRA sections 202, This action does not entail special comments to OMB’s Office of 203, 204, or 205 do not apply to this considerations of environmental justice Information and Regulatory Affairs via action. related issues as delineated by email to OIRA_submission@ Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism February 16, 1994), because it does not EPA. Since OMB is required to make a This action does not have federalism establish an environmental health or decision concerning the ICR between 30 implications as specified in Executive safety standard. This action establishes and 60 days after receipt, OMB must Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, an information requirement and does receive comments no later than May 23, 1999). It will not have substantial direct not affect the level of protection 2019. EPA will respond to any ICR- effects on the states, on the relationship provided to human health or the related comments in the final rule. between the national government and environment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16833

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 710 substantiation requirement of this § 710.55 Claim review, duration of subpart if both of the following protection, TSCA Inventory maintenance, Environmental Protection, Chemicals, posting results, and extension. Confidential Business Information, conditions are met: (i) The previous substantiation was Hazardous substances, Reporting and (a) Review criteria and procedures. submitted to EPA on or after [insert date Recordkeeping Requirements. Except as set forth in this subpart, five years before the date that is 90 days confidentiality claims for specific Dated: April 10, 2019. after effective date of final rule]; and chemical identities asserted in Notices Andrew R. Wheeler, (ii) The person reports to EPA the of Activity Form A will be reviewed and Administrator. submission date; submission type; and case number, transaction ID, or approved or denied in accordance with Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR equivalent identifier for the previous the criteria and procedures in 40 CFR chapter I be amended as follows: submission that contained the part 2, subpart B. PART 710—COMPILATION OF THE substantiation, not later than the (b) Duration of protection from TSCA CHEMICAL SUBSTANCE deadline specified in § 710.47. disclosure. Except as provided in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, and section 14 of INVENTORY § 710.45 Contents of substantiation. TSCA, a specific chemical identity that ■ 1. The authority citation for part 710 A person substantiating a is the subject of an approved continues to read as follows: confidentiality claim for a specific confidentiality claim under this subpart chemical identity must submit answers will be protected from disclosure for a Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a) and (b). to the questions in § 710.37(c)(1) and period of 10 years from the date on ■ (2), signed and dated by an authorized 2. Add subpart C to read as follows: which the confidentiality claim was first official, and complete the certification asserted by any submitter after June 22, Subpart C—Review Plan statement in § 710.37(e). If any of the information contained in the answers to 2016, unless, prior to the expiration of Sec. the period, the claimant notifies EPA 710.41 Scope. the questions listed in § 710.37(c)(1) or (2) is claimed as confidential, the that the person is withdrawing the 710.43 Persons subject to substantiation confidentiality claim, in which case requirement. submitter must clearly indicate such by 710.45 Contents of substantiation. marking the substantiation as EPA will not protect the information 710.47 When to submit substantiation or confidential business information. from disclosure; or EPA otherwise information on previous substantiation. becomes aware that the information 710.49 No confidentiality claim. § 710.47 When to submit substantiation or does not qualify for protection from 710.51 Electronic filing. information on previous substantiation. disclosure, in which case EPA will take 710.53 Record-keeping requirements. (a) All persons required to the actions described in TSCA section 710.55 Claim review, duration of substantiate a confidentiality claim 14(g)(2) to notify the claimant of EPA’s protection, TSCA Inventory pursuant to § 710.43(a) must submit intent to disclose the information. maintenance, posting results, and their substantiation not later than [insert extension. date that is 90 days after effective date (c) Updating the TSCA Inventory. EPA will periodically update the TSCA § 710.41 Scope. of final rule]. (b) All persons who seek an Inventory based on the results of the This part applies to the substantiation exemption under § 710.43(b)(2) must reviews of the confidentiality claims and review of claims of confidentiality submit the information specified in asserted in Notices of Activity Form A. asserted in Notices of Activity Form A § 710.43(b)(2)(iii) not later than [date to protect the specific chemical (d) Posting of annual goals and that is 90 days after effective date of identities of chemical substances. numbers of reviews completed. At the final rule]. beginning of each calendar year, EPA § 710.43 Persons subject to substantiation § 710.49 No confidentiality claim. will publish an annual goal for reviews requirement. and the number of reviews completed in If substantiation required under (a) Any person who filed a Notice of the prior year on the Agency website. Activity Form A requesting to maintain § 710.43(a) is not submitted to EPA in accordance with the provisions of this Determination of annual review goals an existing confidentiality claim for a will take into consideration the number specific chemical identity must subpart, and no exemption under § 710.43(b) applies, EPA will consider of claims needing review, available substantiate that confidentiality claim as resources, and a target completion date specified in §§ 710.45 and 710.47 unless the confidentiality claim as deficient, so that the specific chemical identity is not for all reviews under this subpart not eligible for an exemption. later than February 19, 2024. (b) Exemptions. (1) Any person who subject to a confidentiality claim, and completed the voluntary substantiation EPA may make the information public (e) Extension. If EPA determines that process set forth in § 710.37(a)(1) by without further notice to the Notice of the target completion date in paragraph submitting with the Notice of Activity Activity Form A submitter. (d) of this section cannot be met based Form A answers to the questions in § 710.51 Electronic filing. on the number of claims needing review and the available resources, then EPA § 710.37(c)(1) and (2), signed and dated EPA will accept information will publish a document in the Federal by an authorized official, and submitted under this subpart only if Register announcing the extension of completing the certification statement submitted in accordance with § 710.39. for claims specified in § 710.37(e), is the deadline to complete its review of exempt from the substantiation § 710.53 Record-keeping requirements. all confidentiality claims under this requirement of this subpart. Each person who is subject to this subpart for not more than two (2) A person who has previously part must retain records that document additional years, together with an substantiated the confidentiality claim any information reported to EPA. explanation of the reasons for the for a specific chemical identity that the Records must be retained for a period of extension. person requested to maintain in a Notice 5 years beginning on the last day of the [FR Doc. 2019–07920 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] of Activity Form A is exempt from the submission period. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16834 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Emily Pedneau, (301) 492–4448, for granting an extension to the public HUMAN SERVICES issues related to Qualified Health Plans. comment period in this instance would Meg Barry, (410) 786–1536, for issues further our overall objective to obtain Centers for Medicare & Medicaid related to CHIP. public input on the proposed provisions Services Thomas Novak, (202) 322–7235, for to move the health care ecosystem in the issues related to trust exchange direction of interoperability. Therefore, 42 CFR Parts 406, 407, 422, 423, 431, networks and payer to payer we are extending the comment period 438, 457, 482, and 485 coordination. for the proposed rule for an additional [CMS–9115–N] Sharon Donovan, (410) 786–9187, for 30 days. issues related to federal-state data While we believe it is in the best RIN 0938–AT79 exchange. interest of the public and our proposed Daniel Riner, (410) 786–0237, for policies to extend the comment period Medicare and Medicaid Programs; issues related to Physician Compare. for this proposed rule, we also Patient Protection and Affordable Care Ashley Hain, (410) 786–7603, for acknowledge that stakeholders require Act; Interoperability and Patient issues related to hospital public appropriate implementation timelines Access for Medicare Advantage reporting. that could be impacted by this Organization and Medicaid Managed Melissa Singer, (410) 786–0365, for extension. Therefore, we note that based Care Plans, State Medicaid Agencies, issues related to provider directories. on public comments received on this CHIP Agencies and CHIP Managed CAPT Scott Cooper, USPHS, (410) proposed rule, we will adjust the Care Entities, Issuers of Qualified 786–9465, for issues related to hospital effective dates of our policies to allow Health Plans in the Federally-facilitated and critical access hospital conditions for adequate implementation timelines Exchanges and Health Care Providers; of participation. as appropriate. Supplement and Extension of Lisa Bari, (410) 786–0087, for issues Comment Period Dated: April 18, 2019. related to advancing interoperability in Seema Verma, innovative models. AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. Russell Hendel, (410) 786–0329, for Medicaid Services. issues related to the Collection of ACTION: Proposed rule; supplement and [FR Doc. 2019–08181 Filed 4–19–19; 8:45 am] extension of comment period. Information or the Regulation Impact Analysis sections. BILLING CODE 4120–01–P SUMMARY: This document extends the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the comment period for the proposed rule ‘‘Medicare and Medicaid Programs; entitled ‘‘Medicare and Medicaid DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Patient Protection and Affordable Care HUMAN SERVICES Programs; Patient Protection and Act; Interoperability and Patient Access Affordable Care Act; Interoperability for Medicare Advantage Organization Office of the Secretary and Patient Access for Medicare and Medicaid Managed Care Plans, Advantage Organization and Medicaid State Medicaid Agencies, CHIP 45 CFR Parts 170 and 171 Managed Care Plans, State Medicaid Agencies and CHIP Managed Care Agencies, CHIP Agencies and CHIP Entities, Issuers of Qualified Health RIN 0955–AA01 Managed Care Entities, Issuers of Plans in the Federally-facilitated 21st Century Cures Act: Qualified Health Plans in the Federally- Exchanges and Health Care Providers’’ Interoperability, Information Blocking, facilitated Exchanges and Health Care proposed rule that appeared in the and the ONC Health IT Certification Providers’’ that appeared in the March March 4, 2019 Federal Register (84 FR Program 4, 2019 Federal Register. The comment 7610), we solicited public comments on period for the proposed rule, which proposed policies that aim to move the AGENCY: Office of the National would end on May 3, 2019, is extended health care ecosystem in the direction of Coordinator for Health Information 30 days to June 3, 2019. We additionally interoperability, and to signal our Technology (ONC), Department of note that based on public comments commitment to the vision set out in the Health and Human Services (HHS). received on this proposed rule, we will 21st Century Cures Act and Executive ACTION: adjust the effective dates of our policies Proposed rule; extension of Order 13813 to improve access to, and comment period. to allow for adequate implementation the quality of, information that timelines, as appropriate. Americans need to make informed SUMMARY: On March 4, 2019, the DATES: The comment period for the health care decisions, including data Department of Health and Human proposed rule (84 FR 7610) is extended about health care prices and outcomes, Services (HHS) published a proposed to 5 p.m., eastern daylight time, on June while minimizing reporting burdens on rule that would implement certain 3, 2019. affected plans, health care providers, or provisions of the 21st Century Cures ADDRESSES: You may submit comments payers. Act, including conditions and as outlined in the March 4, 2019 Since the issuance of the proposed maintenance of certification proposed rule (84 FR 7610). Please rule, we have received inquiries from a requirements for health information choose only one method listed. variety of stakeholders, including technology (health IT) developers under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: healthcare provider organizations and the ONC Health IT Certification Program Alexandra Mugge, (410) 786–4457, for industry representatives requesting an (Program), the voluntary certification of issues related to interoperability, CMS extension to the comment period. In health IT for use by pediatric health care health IT strategy, technical standards order to maximize the opportunity for providers, and reasonable and necessary and patient matching. the public to provide meaningful input activities that do not constitute Natalie Albright, (410) 786–1671, for to CMS, we believe that it is important information blocking. The comment issues related to Medicare Advantage. to allow additional time for the public period for the rule was scheduled to John Giles, (410) 786–1255, for issues to prepare comments on the proposed close on May 3, 2019. This document related to Medicaid. rule. In addition, we believe that extends the comment period for the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16835

proposed rule by 30 days to June 3, of the proposed rule for use in their SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 2019. individual comments. Additionally, a ‘‘21st Century Cures Act: DATES: The comment period for the separate document (‘‘public comment Interoperability, Information Blocking, proposed rule published March 4, 2019, template’’) is available on ONC’s and the ONC Health IT Certification at 84 FR 7424, is extended. Comments website (http://www.healthit.gov) for the Program’’ proposed rule that appeared must be received on or before June 3, public to use in providing comments on in the March 4, 2019 Federal Register 2019. the proposed rule. This document is (84 FR 7424), we solicited public meant to provide the public with a comments on proposals to implement ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, simple and organized way to submit certain provisions of the 21st Century identified by RIN 0955–AA01, by any of comments on proposals and respond to Cures Act, including conditions and the following methods (please do not specific questions posed in the maintenance of certification submit duplicate comments). Because of preamble of the proposed rule. While requirements for health information staff and resource limitations, we cannot use of this document is entirely technology (health IT) developers under accept comments by facsimile (FAX) voluntary, we encourage commenters to the ONC Health IT Certification Program transmission. consider using the document in lieu of (Program), the voluntary certification of • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Follow unstructured comments, or to use it as health IT for use by pediatric health care the instructions for submitting an addendum to narrative cover pages. providers, and reasonable and necessary comments. Attachments should be in We believe that use of the document activities that do not constitute Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, or may facilitate our review and information blocking. The comment Adobe PDF; however, we prefer understanding of the comments period for the rule was scheduled to Microsoft Word. http:// received. close on May 3, 2019. This document www.regulations.gov. Inspection of Public Comments: All extends the comment period for the • Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail: comments received before the close of proposed rule by 30 days until June 3, Department of Health and Human the comment period will be available for 2019. Services, Office of the National public inspection, including any Coordinator for Health Information personally identifiable or confidential To date, we have received comments Technology, Attention: 21st Century business information that is included in from organizations with broad Cures Act: Interoperability, Information a comment. Please do not include stakeholder representation requesting Blocking, and the ONC Health IT anything in your comment submission that we extend the 60-day comment Certification Program Proposed Rule, that you do not wish to share with the period for the proposed rule. For Mary E. Switzer Building, Mail Stop: general public. Such information example, we have received comments 7033A, 330 C Street SW, Washington, includes, but is not limited to: A requesting more time from clinicians, DC 20201. Please submit one original person’s social security number; date of hospitals, health IT developers and and two copies. birth; driver’s license number; state developer associations, professional • Hand Delivery or Courier: Office of identification number or foreign country societies, researchers, quality the National Coordinator for Health equivalent; passport number; financial improvement organizations, health Information Technology, Attention: 21st account number; credit or debit card plans, and patient advocacy Century Cures Act: Interoperability, number; any personal health organizations. The commenters have Information Blocking, and the ONC information; or any business stated that due to the depth and Health IT Certification Program information that could be considered complexity of the policies proposed, it Proposed Rule, Mary E. Switzer proprietary. We will post all comments is critical for the public to have Building, Mail Stop: 7033A, 330 C that are received before the close of the extended time in providing sufficient Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. comment period at http:// and thoughtful comments to advance Please submit one original and two www.regulations.gov. shared goals and shape the copies. (Because access to the interior of Docket: For access to the docket to interoperability landscape. Based on the Mary E. Switzer Building is not read background documents or these public comments and the stated readily available to persons without comments received, go to http:// goals of the proposed rule to improve federal government identification, www.regulations.gov or the Department interoperability and patient access to commenters are encouraged to leave of Health and Human Services, Office of health information for the purposes of their comments in the mail drop slots the National Coordinator for Health promoting competition and better care, located in the main lobby of the Information Technology, Mary E. we are extending the comment period building.) Switzer Building, Mail Stop: 7033A, 330 for the proposed rule for an additional Enhancing the Public Comment C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201 30 days. Experience: To facilitate public (call ahead to the contact listed below Dated: April 18, 2019. comment on this proposed rule, a copy to arrange for inspection).. will be made available in Microsoft FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex M. Azar II, Word format on ONC’s website (http:// Michael Lipinski, Office of Policy, Secretary, Department of Health and Human www.healthit.gov). We believe this Office of the National Coordinator for Services. version will make it easier for Health Information Technology, 202– [FR Doc. 2019–08178 Filed 4–19–19; 8:45 am] commenters to access and copy portions 690–7151. BILLING CODE 4150–45–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 16836

Notices Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 78

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 displays a currently valid OMB control contains documents other than rules or CFR 404.7. number and the agency informs proposed rules that are applicable to the potential persons who are to respond to public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Mojdeh Bahar, the collection of information that such committee meetings, agency decisions and Assistant Administrator. persons are not required to respond to rulings, delegations of authority, filing of [FR Doc. 2019–08123 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] petitions and applications and agency the collection of information unless it BILLING CODE 3410–03–P statements of organization and functions are displays a currently valid OMB control examples of documents appearing in this number. section. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) Submission for OMB Review; DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Title: List Sampling Frame Survey— Comment Request Substantive Change. Agricultural Research Service April 17, 2019. OMB Control Number: 0535–0140. Summary of Collection: General The Department of Agriculture will Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive authority for these data collection submit the following information License activities is granted under U.S. Code collection requirement(s) to OMB for Title 7, Section 2204 which specifies AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, review and clearance under the that ‘‘The Secretary of Agriculture shall USDA. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, procure and preserve all information ACTION: Notice of intent. Public Law 104–13 on or after the date concerning agriculture which he can of publication of this notice. Comments obtain .... by the collection of SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that are requested regarding: (1) Whether the statistics . . .’’. The primary objective of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, collection of information is necessary the National Agricultural Statistics Agricultural Research Service, intends for the proper performance of the Service (NASS) is to provide data users to grant to AGROSOURCE, INC. of functions of the agency, including with timely and reliable agricultural Tequesta, Florida, an exclusive license whether the information will have production and economic statistics, as to U.S. Patent No. 9,629,362, practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the well as environmental and specialty ‘‘METHODS FOR KILLING INSECTS agency’s estimate of burden including agricultural related statistics. To USING METHYL BENZOATE,’’ issued the validity of the methodology and accomplish this objective, NASS relies on APRIL 25, 2017. assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance heavily on the use of sample surveys DATES: Comments must be received on the quality, utility and clarity of the statistically drawn from the ‘‘List or before May 23, 2019. information to be collected; and (4) Sampling Frame.’’ The List Sampling ways to minimize the burden of the ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, Frame is a database of names and collection of information on those who ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, addresses, with control data, that are to respond, including through the 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4–1174, contains the components values from use of appropriate automated, Beltsville, Maryland 20705–5131. which these samples can be drawn. electronic, mechanical, or other Most of the surveys that NASS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: technological collection techniques or conducts are based on multiple frame Brian T. Nakanishi of the Office of other forms of information technology samples. This multi-frame concept Technology Transfer at the Beltsville should be addressed to: Desk Officer for currently involves a List Frame, which address given above; telephone: 301– Agriculture, Office of Information and consists of names of all known farm 504–5989. Regulatory Affairs, Office of operators, and an Area Frame, which SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Management and Budget (OMB), New consists of all land in the United States. Federal Government’s patent rights in Executive Office Building, Washington, The Area Frame is used to measure this invention are assigned to the United DC; New Executive Office Building, 725 incompleteness in the List Frame. States of America, as represented by the 17th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20503. Currently, NASS is approved to use Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the Commenters are encouraged to submit web-scraping to identify potential farm public interest to so license this their comments to OMB via email to: operators who are not currently on the invention as AGROSOURCE, INC. of [email protected] or fax NASS List Frame. The substantive Tequesta, Florida has submitted a (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental change that NASS is proposing, complete and sufficient application for Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail involves adding an additional a license. The prospective exclusive Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– questionnaire to the currently approved license will be royalty-bearing and will 7602. docket. This is being done through the comply with the terms and conditions Comments regarding these June Area Research Project (JARP) pilot of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The information collections are best assured study. The new questionnaire that is prospective exclusive license may be of having their full effect if received by being added, will be the second phase granted unless, within thirty (30) days May 23, 2019. Copies of the of the JARP study. This two-phased from the date of this published Notice, submission(s) may be obtained by pilot study is designed to assess the the Agricultural Research Service calling (202) 720–8681. viability of replacing or reducing the receives written evidence and argument An agency may not conduct or NASS Area Frame with a web-scraped which establishes that the grant of the sponsor a collection of information List Frame for the June Area Survey license would not be consistent with the unless the collection of information (JAS). JARP’s second phase

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16837

questionnaire will be administered via collection requirement(s) to Office of mortgage. Regular periodic operations telephone, web and mail, thereby Management and Budget (OMB) for and maintenance (O&M) review can reducing or possibly eliminating the review and clearance under the identify and correct inadequate O&M expensive in-person enumeration costs Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, practices before they cause extensive which are needed for the current Area Public Law 104–13. Comments are harm to the system. Inadequate O&M Frame-based JAS. requested regarding (1) whether the practices can result in public safety The JARP study will be conducted in collection of information is necessary hazards, increased power outages for four states (Kansas, Nebraska, New York for the proper performance of the consumers, added expense for and Pennsylvania) in the summer of functions of the agency, including emergency maintenance, and premature 2019. A parallel design study, also whether the information will have aging of the borrower’s systems, which called a parallel group study, will be practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the could increase the loan security risk to conducted. The ‘‘control’’ group will be agency’s estimate of burden including RUS. the 2019 JAS sample, which will be the validity of the methodology and Need and Use of the Information: drawn and analyzed using current assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance RUS will collect information using form production processes. The ‘‘treatment’’ the quality, utility and clarity of the 300 Review Rate Summary to identity group will be the sample collected information to be collected; (4) ways to items that may be in need of additional within this pilot study. Data collected minimize the burden of the collection of attention; to plan corrective actions for JARP will be used to evaluate the information on those who are to when needed; to budget funds and efficacy of eliminating or reducing the respond, including through the use of manpower for needed work; and to need for NASS’s Area Frame-based appropriate automated, electronic, initiate ongoing programs as necessary surveys. mechanical, or other technological to avoid or minimize the need for This substantive change will add an collection techniques or other forms of ‘‘catch-up’’ programs. additional 8,000 respondents and 1,697 information technology. Description of Respondents: Not-for- hours of respondent burden to the Comments regarding this information profit institutions; Business or other for- currently approved totals. collection received by May 23, 2019 will profit. Need and Use of the Information: The be considered. Written comments Number of Respondents: 156. List Sampling Frame Surveys are used should be addressed to: Desk Officer for to develop and maintain a complete list Agriculture, Office of Information and Frequency of responses: Reporting: of possible farm operations. Data from Regulatory Affairs, Office of On occasion. criteria surveys are used to provide Management and Budget (OMB), New Total Burden Hours: 624. control data for new records on the list Executive Office Building, 725 17th Kimble Brown, sampling frame. This information is Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. Departmental Information Collection utilized to define the size of operation, Commenters are encouraged to submit Clearance Officer. define sample populations and establish their comments to OMB via email to: [FR Doc. 2019–08144 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] [email protected] or eligibility for the Census of Agriculture. BILLING CODE 3410–15–P New names and addresses of potential fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental farms are obtained on a regular basis Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail from growers association, other Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE government agencies and various 7602. Copies of the submission(s) may outside sources. The goal is to produce be obtained by calling (202) 720–8958. Rural Business-Cooperative Service for each State a relatively complete, An agency may not conduct or current, and unduplicated list of names sponsor a collection of information Notice of Solicitation of Applications for statistical sampling for agricultural unless the collection of information for the Biorefinery, Renewable operation surveys and the Census of displays a currently valid OMB control Chemical, and Biobased Product Agriculture. This information is used to number and the agency informs Manufacturing Assistance Program for develop efficient sample designs, which potential persons who are to respond to Federal Fiscal Year 2019; Amendment allows NASS the ability to draw the collection of information that such AGENCY: Rural Business-Cooperative reduced sample sizes from the originally persons are not required to respond to Service, USDA. large universe populations. the collection of information unless it Description of Respondents: Farms. displays a currently valid OMB control ACTION: Notice of solicitation of Number of Respondents: 8,000. number. applications; amendment. Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion. Rural Utilities Service SUMMARY: The Rural Business- Total Burden Hours: 1,697. Title: 7 CFR 1730, Review Rating Cooperative Service (the Agency) Summary. published a notice in the Federal Kimble Brown, OMB Control Number: 0572–0025. Register on August 3, 2018, announcing Departmental Information Collection Summary of Collection: The Rural the acceptance of applications for funds Clearance Officer. Utilities Service (RUS) manages loan available under the Biorefinery, [FR Doc. 2019–08091 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] programs in accordance with the Rural Renewable Chemical, and Biobased BILLING CODE 3410–20–P Electrification Act (RE Act) of 1936, 7 Product Manufacturing Assistance U.S.C. 901 et seq., as amended. An Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019. The important part of safeguarding loan Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE security is to see that RUS financed (2018 Farm Bill) provides funding for Submission for OMB Review; facilities are being responsible used, the program for FY 2019 and expands Comment Request adequately operated, and adequately the eligible technology definition. This maintained. Future needs have to be notice provides an amendment to April 18, 2019. anticipated to ensure that facilities will Section III. Eligibility Information, The Department of Agriculture has continue to produce revenue and loans subsection C. Eligible Projects, to submitted the following information will be repaid as required by the RUS include the definition.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16838 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing improper determinations of eligibility, information about this Notice, please provisions of the Paperwork Reduction improper use of funds, and/or unsound contact Aaron Morris, Assistant Deputy Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) requires loans. Administrator, USDA Rural that interested members of the public Estimate of Burden: Public reporting Development, Energy Programs, 1400 and affected agencies have an burden for this collection of information Independence Avenue SW, Stop 3225, opportunity to comment on information is estimated to average 13 hours per Room 6901, Washington, DC 20250. collection and recordkeeping activities response. Telephone:(202) 720–1501. Email: (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice Respondents: Business or other for [email protected]. identifies an information collection that profit; Not-for-profit institutions; State, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the RUS is submitting to OMB for Local or Tribal government. Federal Register on August 3, 2018 (83 extension. Estimated Number of Respondents: FR 38119), make the following Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 3,000. Estimated Number of Responses per amendment: the proposed collection of information In the third column on page 38120, is necessary for the proper performance Respondent: 1. Estimated Total Annual Burden on under Section III Eligibility Information, of the functions of the Agency, Respondents: 38,359 hours. subsection C. Eligible Projects, add the including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of Copies of this information collection following: can be obtained from Thomas P. In addition, the Agricultural the Agency’s estimate of the burden of Dickson, Rural Development Innovation Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm the proposed collection of information Center—Regulatory Team 2, USDA, Bill), amends the definition of ‘eligible including the validity of the 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP technology’ to allow applicants to methodology and assumptions used; (c) 1522, Room 5164, South Building, submit for funding projects for the ways to enhance the quality, utility and Washington, DC 20250–1522. development, construction and clarity of the information to be Telephone: (202) 690–4492. Email retrofitting of commercial-scale collected; and (d) ways to minimize the [email protected]. All biorefineries using technologies that burden of the collection of information responses to this notice will be produce any 1 or more, or a on those who are to respond, including summarized and included in the request combination, of an advanced biofuel, through the use of appropriate for OMB approval. All comments will renewable chemical, or biobased automated, electronic, mechanical, or also become a matter of public record. product. other technological collection techniques or other forms of information Bette B. Brand, Bette B. Brand, technology. Comments may be sent to: Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Administrator, Rural Business-Cooperative Thomas P. Dickson, Rural Development Service. Service. Innovation Center—Regulatory Team 2, [FR Doc. 2019–08168 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2019–08118 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P BILLING CODE 3410–XY–P STOP 1522, Room 5164, South Building, Washington, DC 20250–1522. Telephone: (202) 690–4492. Email DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [email protected]. Title: Guaranteed Loanmaking and Rural Housing Service Rural Business-Cooperative Service Servicing Regulations. OMB Number: 0570–0069. Rural Business-Cooperative Service Information Collection Activity; Type of Request: Extension of a Comment Request currently approved information Notice of Request for Extension of a collection. AGENCY: Rural Business-Cooperative Currently Approved Information Abstract: The Business & Industry Service, USDA. Collection Guaranteed Loan Program is authorized ACTION: Notice and request for under Section 310B of the Consolidated AGENCY: Rural Housing Service (RHS), comments. Farm and Rural Development Act (7 and Rural Business-Cooperative Service SUMMARY: In accordance with the U.S.C. 1926) to banks and other (RBS), USDA. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the approved lenders to finance private ACTION: Notice of collection and Rural Business-Cooperative Service businesses located in rural areas. The comments. (RBS) invites comments on this guaranteed loan program encourages lender participation and provides SUMMARY: In accordance with the information collection for which RUS Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this intends to request approval from the specific guidance in the processing and servicing of guaranteed loans. The notice announces the intention of the Office of Management and Budget above-named Agencies to request an (OMB). regulations governing the Business & Industry Guaranteed Loan Program are extension for a currently approved DATES: Comments on this notice must be codified at 7 CFR 4279. The required information collection in support of received by June 24, 2019. information, in the form of written debt settlement of Community Facilities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: documentation and Agency approved and Direct Business Program Loans and Thomas P. Dickson, Rural Development forms, is collected from applicants/ Grants. Innovation Center—Regulatory Team 2, borrowers, their lenders, and DATES: Comments on this notice must be USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, consultants. The collected information received by June 24, 2019 to be assured STOP 1522, Room 5164, South will be used to determine applicant/ of consideration. Building, Washington, DC 20250–1522. borrower eligibility, project feasibility, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Telephone: (202) 690–4492. Email and to ensure borrowers operate on a Thomas Dickson, Rural Development [email protected]. sound basis and use loan funds for Innovation Center—Regulatory Team, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office authorized purposes. Failure to collect U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 of Management and Budget’s (OMB) proper information could result in Independence Avenue SW, STOP 1522,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16839

Washington, DC 20250, Telephone: purchasing, or marketing services, Regulatory Team; phone—(715) 619– 202–690–4492, email: thomas.dickson@ supplies, or facilities. 3124; or email [email protected]. usda.gov. The Food Security Act of 1985, Richard A. Davis, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office Section 1323, authorizes loan Acting Administrator, Rural Housing Service. of Management and Budget’s (OMB) guarantees and grants to Nonprofit [FR Doc. 2019–08142 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing National Corporations to provide provisions of the Paperwork Reduction technical and financial assistance to for- BILLING CODE P Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) requires profit or nonprofit local businesses in that interested members of the public rural areas. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE and affected agencies have an The Business and Industry program is opportunity to comment on information authorized by Section 310 B of the Rural Utilities Service collection and recordkeeping activities Consolidated Farm and Rural (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice Development Act to improve, develop, Broadband Pilot Program—ReConnect identifies an information collection that or finance business, industry, and Program Rural Development is submitting to employment and improve the economic AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, OMB for extension. and environmental climate in rural Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Department of Agriculture. communities, including pollution ACTION: Notice; announcement of the collection of information is abatement control. necessary for the proper performance of opening date for Rural e-Connectivity the functions of the agency, including The Consolidated Farm and Rural Pilot Program application windows. whether the information will have Development Act, Section 310 B(c), authorizes Rural Business Enterprise SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the (RUS) announced its general policy and agency’s estimate of the burden of the Grants to public bodies and nonprofit corporations to facilitate the application procedures for funding collection of information including the under the eConnectivity Pilot Program validity of the methodology and development of private businesses in rural areas. (ReConnect Program) in a Funding assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance Opportunity Announcement (FOA) and the quality, utility and clarity of the The Consolidated Farm and Rural solicitation of applications on December information to be collected; and (d) Development Act, Section 310 B(f)(i), 14, 2018 in the Federal Register and ways to minimize the burden of the authorized Rural Cooperative amended the application window collection of information on Development Grants to nonprofit closing dates in a notice published on respondents, including through the use institutions for the purpose of enabling February 25, 2019 in the Federal of appropriate automated, electronic, such institutions to establish and Register. The Reconnect Program will mechanical, or other technological operate centers for rural cooperative provide loans, grants, and loan/grant collection techniques or other forms of development. combinations to facilitate broadband information technology. The purpose of the debt settlement deployment in rural areas. This Notice Comments may be sent to: Thomas P. function for the above programs is to announces the opening date for the Dickson, Rural Development Innovation provide the delinquent client with an ReConnect Program application Center—Regulatory, USDA, 1400 equitable tool for the compromise, windows. Independence Avenue SW, STOP 1522, adjustment, cancellation, or charge-off DATES: The Agency will begin accepting South Building, Washington, DC 20250– of a debt owed to the Agency. 1522. Telephone: (202) 690–4492. Email applications through https:// The information collected is similar to [email protected]. reconnect.usda.gov for all three that required by a commercial lender in Title: Debt Settlement-Community ReConnect Program funding categories similar circumstances. and Business Programs. on April 23, 2019. Please note that each OMB Number: 0575–0124. Information will be collected by the funding category has a different Type of Request: Extension of a field offices from applicants, borrowers, application deadline (as referenced in currently approved information consultants, lenders, and attorneys. Section II of Supplementary collection. Failure to collect information could Information). Please refer to the specific Abstract: The following Community result in improper servicing of these funding category for the appropriate and Direct Business Programs loans and loans. application dates. ADDRESSES: Application Submission: grants are debt settled by this currently Estimate of Burden: Public reporting The application system for electronic approved docket (0575–0124). The burden for this collection of information submissions is available at https:// Community Facilities loan and grant is estimated to average 6.2 hours per reconnect.usda.gov. program is authorized by Section 306 of response. the Consolidated Farm and Rural Electronic submissions: Electronic Development Act to make loans to Respondents: Public bodies and submissions of applications will allow public entities, nonprofit corporations, nonprofit organizations. for the expeditious review of an and Indian tribes through the Estimated Number of Respondents: Applicant’s proposal. As a result, all Community Facilities program for the 23. Applicants must file their application electronically. development of essential community Estimated Number of Responses per facilities primarily serving rural Respondent: 7.1. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For residents. Estimated Number of Responses: 163. general inquiries regarding the The Economic Opportunity Act of ReConnect Program, contact Chad 1964, Title 3, authorizes Economic Estimated Total Annual Burden on Parker, Assistant Administrator Opportunity Cooperative loans to assist Respondents: 1,005 hours. Telecommunications Program, Rural incorporated and unincorporated Copies of this information collections Utilities Service, U.S. Department of associations to provide low-income can be obtained from Diane M. Berger, Agriculture (USDA), email: rural families essential processing, Rural Development Innovation Center— [email protected], telephone

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16840 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

(202) 720–9554. You may obtain defaulted on, or failed to meet the terms 3. 100 Percent Grant additional information regarding and conditions of, an RUS loan or had Applications will be accepted from applications or submit requests for an RUS loan rescinded. To address April 23, 2019 through May 31, 2019. technical assistance at https:// these issues, the actions taken in the Notwithstanding overlapping www.usda.gov/reconnect/contact-us. Notice published in the Federal applications, generally all eligible SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Register (84 FR 14911) on April 12, applications will be scored and the Authority: This solicitation is issued 2019: (1) Revises the definition of applications with the highest score will pursuant to the Consolidated Appropriations Broadband loan in the FOA, as receive an award offer until all funds are Act, 2018, Public Law 115–141, and the published in the Federal Register on expended for this category. Scoring Rural Electrification Act of 1936, 7 U.S.C. December 14, 2018, as required by the criteria was established in the FOA, 901 et seq. 2019 Appropriations Act; (2) describes published in Federal Register on any changes to the data used in the Overview December 14, 2018, and can also be protected broadband service areas Federal Agency: Rural Utilities found on the website https:// mapping layer and, (3) announces the reconnect.usda.gov. Service, USDA. criteria by which applicants may Funding Opportunity Title: Rural challenge the determination of service B. Available Funds eConnectivity Pilot Program (ReConnect area eligibility. These actions were USDA is making available up to $200 Program). taken by the Agency to ensure that all million in in program level for grants, Announcement Type: Announcement eligible service areas receive fair of Opening Date for Rural e- $200 million in program level for loan consideration for funding under the and grant combinations, and $200 Connectivity Pilot Program Application ReConnect Program. Windows (FOA published in the million in program level for low-interest Telecommunications companies, rural Federal Register on December 14, 2018.) loans. RUS retains the discretion to Catalog of Federal Domestic electric cooperatives and utilities, divert funds from one funding category Assistance (CFDA) Number: Rural internet service providers and to another. municipalities may apply for funding eConnectivity Pilot Program (ReConnect III. Program Requirements Program)—10.752. through the ReConnect Program to connect rural areas that do not have To be eligible for an award, I. Background sufficient broadband service. Funds will applications must meet all the On March 23, 2018, Congress passed be awarded to projects that have requirements contained in the FOA the Consolidated Appropriations Act financially sustainable business models published in the Federal Register on 2018, which established a broadband that will bring high-speed broadband to December 14, 2018 at 83 FR 64315. loan and grant pilot program, the rural homes, businesses, farms, ranches Information can also be found at https:// ReConnect Program. One of the essential and community facilities, such as first reconnect.usda.gov. responders, health care sites, and goals of the ReConnect Program is to Chad Rupe, schools. The ReConnect Program expand broadband service to rural areas Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. without sufficient access to broadband, enables USDA to create and implement [FR Doc. 2019–08176 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] defined as 10 megabits per second innovative solutions to rural (Mbps) downstream and 1 Mbps connectivity by providing various BILLING CODE 3410–15–P upstream. For this purpose, Congress financial options to our partners and provided RUS with $600 million and customers. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE expanded its existing authority to make II. Funding Categories and Application loans and grants. Submission Dates International Trade Administration On December 14, 2018, RUS published a Funding Opportunity A. Funding Categories [A–570–097 and C–570–098] Announcement (FOA) and solicitation 1. 100 Percent Loan of applications in the Federal Register Polyester Textured Yarn From the at 83 FR 64315. The FOA provided the Applications will be accepted on a People’s Republic of China: policy and application procedures for rolling basis from April 23, 2019 Preliminary Affirmative Determinations the ReConnect Program. On February through July 12, 2019. If two loan of Critical Circumstances in the 25, 2019, RUS published a notice applications are received for the same Antidumping and Countervailing Duty announcing the application deadlines in proposed funded service area, the Investigations application that arrives first will be the Federal Register at 84 FR 5981. The AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, considered first. agency is publishing this notice to International Trade Administration, provide the date that the application 2. 50 Percent Loan/50 Percent Grant Department of Commerce. windows will open. Combination Since the publication of the December SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 14, 2018 FOA, the 2019 Appropriations Applications will be accepted from (Commerce) preliminarily determines Act became law on February 15, 2019. April 23, 2019 through June 21, 2019. that critical circumstances exist with The 2019 Appropriations Act requires Notwithstanding overlapping respect to all imports of polyester that the Agency shall, in determining applications, generally all eligible textured yarn (yarn) from the People’s whether an entity may overbuild, or applications will be scored and the Republic of China (China). duplicate broadband expansion efforts applications with the highest score will DATES: Applicable April 23, 2019. made by any entity that has received a receive an award offer until all funds are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: broadband loan from RUS, not consider expended for this category. Scoring George Ayache, AD/CVD Operations, loans that were rescinded or defaulted criteria was established in the Federal Office VIII, Enforcement and on, or whose loan terms and conditions Register FOA on December 14, 2018 and Compliance, International Trade were not met, if the new entity under can also be found on the website https:// Administration, U.S. Department of consideration has not previously reconnect.usda.gov. Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16841

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone In these AD and CVD investigations, the with section 703(e)(1)(A) of the Act, (202) 482–2623. petitioners requested that Commerce Commerce considered the evidence SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: issue preliminary critical circumstances currently on the record of the CVD determinations on an expedited basis.7 investigation. Specifically, as reflected Background Section 703(e)(1) of the Act provides in the initiation checklist, the following On October 18, 2018, Commerce that Commerce, upon receipt of a timely subsidy programs, alleged in the received antidumping duty (AD) and allegation of critical circumstances, will Petitions and supported by information countervailing duty (CVD) petitions preliminarily determine that critical reasonably available to the petitioners, concerning imports of yarn from China circumstances exist in CVD appear to be either export contingent or filed in proper form on behalf of Unifi investigations if there is a reasonable contingent upon the use of domestic Manufacturing, Inc. and Nan Ya Plastics basis to believe or suspect that: (A) ‘‘the goods over imported goods, which Corp. America (the petitioners).1 On alleged countervailable subsidy’’ is would render them inconsistent with November 19, 2018, we published the inconsistent with the Subsidies and the SCM Agreement: 9 notices of initiation of the AD and CVD Countervailing Measures (SCM) • Export Loans from Chinese State- investigations.2 Agreement of the World Trade Owned Banks In the AD investigation, Commerce Organization; and (B) there have been • Export Seller’s Credit selected Fujian Billion Polymerization massive imports of the subject • Export Buyer’s Credit Fiber Technology Industrial Co., Ltd. merchandise over a relatively short • Export Credit Guarantees • (Fujian Billion), Fujian Zhengqi High period. Section 733(e)(1) of the Act GOC and Sub-Central Government Tech Fiber, and Suzhou Shenghong provides that Commerce, upon receipt Subsidies for the Development of Fiber Co., Ltd. (Suzhou Shenghong) as of a timely allegation of critical Famous Brands and China World Top circumstances, will preliminarily the respondents for individual Brands determine that critical circumstances • examination.3 In the CVD investigation, SME International Market exist in AD investigations if there is a Commerce selected Fujian Billion, Exploration/Development Fund reasonable basis to believe or suspect • Jiangsu Shenghong Textile Imp & Exp Export Assistance Grants that: (A)(i) There is a history of dumping • Co., Suzhou Shenghong, and Suzhou VAT Refunds for FIEs Purchasing and material injury by reason of Shenghong Garmant Development Co.4 Domestically-Produced Equipment dumped imports in the United States or On April 2, 2019, the petitioners alleged Therefore, Commerce preliminarily elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or that critical circumstances exist with determines that there is a reasonable (ii) the person by whom, or for whose respect to imports of yarn from China, basis to believe or suspect that alleged account, the merchandise was imported pursuant to sections 703(e)(1) and subsidies in the CVD investigation are knew or should have known that the inconsistent with the SCM Agreement. 733(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as exporter was selling the subject amended (the Act), and 19 CFR History of Dumping and Material Injury/ 5 merchandise at less than its fair value 351.206. and that there was likely to be material Knowledge of Sales Below Fair Value In accordance with 19 CFR injury by reason of such sales; and (B) and Material Injury 351.206(c)(2)(i), if the petitioner submits there have been massive imports of the To determine whether there is a an allegation of critical circumstances subject merchandise over a relatively history of dumping pursuant to section more than 20 days before the scheduled short period. 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, Commerce date of the preliminary determination, Sections 351.206(h)(2) and (i) of generally considers current or previous Commerce must issue a preliminary Commerce’s regulations provide that AD orders on subject merchandise from finding whether there is a reasonable imports must increase by at least 15 the country in question in the United basis to believe or suspect that critical percent during the ‘‘relatively short States and current orders imposed by circumstances exist by no later than the period’’ to be considered ‘‘massive’’ and other countries regarding imports of the date of the preliminary determination.6 defines a ‘‘relatively short period’’ as same merchandise. However, in the normally being the period beginning on Critical Circumstances Allegation, the 1 See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Polyester Textured the date the proceeding begins (i.e., the Yarn from the People’s Republic of China and petitioners did not provide information India—Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping date the petition is filed) and ending at on the history of dumping.10 and Countervailing Duties,’’ dated October 18, 2018 least three months later. Commerce’s To determine whether importers (Petitions). regulations also provide, however, that knew or should have known that 2 See Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the if Commerce finds that importers, or exporters were selling the subject People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than- exporters or producers, had reason to Fair-Value Investigations, 83 FR 58223 (November merchandise at less than fair value 19, 2018); see also Polyester Textured Yarn from believe, at some time prior to the pursuant to section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of India and the People’s Republic of China: Initiation beginning of the proceeding, that a the Act, we typically consider the of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 83 FR 58232 proceeding was likely, Commerce may (November 19, 2018). magnitude of dumping margins, consider a period of not less than three 11 3 including margins alleged in petitions. See Memorandum, ‘‘Less-Than-Fair-Value 8 Investigation of Polyester Textured Yarn from the months from that earlier time. People’s Republic of China: Respondent Selection,’’ Critical Circumstances Analysis 9 See CVD Initiation Checklist: Polyester Textured dated December 11, 2018. Yarn from the People’s Republic of China, dated 4 See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Alleged Countervailable Subsidies Are November 7, 2018. Investigation of Polyester Textured Yarn from the Inconsistent With the SCM Agreement 10 See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 5–7. People’s Republic of China: Respondent Selection,’’ 11 See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determinations dated December 11, 2018. To determine whether an alleged of Critical Circumstances: Certain Cold-Rolled 5 See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Polyester Textured countervailable subsidy is inconsistent Carbon Steel Flat Products from Australia, the Yarn from the People’s Republic of China— with the SCM Agreement, in accordance People’s Republic of China, India, the Republic of Petitioners’ Allegation of Critical Circumstances,’’ Korea, the Netherlands, and the Russian dated April 2, 2018 (Critical Circumstances Federation, 67 FR 19157, 19158 (April 18, 2002) Allegation). CVD investigation is currently due no later than (unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of 6 The preliminary determination for the AD April 26, 2019. Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled investigation is currently due no later than June 25, 7 See Critical Circumstances Allegation at 3–5. Carbon Steel Flat Products from Australia, 67 FR 2019, and the preliminary determination for the 8 See 19 CFR 351.206(i). Continued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16842 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Commerce has found margins of 15 AD investigation is sufficient to impute from China had massive surges in percent or more (for constructed export importer knowledge. imports.20 price) to 25 percent or more (for export Based on the criteria and findings price) to be sufficient for this purpose.12 Massive Imports discussed above, we preliminarily The dumping margins of 74.98 percent In determining whether there are determine in both the AD and CVD investigations that critical and 77.15 percent alleged in the AD ‘‘massive imports’’ over a ‘‘relatively circumstances exist with respect to all Petition Supplement significantly short period,’’ pursuant to sections 13 imports of yarn from China. exceed the 15 to 25 percent threshold. 703(e)(1)(B) and 733(e)(1)(B) of the Act, Therefore, on that basis, we Commerce normally compares the Final Critical Circumstances preliminarily conclude importers knew, import volumes of the subject Determination or should have known, that exporters in merchandise for at least three months China were selling at less than fair We will issue our final determinations immediately preceding the filing of the value. concerning critical circumstances when petition (i.e., the ‘‘base period’’) to a To determine whether importers we issue our final CVD and AD comparable period of at least three knew, or should have known, that there determinations. All interested parties months following the filing of the was likely to be material injury caused will have the opportunity to address petition (i.e., the ‘‘comparison this determination in case briefs to be by reason of such imports pursuant 16 section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, period’’). Imports will normally be submitted after the completion of the Commerce normally will look to the considered massive when imports preliminary CVD and AD preliminary injury determination of the during the comparison period have determinations by a deadline to be International Trade Commission (ITC).14 increased by 15 percent or more established at a later date. If the ITC finds a reasonable indication compared to imports during the base ITC Notification period.17 of material injury to the relevant U.S. In accordance with sections 703(f) industry, Commerce will determine that Accordingly, to determine and 733(f) of the Act, we will notify the a reasonable basis exists to impute preliminarily whether there has been a ITC of these preliminary determinations importer knowledge that material injury massive surge in imports for each of critical circumstances. is likely by reason of such imports. In mandatory respondent which provided these investigations, the ITC found that shipment data, Commerce compared the Suspension of Liquidation there is a ‘‘reasonable indication’’ of total volume of shipments from In accordance with section 703(e)(2) material injury to the domestic industry November 2018 through January 2019, of the Act, because we have because of the imported subject the comparison period (i.e., all months preliminarily found that critical merchandise.15 Therefore, the ITC’s for which shipment data was available), circumstances exist with regard to preliminary injury determination in the with the preceding three-month period imports from all producers and of August 2018 through October 2018, exporters of yarn from China, if we 47509 (July 19, 2002), Notice of Final Determination the base period. Regarding the CVD make an affirmative preliminary of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold- determination that countervailable Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from the People’s investigation, for ‘‘all others,’’ Republic of China, 67 FR 62107 (October 3, 2002), Commerce compared Global Trade Atlas subsidies have been provided to these Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than (GTA) data for the period November same producers/exporters at above de Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 2018 through January 2019 with the minimis rates, we will instruct U.S. Products from India, 67 FR 47518 (July 19, 2002), Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than preceding three-month period of August Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 2018 through October 2018,18 after suspend liquidation of all entries of Products from Korea, 67 FR 62124 (October 3, subtracting from the GTA data subject merchandise from these 2002), Notice of Final Determination of Sales at shipments reported by the mandatory producers/exporters that are entered, or Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances: respondents which provided such data. withdrawn from warehouse for Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products consumption, on or after the date that is from The Netherlands, 67 FR 62112 (October 3, Similarly, regarding the AD 90 days prior to the effective date of 2002), Notice of the Final Determination Sales at investigation, for non-individually Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances: ‘‘provisional measures’’ (e.g., the date of examined companies requesting Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products publication in the Federal Register of separate rate status, we performed the from the Russian Federation, 67 FR 62121 (October the notice of an affirmative preliminary 3, 2002)). same comparison. For those mandatory determination that countervailable 12 Id. respondents in either the CVD or AD 13 subsidies have been provided at above See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Polyester Textured investigation that are not participating Yarn from the People’s Republic of China— de minimis rates). At such time, we will Petitioners’ Supplement for Volume II Regarding in the investigation, we preliminarily also instruct CBP to require a cash China Antidumping Duties,’’ dated October 29, determine, on the basis of adverse facts deposit equal to the estimated 2018 (AD Petition Supplement), at 7 and Exhibit 19 available, that there has been a preliminary subsidy rates reflected in AD–PRC–Supp–5. massive surge in imports. Accordingly, 14 See, e.g., Antidumping and Countervailing the preliminary determination Duty Investigations of Certain Softwood Lumber based on our analysis of information on published in the Federal Register. The Products from Canada: Preliminary Determinations the record, we preliminarily determine suspension of liquidation will remain in of Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 19219, 19220 that all producers/exporters of yarn (April 26, 2017) (Softwood Lumber from Canada effect until further notice. Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination), In accordance with section 733(e)(2) unchanged in Certain Softwood Lumber Products 16 See Softwood Lumber from Canada Preliminary of the Act, because we have from Canada: Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances Determination, 82 FR at preliminarily found that critical 19220, unchanged in Softwood Lumber from Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final circumstances exist with regard to Determination of Critical Circumstances, 82 FR Canada Final AD Determination, 82 FR at 51807– 51806, 51807–08 (November 8, 2017) (Softwood 08. imports from all producers and Lumber from Canada Final AD Determination). 17 Id. 15 See Polyester Textured Yarn from China and 18 Commerce gathered GTA data under the 20 See Memorandum, ‘‘Polyester Textured Yarn India: Investigation Nos. 701–TA–612–613 and 731– following harmonized tariff schedule numbers: from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary 1429–1430 (Preliminary), 83 FR 63532 (December 5402.33.3000 and 5402.33.6000. Critical Circumstances Calculation,’’ dated 10, 2018). 19 See section 776 of the Act. concurrently with this notice.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16843

exporters of yarn from China, if we from India and China.1 Commerce time to fully and properly analyze all make an affirmative preliminary exercised its discretion to toll all record evidence.5 determination that sales at less than fair deadlines affected by the partial federal In accordance with 19 CFR value have been made by these same government closure from December 22, 351.205(e), the petitioners have stated producers/exporters at above de 2018, through the resumption of the reasons for requesting a minimis rates, we will instruct CBP to operations on January 29, 2019.2 postponement of the preliminary suspend liquidation of all entries of Currently, the preliminary determinations, and Commerce finds no subject merchandise from these determinations of these LTFV compelling reason to deny the request. producers/exporters that are entered, or investigations are due no later than May Therefore, Commerce is postponing the withdrawn from warehouse, for 6, 2019. deadline for the preliminary determinations by 50 days (i.e., 190 consumption on or after the date that is Postponement of Preliminary days after the date on which these 90 days prior to the effective date of Determinations ‘‘provisional measures’’ (e.g., the date of investigations were initiated, plus the publication in the Federal Register of Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act 40 tolling days), in accordance with the notice of an affirmative preliminary of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act. As a determination of sales at LTFV at above Commerce to issue the preliminary result, Commerce will issue its de minimis rates). At such time, we will determination in an LTFV investigation preliminary determinations no later also instruct CBP to require a cash within 140 days after the date on which than June 25, 2019. In accordance with deposit equal to the estimated Commerce initiated the investigation. section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR preliminary dumping margins reflected However, section 733(c)(1) of the Act 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final in the preliminary determination permits Commerce to postpone the determinations of these investigations published in the Federal Register. The preliminary determination until no later will continue to be 75 days after the suspension of liquidation will remain in than 190 days after the date on which date of the preliminary determinations, effect until further notice. Commerce initiated the investigation if: unless postponed at a later date. These determinations are issued and (A) The petitioner makes a timely This notice is issued and published published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) request for a postponement; or (B) pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2). Commerce concludes that the parties and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). concerned are cooperating and Dated: April 18, 2019. determines that (i) the investigation is Dated: April 16, 2019. Jeffrey I. Kessler, extraordinarily complicated, and that Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and (ii) additional time is necessary to make Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. a preliminary determination. Under 19 Compliance. [FR Doc. 2019–08275 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must [FR Doc. 2019–08133 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P submit a request for postponement 25 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE must state the reasons for the request. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Commerce will grant the request unless International Trade Administration it finds compelling reasons to deny the International Trade Administration request. [A–533–840] [A–533–885, A–570–097] On March 29, 2019, the petitioners 3 submitted a timely request that Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp Polyester Textured Yarn From India Commerce postpone the preliminary From India: Preliminary Results of and the People’s Republic of China: determinations in these LTFV Antidumping Duty Administrative Postponement of Preliminary investigations.4 The petitioners stated Review; 2017–2018 Determinations in the Less-Than-Fair- that they requested postponement to Value Investigations AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, allow Commerce time to gather all data International Trade Administration, and questionnaire responses and to AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, Department of Commerce. International Trade Administration, allow Commerce and interested parties SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Department of Commerce. 1 (Commerce) preliminarily determines DATES: See Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the Applicable April 23, 2019. People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than- that certain frozen warmwater shrimp FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fair-Value Investigations, 83 FR 58223 (November (shrimp) from India is being, or is likely Irene Gorelik at (202) 482–6905 19, 2018) (Initiation Notice). to be, sold in the United States at less 2 (People’s Republic of China (China)); See Memorandum to the Record from Gary than normal value during the period of Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Katherine Johnson at (202) 482–4929 Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, review (POR) February 1, 2017, through (India), AD/CVD Operations, VIII, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties January 31, 2018. Enforcement and Compliance, of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and DATES: Applicable April 23, 2019. International Trade Administration, Compliance, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Partial Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 January 28, 2019. All deadlines in these LTFV Manuel Rey or Brittany Bauer, AD/CVD Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, investigations affected by the partial federal Operations, Office II, Enforcement and DC 20230. government closure have been extended by 40 days. If the new deadline falls on a non-business day, in Compliance, International Trade SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: accordance with Commerce’s practice, the deadline Administration, U.S. Department of Background will become the next business day. Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 3 The petitioners are Unifi Manufacturing, Inc. NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: On November 7, 2018, the Department and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America. (202) 482–5518 or (202) 482–3860, of Commerce (Commerce) initiated less- 4 See the Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Polyester Textured Yarn from China and India—Petitioners’ Request to respectively. than-fair-value (LTFV) investigations of Extend the Preliminary Antidumping Duty imports of polyester textured yarn (yarn) Determinations,’’ dated March 29, 2019. 5 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16844 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and for customs purposes, the written Weighted- product description remains dispositive. average Background Exporter/producer dumping Methodology margin Commerce is conducting an Commerce is conducting this review (percent) administrative review of the in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of antidumping duty order on shrimp from Blue-Fin Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd 1.87 the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Crystal Sea Foods Private Lim- India. The review covers six producers Act). Export price is calculated in and/or exporters of the subject ited ...... 1.87 accordance with section 772 of the Act. Forstar Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd ... 1.87 merchandise. Commerce selected two Normal value is calculated in Milsha Agro Exports Pvt. Ltd ...... 1.87 mandatory respondents for individual accordance with section 773 of the Act. examination: Calcutta Seafoods Pvt. Because the Elque Group did not Disclosure and Public Comment Ltd./Bay Seafood Pvt. Ltd./Elque & Co. provide useable cost data, we Commerce intends to disclose the (collectively, the Elque Group); and preliminarily determine to apply calculations performed in connection Magnum Sea Foods Limited/Magnum adverse facts available (AFA) to this with these preliminary results to Estates Limited (collectively, Magnum). respondent, in accordance with sections interested parties within five days after The POR is February 1, 2017, through 776(a) and (b) of the Act and 19 CFR the date of publication of this notice.4 January 31, 2018. 351.308. For a full discussion of the Interested parties may submit case briefs rationale underlying our preliminary We preliminarily determine that sales to Commerce no later than 30 days after results, see the Preliminary Decision to the United States have been made the date of publication of this notice.5 below normal value and, therefore, are Memorandum. For a full description of the Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised subject to antidumping duties. If these in the case briefs, may be filed no later preliminary results are adopted in the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary than five days after the time limit for final results of this review, we will filing case briefs.6 Parties who submit instruct U.S. Customs and Border Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping proceeding are encouraged to submit duties on all appropriate entries. We public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and with each argument: (1) A statement of invite all interested parties to comment the issue; (2) a brief summary of the on these preliminary results. Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized argument; and (3) a table of authorities.7 Commerce exercised its discretion to Electronic Service System (ACCESS). Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed toll all deadlines affected by the partial ACCESS is available to registered users using ACCESS.8 federal government closure from at http://access.trade.gov, and to all Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), December 22, 2018, through the parties in the Central Records Unit, interested parties who wish to request a resumption of operations on January 29, room B8024 of the main Department of hearing must submit a written request to 1 2019. If the new deadline falls on a Commerce building. In addition, a the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement non-business day, in accordance with complete version of the Preliminary and Compliance, filed electronically via Commerce’s practice, the deadline will Decision Memorandum can be accessed ACCESS. An electronically-filed become the next business day. directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ document must be received successfully Accordingly, the revised deadline for frn/. The signed and electronic versions in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. the preliminary results of this review is of the Preliminary Decision Eastern Time within 30 days after the now April 9, 2019. Memorandum are identical in content. date of publication of this notice.9 Hearing requests should contain: (1) The Scope of the Order A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is party’s name, address, and telephone The merchandise subject to the order attached at the Appendix to this notice. number; (2) the number of participants; 2 and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. is certain frozen warmwater shrimp. Preliminary Results of the Review The product is currently classified Issues raised in the hearing will be under the following Harmonized Tariff As a result of this review, we limited to issues raised in the briefs. If Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) preliminarily determine that weighted- a request for a hearing is made, parties item numbers: 0306.17.00.03, average dumping margins exist for the will be notified of the time and date for 0306.17.00.06, 0306.17.00.09, respondents for the period February 1, the hearing to be held at the U.S. 0306.17.00.12, 0306.17.00.15, 2017, through January 31, 2018, as Department of Commerce, 1401 0306.17.00.18, 0306.17.00.21, follows: Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 0306.17.00.24, 0306.17.00.27, DC 20230.10 Weighted- Commerce intends to issue the final 0306.17.00.40, 1605.21.10.30, and average 1605.29.10.10. Although the HTSUS Exporter/producer dumping results of this administrative review, numbers are provided for convenience margin including the results of its analysis (percent) raised in any written briefs, not later

1 than 120 days after the publication date See Memorandum, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Calcutta Seafoods Pvt. Ltd./Bay Partial Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this Seafood Pvt. Ltd./Elque & Co. 110.90 Magnum Sea Foods Limited/ review, excluding rates that are zero, de minimis or segment of the proceeding have been extended by based entirely on facts available. See section 40 days. Magnum Estates Limited ...... 1.87 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act. 2 For a complete description of the Scope of the 4 See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Order, see Memorandum, ‘‘Decision Memorandum Review-Specific Average Rate 5 See 19 CFR 351.309(c). for the Preliminary Results of the 2017–2018 Applicable to the Following 6 See 19 CFR 351.309(d). Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 3 7 Order on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Companies: See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). India,’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby 8 See 19 CFR 351.303. adopted by, this notice (Preliminary Decision 3 This rate is based on the rates for the 9 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Memorandum). respondents that were selected for individual 10 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16845

of this notice, pursuant to section 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis D. Selection and Corroboration of Adverse 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. within the meaning of 19 CFR Facts Available Rate 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash 6. Discussion of the Methodology Assessment Rates deposit rate will be zero; (2) for Normal Value Comparisons A. Determination of Comparison Method Upon completion of the previously reviewed or investigated administrative review, Commerce shall B. Results of Differential Pricing Analysis companies not participating in this Magnum determine, and CBP shall assess, review, the cash deposit will continue Product Comparisons antidumping duties on all appropriate to be the company-specific rate Export Price entries covered by this review.11 We published for the most recently Normal Value will instruct CBP to assess antidumping completed segment; (3) if the exporter is A. Home Market Viability and Comparison duties on all appropriate entries covered not a firm covered in this review, or the Market by this review. Where assessments are original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) B. Level of Trade based upon total facts available, investigation, but the manufacturer is, C. Cost of Production Analysis 1. Calculation of Cost of Production including AFA, we will instruct CBP to the cash deposit rate will be the rate assess duties at the AFA margin rate. 2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices established for the most recent segment 3. Results of the COP Test Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), for the manufacturer of the D. Calculation of Normal Value Based on because Magnum reported the entered merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit Comparison Market Prices value for all of its U.S. sales, we will rate for all other manufacturers or E. Calculation of Normal Value Based on calculate importer-specific ad valorem exporters will continue to be 10.17 Constructed Value duty assessment rates based on the ratio percent, the all-others rate made Currency Conversion of the total amount of antidumping effective by the LTFV investigation.14 Recommendation duties calculated for the examined sales These deposit requirements, when [FR Doc. 2019–08270 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] to the total entered value of the sales for imposed, shall remain in effect until BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P which entered value was reported. further notice. Where either the respondent’s weighted- average dumping margin is zero or de Notification to Importers DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR This notice also serves as a 351.106(c), or an importer-specific rate preliminary reminder to importers of International Trade Administration is zero or de minimis, we will instruct their responsibility under 19 CFR CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding [A–508–812] without regard to antidumping duties. the reimbursement of antidumping For the companies which were not duties prior to liquidation of the Magnesium From Israel: selected for individual review, we will relevant entries during this review Postponement of Preliminary assign an assessment rate based on the period. Failure to comply with this Determination in the Less-Than-Fair- average 12 of the cash deposit rates requirement could result in the Value Investigation calculated for the companies selected Secretary’s presumption that AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, for mandatory review (i.e., the Elque reimbursement of antidumping duties International Trade Administration, Group and Magnum), excluding any occurred and the subsequent assessment Department of Commerce. which are de minimis or determined of double antidumping duties. entirely on adverse facts available. The We are issuing and publishing these DATES: Applicable April 23, 2019. final results of this review shall be the results in accordance with sections FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: basis for the assessment of antidumping 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Bryan Hansen at (202) 482–3683, or duties on entries of merchandise Dated: April 9, 2019. Minoo Hatten at (202) 482–1690, AD/ covered by the final results of this Gary Taverman, CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement review and for future deposits of and Compliance, International Trade estimated duties, where applicable.13 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Administration, U.S. Department of We intend to issue liquidation performing the non-exclusive functions and Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue instructions to CBP 15 days after duties of the Assistant Secretary for NW, Washington, DC 20230. publication of the final results of this Enforcement and Compliance. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: review. Appendix Background Cash Deposit Requirements List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary On November 13, 2018, the The following deposit requirements Decision Memorandum Department of Commerce (Commerce) will be effective for all shipments of the 1. Summary initiated the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) subject merchandise entered, or 2. Background investigation of imports of magnesium withdrawn from warehouse, for 3. Scope of the Order from Israel.1 Commerce exercised its consumption on or after the publication 4. Affiliation and Collapsing discretion to toll all deadlines affected date of the final results of this A. Legal Framework administrative review, as provided by B. Affiliation and Single Entity Analysis by the closure of the Federal 5. Application of Facts Available and Use of Government from December 22, 2018, section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The 2 cash deposit rate for each specific Adverse Inference through January 28, 2019. Accordingly, company listed above will be that A. Legal Framework the revised deadline for the preliminary B. Use of Facts Otherwise Available established in the final results of this C. Application of Facts Available With an review, except if the rate is less than 1 See Magnesium From Israel: Initiation of Less- Adverse Inference Than-Fair-Value Investigation, 83 FR 58533 (November 20, 2018) (Initiation Notice). 11 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 14 See Notice of Amended Final Determination of 2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the 12 This rate will be calculated as discussed in the Sale at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated ‘‘Preliminary Results of the Review’’ section, above. Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of 13 See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. from India, 70 FR 5147 (February 1, 2005). the proceeding have been extended by 40 days.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16846 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

determination in this investigation is Commerce will issue its preliminary Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) May 13, 2019.3 determination no later than July 1, 2019. has been engaged in developing an MSE In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of for bluefin tuna. The United States Postponement of Preliminary the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the participates in this MSE development Determination deadline for the final determination of and has been considering stakeholder Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act this investigation will continue to be 75 input throughout that development of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires days after the date of publication of the through established procedures, Commerce to issue the preliminary preliminary determination, unless including consultation with the ICCAT determination in an LTFV investigation postponed at a later date. Advisory Committee and coordination within 140 days after the date on which This notice is issued and published with NMFS’s Highly Migratory Species Commerce initiated the investigation. pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act (HMS) Division and the HMS Advisory However, section 733(c)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). Panel. The United States also permits Commerce to postpone the Dated: April 17, 2019. participates in the development of the preliminary determination until no later MSE through U.S. scientists’ than 190 days after the date on which Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and participation in development of the Commerce initiated the investigation if: MSE framework through ICCAT’s 4 Compliance. (A) The petitioner makes a timely Standing Committee on Research and [FR Doc. 2019–08134 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] request for a postponement; or (B) Statistics (SCRS). Commerce concludes that the parties BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P This educational workshop is concerned are cooperating, that the intended to explain to a broader investigation is extraordinarily DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE stakeholder audience the concept of complicated, and that additional time is MSE as a tool for fisheries management, necessary to make a preliminary National Oceanic and Atmospheric describe the MSE approach being determination. Under 19 CFR Administration developed by ICCAT, and present 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a preliminary demonstrations as an request for postponement 25 days or RIN 0648–XG982 illustration of MSE for Atlantic bluefin more before the scheduled date of the tuna. One goal is to solicit feedback preliminary determination and must Workshop on Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Management Strategy Evaluation from U.S. fishery stakeholders on how state the reasons for the request. scientists represent the Atlantic bluefin Commerce will grant the request unless AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries resource and fisheries in models, fishery it finds compelling reasons to deny the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and management objectives, management request. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), On April 9, 2019, the petitioner performance indicators, and candidate Commerce. submitted a timely request that management procedures. The workshop Commerce postpone the preliminary ACTION: Notice of workshop. will primarily be informational and determination in this LTFV educational, and there will be no SUMMARY: The University of binding decisions or formal consensus- investigation.5 The petitioner stated that Massachusetts Dartmouth, School for it requests postponement of the based recommendations. While Marine Science and Technology and the discussions at the workshop will help to preliminary determination of this Gulf of Maine Research Institute are investigation because the initial inform U.S. scientists who are hosting a workshop on ‘‘Stakeholder participating in work of ICCAT’s SCRS, questionnaire responses submitted by Engagement in Management Strategy Dead Sea Magnesium, Ltd. are recommendations directly affecting the Evaluation of Atlantic Bluefin Tuna United States’ position development substantially deficient and it may not be Fisheries.’’ This educational workshop possible for Commerce to obtain usable and input to the MSE will continue to is supported with NMFS funding occur through established procedures. corrected responses within the current through the Bluefin Tuna Research 6 This workshop is intended to schedule. Program and is open to the public. Because there are no compelling complement, not replace, existing DATES: reasons to deny the request, Commerce, A workshop will be held on opportunities for U.S. stakeholder input. in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) April 29, 2019, from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Limited funding is available to support of the Act, is postponing the deadline EDT and April 30, 2019, from 9 a.m. to travel to this workshop for Atlantic for the preliminary determination by 50 12 p.m. EST. bluefin tuna stakeholders. For more days (i.e., 190 days after the date on ADDRESSES: The workshop will take information, contact Dr. Steven Cadrin. which this investigation was initiated place at University of Massachusetts Dated: April 17, 2019. Dartmouth, School for Marine Science plus 40 days for tolling). As a result, Paul Doremus, and Technology, 836 South Rodney Acting Director, Office of International Affairs 3 French Boulevard, New Bedford, MA, The deadline for the preliminary determination and Seafood Inspection, National Marine is normally 140 days after we initiate an Rooms 101–103. Fisheries Service. investigation. After tolling, this date is May 12, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 2019, which is a Sunday. Commerce practice [FR Doc. 2019–08098 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Steven Cadrin, [email protected] or dictates that where a deadline falls on a weekend BILLING CODE 3510–22–P or Federal holiday, the appropriate deadline is the (508) 910–6358. next business day (in this instance, May 13, 2019). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative Management strategy evaluation (MSE) COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act is a process that allows fishery managers COMMISSION of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). and stakeholders (e.g., industry, 4 The petitioner is US Magnesium LLC. scientists, and non-governmental Sunshine Act Meetings 5 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Re: Magnesium organizations) to assess how well from Israel: Petitioner’s Request For Postponement Of The Preliminary Determination,’’ dated April 9, different management strategies, achieve FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS 2019 (Request for Postponement). specified objectives for a fishery. The ANNOUNCEMENT: 84 FR 16006, April 17, 6 See Request for Postponement. International Commission for the 2019.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16847

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF available at www.reginfo.gov (this link identify and highlight those policies and THE MEETING: 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, April becomes active on the day following practices that have been successful. The 23, 2019. publication of this notice). Select primary federal financial regulator will CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The meeting ‘‘Information Collection Review,’’ under share information with other agencies, has been cancelled. ‘‘Currently under review, use the when appropriate, to support CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: dropdown menu ‘‘Select Agency’’ and coordination of efforts and to avoid Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the select ‘‘Consumer Financial Protection duplication. The Agencies may publish Commission, 202–418–5964. Bureau’’ (recent submissions to OMB information disclosed to them, such as will be at the top of the list). The same best practices, in any form that does not Dated: April 19, 2019. documentation is also available at identify a particular entity or individual Christopher Kirkpatrick, http://www.regulations.gov. Requests for or disclose confidential business Secretary of the Commission. additional information should be information. This is a routine request for [FR Doc. 2019–08321 Filed 4–19–19; 4:15 pm] directed to Darrin King, PRA Officer, at OMB to renew its approval of the BILLING CODE 6351–01–P (202) 435–9575, or email: CFPB_PRA@ collections of information currently cfpb.gov. If you require this document approved under this OMB control in an alternative electronic format, number. BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL please contact CFPB_Accessibility@ Request for Comments: The Bureau PROTECTION cfpb.gov. Please do not submit issued a 60-day Federal Register notice comments to these email boxes. on February 4, 2019, 84 FR 1429, Docket [Docket No. CFPB–2019–0019] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Number: CFPB–2019–0001. Comments Agency Information Collection Title of Collection: Joint Standards for were solicited and continue to be Activities: Submission for OMB Assessing the Diversity Policies and invited on: (a) Whether the collection of Review; Comment Request Practices. information is necessary for the proper OMB Control Number: 3170–0060. performance of the functions of the AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Type of Review: Extension without Bureau, including whether the Protection. change of a currently approved information will have practical utility; ACTION: Notice and request for comment. information collection. (b) The accuracy of the Bureau’s Affected Public: Businesses and other estimate of the burden of the collection SUMMARY: In accordance with the for-profit entities. of information, including the validity of Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Estimated Number of Respondents: the methods and the assumptions used; (PRA), the Bureau of Consumer 750. (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, Financial Protection (Bureau) is Estimated Total Annual Burden and clarity of the information to be proposing to revise an existing Hours: 9,000. collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the information collection titled, ‘‘Joint Abstract: Section 342 of the Dodd- burden of the collection of information Standards for Assessing the Diversity Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer on respondents, including through the Policies and Practices.’’ Protection Act of 2010 (Act) required use of automated collection techniques DATES: Written comments are the Office of the Comptroller of the or other forms of information encouraged and must be received on or Currency (OCC), Board of Governors of technology. Comments submitted in before May 23, 2019 to be assured of the Federal Reserve System (Board), response to this notice will be reviewed consideration. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation by OMB as part of its review of this ADDRESSES: Comments in response to (FDIC), Bureau of Consumer Financial request. All comments will become a this notice are to be directed towards Protection (Bureau) and Securities and matter of public record. OMB and to the attention of the OMB Exchange Commission (SEC) (together, Dated: April 17, 2019. Desk Officer for the Bureau of Consumer Agencies and separately, Agency) each Darrin A. King, Financial Protection. You may submit to establish an Office of Minority and Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of comments, identified by the title of the Women Inclusion (OMWI) to be Consumer Financial Protection. information collection, OMB Control responsible for all matters of the Agency [FR Doc. 2019–08094 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] relating to diversity in management, Number (see below), and docket number BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P (see above), by any of the following employment, and business activities. methods: The Act also instructed each OMWI • Electronic: http:// Director to develop standards for www.regulations.gov. Follow the assessing the diversity policies and DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION instructions for submitting comments. practices of entities regulated by the • Email: OIRA_submission@ Agency. The Agencies worked together [Docket No.: ED–2019–ICCD–0051] omb.eop.gov. to develop joint standards (Joint Agency Information Collection • Fax: (202) 395–5806. Standards) and, on June 10, 2015, they Activities; Comment Request; • Mail: Office of Management and jointly published in the Federal Consolidated State Performance Budget, New Executive Office Building, Register the ‘‘Final Interagency Policy Report Renewal (Part 1 and Part 2) Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503. Statement Establishing Joint Standards In general, all comments received will for Assessing the Diversity Policies and AGENCY: Department of Education (ED), become public records, including any Practices of Entities Regulated by the Office of Elementary and Secondary personal information provided. Agencies’’ (Policy Statement). The Education (OESE). Sensitive personal information, such as Agencies will use the information ACTION: Notice. account numbers or Social Security provided to them to monitor progress numbers, should not be included. and trends in the financial services SUMMARY: In accordance with the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: industry with regard to diversity and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is Documentation prepared in support of inclusion in employment and proposing a revision of an existing this information collection request is contracting activities, as well as to information collection.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16848 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

DATES: Interested persons are invited to respondents, including through the use Docket Numbers: EC19–78–000. submit comments on or before June 24, of information technology. Please note Applicants: Noverco Inc., Valener Inc. 2019. that written comments received in Description: Application for ADDRESSES: To access and review all the response to this notice will be Authorization Under Section 203 of the documents related to the information considered public records. Federal Power Act, et al. of Noverco collection listed in this notice, please Title of Collection: Consolidated State Inc., et al. use http://www.regulations.gov by Performance Report Renewal (Part 1 and Filed Date: 4/17/19. searching the Docket ID number ED– Part 2). Accession Number: 20190417–5101. 2019–ICCD–0051. Comments submitted OMB Control Number: 1810–0724. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/19. in response to this notice should be Type of Review: A revision of an Take notice that the Commission submitted electronically through the existing information collection. received the following electric rate Respondents/Affected Public: State, Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// filings: www.regulations.gov by selecting the Local, and Tribal Governments. Total Estimated Number of Annual Docket Numbers: ER19–1179–000. Docket ID number or via postal mail, Applicants: AES ES Gilbert, LLC. commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Responses: 14,653. Total Estimated Number of Annual Description: Second Supplement to If the regulations.gov site is not Burden Hours: 16,455. March 4, 2019 AES ES Gilbert, LLC available to the public for any reason, Abstract: The Consolidated State tariff filing. ED will temporarily accept comments at Performance Report (CSPR) is the Filed Date: 4/16/19. [email protected]. Please include the required annual reporting tool for each Accession Number: 20190416–5132. docket ID number and the title of the State, the Bureau of Indian Education, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/19. information collection request when District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico as Docket Numbers: ER19–1279–001. requesting documents or submitting authorized under Section 8303 of the Applicants: Messer Energy Services, comments. Please note that comments Elementary and Secondary Education Inc. submitted by fax or email and those Act (ESEA), as amended by the Every Description: Tariff Amendment: First submitted after the comment period will Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The Amendment to Notice of Succession to not be accepted. Written requests for CSPR collects data on programs be effective 3/1/2019. information or comments submitted by authorized by: Filed Date: 4/16/19. postal mail or delivery should be • Title I, Part A; Accession Number: 20190416–5181. addressed to the Director of the • Title I, Part C; Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. Information Collection Clearance • Title I, Part D; Docket Numbers: ER19–1582–000. Division, U.S. Department of Education, • Title II, Part A; 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, • Title III, Part A; Applicants: DTE Electric Company. Washington, DC 20202–0023. • Title IV Part A; Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: • Revised Wholesale Distribution FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Title V, Part A; • Agreements to be effective 1/1/2019. specific questions related to collection Title V, Part B, Subparts 1 and 2; Filed Date: 4/16/19. activities, please contact Sarah and • Accession Number: 20190416–5145. Newman, 202–453–6956. The McKinney-Vento Act. The information in this collection Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The relate to the performance and Department of Education (ED), in Docket Numbers: ER19–1583–000. monitoring activities of the Applicants: PJM Interconnection, accordance with the Paperwork aforementioned programs under ESSA Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. L.L.C. and the McKinney-Vento Act. These Description: Tariff Cancellation: 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general data are needed for reporting on GPRA public and Federal agencies with an Notice of Cancellation of WMPA/ISA as well as other reporting requirements No. 4948; Queue No. AD1–053 to be opportunity to comment on proposed, under ESSA. revised, and continuing collections of effective 5/6/2019. There is one major change from the Filed Date: 4/16/19. information. This helps the Department last approved collection. Reporting assess the impact of its information Accession Number: 20190416–5146. requirements on Title IV, Part A have Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. collection requirements and minimize been added to the collection. the public’s reporting burden. It also Docket Numbers: ER19–1584–000. helps the public understand the Dated: April 17, 2019 Applicants: Armadillo Flats Wind Department’s information collection Kate Mullan, Project, LLC. requirements and provide the requested PRA Coordinator, Information Collection Description: Market-Based Triennial data in the desired format. ED is Clearance Program, Information Management Review Filing: Armadillo Flats Wind soliciting comments on the proposed Branch, Office of the Chief Information Project, LLC Triennial Amend to information collection request (ICR) that Officer. Market-Based Rate Tarif to be effective is described below. The Department of [FR Doc. 2019–08078 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 4/17/2019. Education is especially interested in BILLING CODE 4000–01–P Filed Date: 4/16/19. public comment addressing the Accession Number: 20190416–5187. following issues: (1) Is this collection Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. necessary to the proper functions of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Docket Numbers: ER19–1585–000. Department; (2) will this information be Applicants: Brady Interconnection, processed and used in a timely manner; Federal Energy Regulatory LLC. (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; Commission Description: Market-Based Triennial (4) how might the Department enhance Combined Notice of Filings #1 Review Filing: Brady Interconnection, the quality, utility, and clarity of the LLC Triennial Amendment to Market- information to be collected; and (5) how Take notice that the Commission Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/ might the Department minimize the received the following electric corporate 2019. burden of this collection on the filings: Filed Date: 4/16/19.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16849

Accession Number: 20190416–5188. LLC Triennial Amentment to Market- Applicants: PJM Interconnection, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/ L.L.C. Docket Numbers: ER19–1586–000. 2019. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Applicants: Brady Wind II, LLC. Filed Date: 4/16/19. Recollation Filing of sections Schedule Description: Market-Based Triennial Accession Number: 20190416–5195. 12—Appendices and Attachment H to Review Filing: Brady Wind II, LLC Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. be effective 4/18/2019. Triennial Amendment to Market-Based Docket Numbers: ER19–1593–000. Filed Date: 4/17/19. Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/2019. Applicants: Kingman Wind Energy I, Accession Number: 20190417–5129. Filed Date: 4/16/19. LLC. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/19. Accession Number: 20190416–5189. Description: Market-Based Triennial The filings are accessible in the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. Review Filing: Kingman Wind Energy I, Commission’s eLibrary system by Docket Numbers: ER19–1587–000. LLC Triennial Amendment to Market- clicking on the links or querying the Applicants: Brady Wind, LLC. Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/ docket number. Description: Market-Based Triennial 2019. Any person desiring to intervene or Review Filing: Brady Wind, LLC Filed Date: 4/16/19. protest in any of the above proceedings Triennial Amendment to Market-Based Accession Number: 20190416–5196. must file in accordance with Rules 211 Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. and 214 of the Commission’s Filed Date: 4/16/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1594–000. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Accession Number: 20190416–5190. Applicants: Kingman Wind Energy II, 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. LLC. time on the specified comment date. Docket Numbers: ER19–1588–000. Description: Market-Based Triennial Protests may be considered, but Applicants: Breckinridge Wind Review Filing: Kingman Wind Energy II, intervention is necessary to become a Project, LLC. LLC Triennial Amendment to Market- party to the proceeding. Description: Market-Based Triennial Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/ eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Review Filing: Breckinridge Wind 2019. information relating to filing Project, LLC Triennial Amend to Filed Date: 4/16/19. requirements, interventions, protests, Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective Accession Number: 20190416–5197. service, and qualifying facilities filings 4/17/2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Filed Date: 4/16/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1595–000. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For Accession Number: 20190416–5191. Applicants: Pine River Wind Energy other information, call (866) 208–3676 Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. LLC. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Docket Numbers: ER19–1589–000. Description: Tariff Cancellation: Dated: April 17, 2019. Applicants: Cedar Bluff Wind, LLC. Notice of Cancellation of Market-Based Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Description: Market-Based Triennial Rate Tariff to be effective 6/17/2019. Deputy Secretary. Review Filing: Cedar Bluff Wind, LLC Filed Date: 4/17/19. [FR Doc. 2019–08112 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Triennial Amendment to Market-Based Accession Number: 20190417–5042. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/19. Filed Date: 4/16/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1596–000. Accession Number: 20190416–5192. Applicants: Midcontinent DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. Independent System Operator, Inc., Docket Numbers: ER19–1590–000. Duke Energy Indiana, LLC. Federal Energy Regulatory Applicants: Chaves County Solar, Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Commission _ LLC. 2019–04–17 SA 3297 DEI-City of [Docket No. RM98–1–000] Description: Market-Based Triennial Logansport, Indiana IA to be effective 7/ Review Filing: Chaves County Solar, 1/2019. Records Governing Off-the-Record LLC Triennial Amendment to Market- Filed Date: 4/17/19. Communications; Public Notice Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/ Accession Number: 20190417–5057. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/19. This constitutes notice, in accordance 2019. with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt Filed Date: 4/16/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1597–000. of prohibited and exempt off-the-record Accession Number: 20190416–5193. Applicants: AES Integrated Energy, communications. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. LLC. Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, Docket Numbers: ER19–1591–000. Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: September 22, 1999) requires Applicants: Cottonwood Wind AES Integrated Energy, LLC MBR Commission decisional employees, who Project, LLC. Application to be effective 6/17/2019. make or receive a prohibited or exempt Description: Market-Based Triennial Filed Date: 4/17/19. off-the-record communication relevant Review Filing: Cottonwood Wind Accession Number: 20190417–5071. to the merits of a contested proceeding, Project, LLC Amendment to Market- Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/19. to deliver to the Secretary of the Based Rate Tariff to be effective 4/17/ Docket Numbers: ER19–1598–000. Commission, a copy of the 2019. Applicants: Midcontinent communication, if written, or a Filed Date: 4/16/19. Independent System Operator, Inc. summary of the substance of any oral Accession Number: 20190416–5194. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: communication. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/19. 2019–04–17_SA 3081 UMERC–ATC 1st Prohibited communications are Docket Numbers: ER19–1592–000. Rev GIA (J704) to be effective 4/3/2019. included in a public, non-decisional file Applicants: Elk City Renewables II, Filed Date: 4/17/19. associated with, but not a part of, the LLC. Accession Number: 20190417–5089. decisional record of the proceeding. Description: Market-Based Triennial Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/19. Unless the Commission determines that Review Filing: Elk City Renewables II, Docket Numbers: ER19–1599–000. the prohibited communication and any

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16850 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

responses thereto should become a part having made a prohibited off-the-record Commission. The communications of the decisional record, the prohibited communication shall serve the listed are grouped by docket numbers in off-the-record communication will not document on all parties listed on the ascending order. These filings are be considered by the Commission in official service list for the applicable available for electronic review at the reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding in accordance with Rule Commission in the Public Reference proceeding may seek the opportunity to 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. Room or may be viewed on the respond to any facts or contentions Exempt off-the-record Commission’s website at http:// made in a prohibited off-the-record communications are included in the www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. communication, and may request that decisional record of the proceeding, Enter the docket number, excluding the unless the communication was with a the Commission place the prohibited last three digits, in the docket number cooperating agency as described by 40 communication and responses thereto field to access the document. For CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR in the decisional record. The 385.2201(e)(1)(v). assistance, please contact FERC Online Commission will grant such a request The following is a list of off-the- Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ only when it determines that fairness so record communications recently ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 208–3676, or requires. Any person identified below as received by the Secretary of the for TTY, contact (202)502–8659.

Docket No. File date Presenter or requester

Prohibited

1. ER19–603–000 ...... 4/3/2019 Donald H. Albertson. 2. P–2305–000 ...... 4/3/2019 Lower Sabine River Basin Board.

Exempt

1. CP17–41–000 ...... 4/3/2019 FERC Staff.1 2. CP17–41–000 ...... 4/12/2019 U.S. House of Representative Darin LaHood. 3. CP17–495–000 ...... 4/12/2019 U.S. Congressmen.2 1 Communications Memorandum dated 4/3/19 forwarding email correspondence with Dana Bethea of National Oceanic Atmosphere Adminis- tration. 2 Congressmen Ron Wyden and Peter DeFazio.

Dated: April 17, 2019. Accession Number: 20190415–5297. Dated: April 17, 2019. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/19. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. Deputy Secretary. Docket Numbers: RP19–1128–000. [FR Doc. 2019–08115 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2019–08114 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Applicants: Cameron Interstate BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Pipeline, LLC. Description: Annual Report of Penalty DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Revenues of Cameron Interstate ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Pipeline, LLC. AGENCY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Filed Date: 4/15/19. [EPA–HQ–OW–2016–0178; FRL–9992–55– Accession Number: 20190415–5298. OW] Combined Notice of Filings Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/19. Proposed Information Collection Take notice that the Commission has The filings are accessible in the Request; Comment Request; EPA received the following Natural Gas Commission’s eLibrary system by Application Materials for the Water Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: clicking on the links or querying the Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Filings Instituting Proceedings docket number. Act Docket Numbers: RP19–1126–000. Any person desiring to intervene or AGENCY: Environmental Protection Applicants: Cameron Interstate protest in any of the above proceedings Agency (EPA). must file in accordance with Rules 211 Pipeline, LLC. ACTION: Notice. Description: Annual Report of and 214 of the Commission’s Transportation Imbalances and Cash-out Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Activity of Cameron Interstate Pipeline, 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an LLC. time on the specified comment date. information collection request (ICR), Filed Date: 4/15/19. Protests may be considered, but ‘‘EPA Application Materials for the Accession Number: 20190415–5296. intervention is necessary to become a Water Infrastructure Finance and Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/19. party to the proceeding. Innovation Act’’ (EPA ICR No. 2549.02, Docket Numbers: RP19–1127–000. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed OMB Control No. 2040–0292) to the Applicants: Cameron Interstate information relating to filing Office of Management and Budget Pipeline, LLC. requirements, interventions, protests, (OMB) for review and approval in Description: Annual Report of service, and qualifying facilities filings accordance with the Paperwork Operational Imbalances and Cash-out can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Reduction Act. Before doing so, EPA is Activity of Cameron Interstate Pipeline, docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For soliciting public comments on specific LLC. other information, call (866) 208–3676 aspects of the proposed information Filed Date: 4/15/19. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. collection as described below. This is a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16851

request for approval of a renewal. An technological collection techniques or Total estimated burden: 8,700 hours Agency may not conduct or sponsor and other forms of information technology, (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR a person is not required to respond to e.g., permitting electronic submission of 1320.03(b). a collection of information unless it responses. EPA will consider the Total estimated cost: $15,109,113.40 displays a currently valid OMB control comments received and amend the ICR (per year), includes no annualized number. as appropriate. The final ICR package capital or operation and maintenance DATES: Comments must be submitted on will then be submitted to OMB for costs. or before June 24, 2019. review and approval. At that time, EPA Dated: April 12, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, will issue another Federal Register Andrew D. Sawyers, referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– notice to announce the submission of Director, Office of Wastewater Management. the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to OW–2016–0178, online using [FR Doc. 2019–08158 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] www.regulations.gov (our preferred submit additional comments to OMB. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P method), or by mail to: EPA Docket Abstract: The collection of Center, Environmental Protection information is necessary in order to Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 receive applications for credit assistance ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC pursuant to section 5024 of the Water AGENCY 20460. Infrastructure Finance and Innovation EPA’s policy is that all comments Act (WIFIA) of 2014, 33 U.S.C. 3903. [Petitions IV–2014–13; FRL–9992–57– received will be included in the public The purpose of the WIFIA program is to Region 4] docket without change, including any provide Federal credit assistance in the Clean Air Act Operating Permit personal information provided, unless form of direct loans and loan guarantees Program; Petition for Objection to the comment includes profanity, threats, to eligible clean water and drinking State Operating Permit for Piedmont information claimed to be Confidential water projects. Natural Gas—Wadesboro Compressor Business Information (CBI), or other WIFIA requires that an eligible entity Station (Anson County, North Carolina) information whose disclosure is submit to the EPA Administrator an restricted by statute. application at such time, in such AGENCY: Environmental Protection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: manner, and containing such Agency (EPA). Arielle Gerstein, Water Infrastructure information, as the EPA Administrator ACTION: Notice of final order on Division, Office of Wastewater may require to receive assistance under petitions to object to state operating Management, 4201–T, Environmental WIFIA. In order to satisfy these permits. Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania requirements, EPA must collect an Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; application from prospective borrowers SUMMARY: The EPA Administrator telephone number: 202–566–1868; seeking funding. The Letters of Interest signed an Order, dated March 20, 2019, email address: [email protected]. and Applications collected from denying the petition submitted by Pee Dee Water Air Land and Lives and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: prospective borrowers through this Supporting documents which explain in solicitation will be used by the EPA, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense detail the information EPA will be WIFIA program staff, and reviewers to League (Petitioners) objecting to a collecting are available in the public evaluate applications for credit proposed Clean Air Act (CAA) title V docket for this ICR. The docket can be assistance under the WIFIA eligibility operating permit issued to Piedmont viewed online at www.regulations.gov requirements and selection criteria. Natural Gas (PNG) for its facility located or in person at the EPA Docket Center, Form Numbers: in Wadesboro, Anson County, North WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Carolina. The Order responds to an SWIFIA Application—6100–030 October 3, 2014, petition requesting that Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. SWIFIA Letter of Interest—6100–031 The telephone number for the Docket EPA object to the proposed initial WIFIA Application—6100–032 permit number 10097T01. This Center is 202–566–1744. For additional WIFIA Letter of Interest—6100–033 information about EPA’s public docket, permitting action was issued by the visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Respondents/affected entities: The North Carolina Department of Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of respondents affected by this collection Environment and Natural Resources the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. activity include: corporations, (NCDENR). The Order constitutes a final 3501 et seq.), EPA is soliciting partnerships, joint ventures, trusts, action on the petition addressed therein. comments and information to enable it federal, state, or local government ADDRESSES: Copies of the Order, the to: (i) Evaluate whether the proposed entities, tribal governments or a petition, and all pertinent information collection of information is necessary consortium of tribal governments, and relating thereto are on file at the for the proper performance of the state infrastructure finance authorities. following location: EPA Region 4; Air, functions of the Agency, including The Letters of Interest and Applications Pesticides and Toxics Management whether the information will have collected from prospective borrowers Division; 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, practical utility; (ii) evaluate the through this solicitation will be used by Georgia 30303–8960. The Order is also accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the EPA to evaluate requests for credit available electronically at the following burden of the proposed collection of assistance under the WIFIA eligibility address: https://www.epa.gov/title-v- information, including the validity of requirements and selection criteria. operating-permits/2019-order-denying- the methodology and assumptions used; Respondent’s obligation to respond: petition-object-title-v-operating-permit- (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and The collection is required to obtain png-wadesboro. clarity of the information to be credit assistance pursuant to section FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Art collected; and (iv) minimize the burden 5024 of WIFIA, 33 U.S.C. 3903. Hofmeister, Air Permitting Section, EPA of the collection of information on those Estimated number of respondents: Region 4, at (404) 562–9115 or who are to respond, including through 100 per year (total). [email protected]. the use of appropriate automated Frequency of response: one per SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA electronic, mechanical, or other funding round. affords EPA a 45-day period to review

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16852 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

and, as appropriate, the authority to PNG. Petitioners claim that this Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust object to operating permits proposed by permitting action: Failed to meet the Improvements Act of 1976, requires state permitting authorities under title V requirements for adequate public notice; persons contemplating certain mergers of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661–7661f. grossly underestimates emissions and, or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA and 40 thus, fails to assure compliance with Commission and the Assistant Attorney CFR 70.8(d) authorize any person to national ambient air quality standards General advance notice and to wait petition the EPA Administrator to object and state implementation standards; designated periods before to a title V operating permit within 60 fails to include adequate monitoring to consummation of such plans. Section days after the expiration of EPA’s 45- assure compliance with applicable 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, day review period if EPA has not opacity standards; and failed to include in individual cases, to terminate this objected on its own initiative. Petitions an environmental justice analysis. waiting period prior to its expiration must be based only on objections to the On March 20, 2019, the Administrator permit that were raised with reasonable issued an Order denying the petition. and requires that notice of this action be specificity during the public comment The Order explains EPA’s basis for published in the Federal Register. period provided by the state, unless the denying the petition. The following transactions were petitioner demonstrates that it was Dated: April 11, 2019. granted early termination—on the dates impracticable to raise these issues Mary S. Walker, indicated—of the waiting period during the comment period or the Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. provided by law and the premerger grounds for the issues arose after this [FR Doc. 2019–08160 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] notification rules. The listing for each period. Pursuant to sections 307(b) and transaction includes the transaction BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 505(b)(2) of the CAA, a petition for number and the parties to the judicial review of those parts of the transaction. The grants were made by Order that deny issues in the petition FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION the Federal Trade Commission and the may be filed in the United States Court Assistant Attorney General for the of Appeals for the appropriate circuit Granting of Requests for Early Antitrust Division of the Department of within 60 days from the date this notice Termination of the Waiting Period Justice. Neither agency intends to take is published in the Federal Register. Under the Premerger Notification any action with respect to these Petitioners submitted a petition Rules requesting that EPA object to the proposed acquisitions during the proposed CAA title V operating permit Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 applicable waiting period. no. 10097T01 issued by NCDENR to U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the

EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED MARCH 1, 2019 THRU MARCH 31, 2019

03/01/2019

20190813 ...... G Amazon.com, Inc.; Aurora Innovation, Inc.; Amazon.com, Inc. 20190819 ...... G KKR Americas Fund XII (Dream) L.P.; OneStream Software Holdings Corp.; KKR Americas Fund XII (Dream) L.P. 20190853 ...... G Pensare Acquisition Corp.; U.S. TelePacific Holdings Corp.; Pensare Acquisition Corp. 20190856 ...... G The Toro Company; The Charles Machine Works, Inc.; The Toro Company. 20190869 ...... G Mubadala Investment Company PJSC; John Laing Group plc; Mubadala Investment Company PJSC. 20190880 ...... G Olympus Growth Fund VII, L.P.; Green Equity Investors V, L.P.; Olympus Growth Fund VII, L.P. 20190883 ...... G USI Advantage Corp.; USRIG Holdings, LLC; USI Advantage Corp. 20190891 ...... G Twin River Worldwide Holdings, Inc.; Mr. Henry B. Tippie; Twin River Worldwide Holdings, Inc.

03/04/2019

20190628 ...... G OCP Trust; The Kroger Co.; OCP Trust.

03/05/2019

20190809 ...... G Tiger Global Private Investment Partners IX, L.P.; Starry, Inc.; Tiger Global Private Investment Partners IX, L.P. 20190871 ...... G Agnaten SE; Coty Inc.; Agnaten SE.

03/06/2019

20190835 ...... G Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.; IES Alberta AIV, LP; Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. 20190872 ...... G Further Global Capital Partners, L.P.; Peer Management, LLC; Further Global Capital Partners, L.P. 20190875 ...... G Morgan Stanley; Solium Capital, Inc.; Morgan Stanley.

03/07/2019

20190818 ...... G SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M2) L.P.; Petuum Holdings, Ltd.; SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M2) L.P. 20190870 ...... G Clearlake Capital Partners V, L.P.; The Veritas Capital Fund VI, L.P.; Clearlake Capital Partners V, L.P.

03/08/2019

20190873 ...... G Ingersoll-Rand plc; Silver II GP Holdings S.C.A.; Ingersoll-Rand plc. 20190879 ...... G Legrand S.A.; Penguin Holdco, Inc.; Legrand S.A. 20190888 ...... G J.M. Huber Corporation; Dunes Point Capital Investment Partners I–A, LLC; J.M. Huber Corporation. 20190889 ...... G Nexus Special Situations II, L.P.; Pearson plc; Nexus Special Situations II, L.P. 20190895 ...... G FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.; FirstEnergy Corp.; FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. 20190896 ...... G The Myers Business Trust; SCP AVL LLC; The Myers Business Trust.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16853

EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED MARCH 1, 2019 THRU MARCH 31, 2019—Continued 20190898 ...... G SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M2) L.P.; Nuro, Inc.; SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M2) L.P. 20190900 ...... G American Electric Power Company, Inc.; Sempra Energy; American Electric Power Company, Inc.

03/11/2019

20190903 ...... G Auto-Owners Insurance Company; CIG Holding Company, Inc.; Auto-Owners Insurance Company. 20190904 ...... G Tempo Holding Company, LLC; Azim Premji; Tempo Holding Company, LLC. 20190905 ...... G Juniper Networks, Inc.; Mist Systems, Inc.; Juniper Networks, Inc. 20190908 ...... G Mario Spanicciati; BlackLine, Inc.; Mario Spanicciati. 20190909 ...... G GTCR (AP) Investors LP; Dolphin Investment, L.P.; GTCR (AP) Investors LP. 20190910 ...... G Providence Equity Partners VIII L.P.; David Bernstein; Providence Equity Partners VIII L.P. 20190918 ...... G Northleaf Infrastructure Capital Partners (Canada) III QPFP; Odfjell SE; Northleaf Infrastructure Capital Partners (Canada) III QPFP. 20190927 ...... G The Middleby Corporation; Standex International Corporation; The Middleby Corporation. 20190928 ...... G Apax IX USD L.P.; Centrica plc; Apax IX USD L.P. 20190929 ...... G Astorg VII SLP; Anaqua Parent Holdings, Inc.; Astorg VII SLP. 20190932 ...... G Aquiline Financial Services Fund III L.P.; Parthenon Investors III, L.P.; Aquiline Financial Services Fund III L.P. 20190933 ...... G Wellspring Capital Partners VI, L.P.; Wind Point Partners VIII–A, L.P.; Wellspring Capital Partners VI, L.P. 20190934 ...... G SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M3) L.P.; Flexport, Inc.; SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M3) L.P. 20190941 ...... G Main Post Growth Capital, L.P.; Terri L. Gick; Main Post Growth Capital, L.P.

03/13/2019

20190926 ...... G Falfurrias Capital Partners III, LP; DFW Capital Partners IV, L.P.; Falfurrias Capital Partners III, LP. 20190935 ...... G Digital Colony Partners (Cayman), LP; Gestion Audem Inc.; Digital Colony Partners (Cayman), LP.

03/15/2019

20190922 ...... G Horace Mann Educators Corporation; Bill J. and Betty Jo Ellard Secure Trust B GST Non-Exempt; Horace Mann Edu- cators Corporation. 20190939 ...... G Atlas Merchant Capital Fund LP; AqGen Island Holdings, Inc.; Atlas Merchant Capital Fund LP. 20190944 ...... G Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc.; Richard Robin and Nurit Robin; Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc. 20190946 ...... G Merck & Co., Inc.; Immune Design Corp.; Merck & Co., Inc. 20190950 ...... G Ares Corporate Opportunities Fund V, L.P.; Audax Private Equity Fund V–A, L.P.; Ares Corporate Opportunities Fund V, L.P. 20190955 ...... G Rhone Partners V L.P.; Newell Brands Inc.; Rhone Partners V L.P. 20190956 ...... G JAB Consumer Fund SCA SICAR; Veterinary Specialist of North America Holdings LLC; JAB Consumer Fund SCA SICAR. 20190970 ...... G Bridgepoint Europe VI Investments (2) S.a.r.l.; Kyriba Corp.; Bridgepoint Europe VI Investments (2) S.a.r.l. 20190971 ...... G Madrone Partners L.P.; Uplift, Inc.; Madrone Partners L.P. 20190976 ...... G Sun Life Financial Inc.; GreenOak Real Estate, LP; Sun Life Financial Inc. 20190978 ...... G Jane Hsiao; OPKO Health, Inc.; Jane Hsiao.

03/18/2019

20190868 ...... G Clinigen Group plc; Novartis AG; Clinigen Group plc. 20190940 ...... G New Mountain Partners V (AIV–D), L.P.; Aceto Corporation; New Mountain Partners V (AIV–D), L.P.

03/19/2019

20190959 ...... G Newhouse Broadcasting Corporation; Palladian Holdings, LLC; Newhouse Broadcasting Corporation. 20190966 ...... G Cornell Capital Partners LP; Jiwei Robert Wang; Cornell Capital Partners LP.

03/21/2019

20190877 ...... G AT&T, Inc.; Telapex, Inc.; AT&T, Inc. 20190953 ...... G Marshfield Clinic Health System, Inc.; Beaver Dam Community Hospitals, Inc.; Marshfield Clinic Health System, Inc.

03/22/2019

20190964 ...... G Dongjun Wang; Cornell Capital Partners LP; Dongjun Wang. 20190965 ...... G Yi Qin; Cornell Capital Partners LP; Yi Qin. 20190967 ...... G Jiwei Robert Wang; Cornell Capital Partners LP; Jiwei Robert Wang. 20190975 ...... G Blackstone Core Equity Partners NQ L.P.; Servpro Holding Company, Inc.; Blackstone Core Equity Partners NQ L.P. 20190979 ...... G FR XIII Foxtrot AIV, L.P.; The Weir Group PLC; FR XIII Foxtrot AIV, L.P. 20190982 ...... G The Resolute Fund IV, L.P.; ARCH Holdco LLC; The Resolute Fund IV, L.P. 20190987 ...... G Goldman Sachs Renewable Power LLC; SunPower Corporation; Goldman Sachs Renewable Power LLC. 20190992 ...... G Vista Equity Partners Fund VII–A, L.P.; PlanSource Holdings, Inc.; Vista Equity Partners Fund VII–A, L.P. 20190993 ...... G ACI Worldwide, Inc.; The Western Union Company; ACI Worldwide, Inc. 20190994 ...... G Audax Private Equity Fund IV, L.P.; Accuform Manufacturing, Inc.; Audax Private Equity Fund IV, L.P. 20190996 ...... G The Resolute Fund IV, L.P.; KSBR Holding Corp.; The Resolute Fund IV, L.P. 20191003 ...... G CCMP Capital Investors III (AV–3), L.P.; BCP IV FM US LP; CCMP Capital Investors III (AV–3), L.P. 20191005 ...... G James Allen Pattison; Elliott Sawmilling Co., Inc.; James Allen Pattison. 20191010 ...... G Institutional Venture Partners XII, L.P.; Personal Capital Corporation; Institutional Venture Partners XII, L.P.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16854 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED MARCH 1, 2019 THRU MARCH 31, 2019—Continued 20191014 ...... G Novacap Industries IV, L.P.; GHP Group, Inc.; Novacap Industries IV, L.P.

03/25/2019

20191004 ...... G Blackbird HoldCo, Inc.; Irving Place Capital Partners III SPV, L.P.; Blackbird HoldCo, Inc. 20191008 ...... G AP Drive, L.P.; EQT Infrastructure II Limited Partnership; AP Drive, L.P.

03/26/2019

20191019 ...... G Concrete Pumping Holdings, Inc.; A. Keith Crawford and Melinda Crawford; Concrete Pumping Holdings, Inc.

03/29/2019

20190912 ...... G George J. Pedersen; Kforce Inc.; George J. Pedersen.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION waiting period prior to its expiration Theresa Kingsberry, Program Support and requires that notice of this action be Specialist, Federal Trade Commission Granting of Requests for Early published in the Federal Register. Termination of the Waiting Period Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of The following transactions were Under the Premerger Notification Competition, Room CC–5301, granted early termination—on the dates Rules Washington, DC 20024, (202) 326–3100. indicated—of the waiting period By direction of the Commission. Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 provided by law and the premerger notification rules. The listing for each April J. Tabor, U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust transaction includes the transaction Acting Secretary. Improvements Act of 1976, requires number and the parties to the [FR Doc. 2019–08081 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] persons contemplating certain mergers transaction. The grants were made by BILLING CODE 6750–01–P or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade the Federal Trade Commission and the Commission and the Assistant Attorney Assistant Attorney General for the General advance notice and to wait Antitrust Division of the Department of designated periods before Justice. Neither agency intends to take consummation of such plans. Section any action with respect to these 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, proposed acquisitions during the in individual cases, to terminate this applicable waiting period.

EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED FEBRUARY 1, 2019 THRU FEBRUARY 28, 2019

02/04/2019

20190275 ...... G The E.W. Scripps Company; EPI Group, LLC; The E.W. Scripps Company. 20190667 ...... G RLC Industries Co.; Potlatch Deltic Corporation; RLC Industries Co. 20190694 ...... G Christopher Grassi; Josue Christiano Gomes da Silva; Christopher Grassi. 20190707 ...... G Atlantic Regional Federal Credit Union; York County Federal Credit Union; Atlantic Regional Federal Credit Union. 20190712 ...... G Royal Dutch Shell plc; Landmark Industries; Royal Dutch Shell plc. 20190713 ...... G Landmark Industries Holdings, Ltd.; Landmark Industries; Landmark Industries Holdings, Ltd. 20190714 ...... G 3i Group plc; Elliott Springer; 3i Group plc. 20190715 ...... G 3i Group plc; Kevin Schneider; 3i Group plc. 20190721 ...... G ACI Group Holdings, Inc.; Sharpe Dry Goods Company, LLC; ACI Group Holdings, Inc. 20190730 ...... G John Paulson; Centerbridge Capital Partners II, L.P.; John Paulson. 20190737 ...... G SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M1) L.P.; Automation Anywhere, Inc.; SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M1) L.P. 20190741 ...... G KeyCorp; Gary Lieberman; KeyCorp. 20190760 ...... G Nordic Capital IX Beta, L.P.; Tulip Holding Limited; Nordic Capital IX Beta, L.P.

02/06/2019

20190673 ...... G J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.; Patrick Cory; J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

02/07/2019

20190720 ...... G Henry Schein, Inc.; BW NAR AIV III, L.P.; Henry Schein, Inc.

02/08/2019

20190488 ...... G Ari Ojalvo-Oner; 2288880 Ontario Limited; Ari Ojalvo-Oner. 20190561 ...... G CONMED Corporation; Filtration Group Equity LLC; CONMED Corporation. 20190751 ...... G The Baring Asia Private Equity Fund VI, L.P. 2; Pioneer Corporation; The Baring Asia Private Equity Fund VI, L.P. 2.

02/11/2019

20190750 ...... G Reingold Geiger; Nemo Investor Aggregator, Ltd.; Reingold Geiger. 20190761 ...... G Zebra Technologies Corporation; Water Street Healthcare Partners III, L.P.; Zebra Technologies Corporation. 20190762 ...... G Michael Klein; Clarivate Analytics Plc; Michael Klein.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16855

EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED FEBRUARY 1, 2019 THRU FEBRUARY 28, 2019—Continued 20190765 ...... G ShawCor Ltd.; ZCL Composites Inc.; ShawCor Ltd. 20190768 ...... G AE Industrial Partners Fund II, LP; OEP VI AIV Feeder (A), L.P.; AE Industrial Partners Fund II, LP. 20190770 ...... G NGL Energy Partners LP; DCP Midstream Partners, LP; NGL Energy Partners LP. 20190779 ...... G Starwood Energy Infrastructure Fund III U.S. Investor, L.P.; FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.; Starwood Energy Infrastructure Fund III U.S. Investor, L.P. 20190780 ...... G Steel Dynamics, Inc.; United Steel Supply, LLC; Steel Dynamics, Inc. 20190787 ...... G GTCR Fund XI/B LP; GTCR Fund XI/A LP; GTCR Fund XI/B LP. 20190789 ...... G AIPCF VI Indirect Investor AIV LP; General Electric Company; AIPCF VI Indirect Investor AIV LP. 20190794 ...... G Kirby Corporation; Arlen B. Cenac, Jr.; Kirby Corporation.

02/13/2019

20190742 ...... G Elliott International Limited; Ebay Inc.; Elliott International Limited. 20190743 ...... G Elliott Associates, L.P.; Ebay Inc.; Elliott Associates, L.P.

02/14/2019

20190738 ...... G Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.; Fulcrum IT Holdings, LLC; Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. 20190793 ...... G Tesla, Inc.; Maxwell Technologies , Inc.; Tesla, Inc.

02/15/2019

20190798 ...... G Thoma Bravo Fund XII Global, L.P.; Rubicon Technology Partners (Cayman) L.P.; Thoma Bravo Fund XII Global, L.P. 20190800 ...... G FIC DBR Co-Invest Feeder, L.P.; Denham Oil & Gas Fund LP; FIC DBR Co-Invest Feeder, L.P. 20190801 ...... G AIF IX International Holdings, L.P. (Cayman); RPC Group Plc; AIF IX International Holdings, L.P. (Cayman). 20190803 ...... G Tyler Technologies, Inc.; Arlington Capital Partners II, LP; Tyler Technologies, Inc. 20190804 ...... G John Zimmer; Lyft, Inc.; John Zimmer. 20190805 ...... G Logan Green; Lyft, Inc.; Logan Green. 20190817 ...... G Chevron Corporation; Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.; Chevron Corporation. 20190826 ...... G Mr. Renrong Yu; Beijing OmniVision Technologies, Co. Ltd.; Mr. Renrong Yu.

02/19/2019

20190764 ...... G Canaccord Genuity Group Inc.; Columbia Care LLC; Canaccord Genuity Group Inc.

02/20/2019

20171983 ...... G Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA; NxStage Medical, Inc.; Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA.

02/21/2019

20190748 ...... G Novartis AG; Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Novartis AG.

02/22/2019

20190775 ...... G Uniti Group Inc.; R. Otto Maly; Uniti Group Inc. 20190796 ...... G Aurobindo Pharma Limited; Spectrum Pharamaceuticals, Inc.; Aurobindo Pharma Limited. 20190799 ...... G Sumner Redstone; Pluto Inc.; Sumner Redstone.

02/25/2019

20190797 ...... G Starboard Value and Opportunity Fund Ltd.; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; Starboard Value and Opportunity Fund Ltd. 20190824 ...... G iAero Group Holdco LLC; New Swift Air Holdings, L.L.C.; iAero Group Holdco LLC. 20190827 ...... G Johnson & Johnson; MeiraGTx Holdings plc; Johnson & Johnson.

02/26/2019

20190816 ...... G Sequoia Capital Global Growth Fund III—Endurance Partners; Aurora Innovation, Inc.; Sequoia Capital Global Growth Fund III—Endurance Partners. 20190823 ...... G Unite Parent Corp.; The Ultimate Software Group, Inc.; Unite Parent Corp. 20190837 ...... G KKR Asian Fund II Japan AIV L.P.; Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.; KKR Asian Fund II Japan AIV L.P. 20190840 ...... G Wellspring Capital Partners VI, L.P.; BDCM Opportunity Fund II, L.P.; Wellspring Capital Partners VI, L.P. 20190842 ...... G SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M2) L.P.; Fair Financial Corp.; SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M2) L.P. 20190844 ...... G FLIR Systems, Inc.; Arlington Capital Partners III, L.P.; FLIR Systems, Inc. 20190850 ...... G Bain Capital Fund XII, L.P.; Rangers Renal Holdings LP; Bain Capital Fund XII, L.P. 20190851 ...... G Carousel Capital Partners V, L.P.; Sterling Group Partners III, L.P.; Carousel Capital Partners V, L.P. 20190852 ...... G LightBay Investment Partners LP; Levine Leichtman Capital Partners V, L.P.; LightBay Investment Partners LP. 20190857 ...... G One Rock Capital Partners II LP; Univar Inc.; One Rock Capital Partners II LP. 20190858 ...... G SPC Investment Co., L.P.; Patricia Bragg; SPC Investment Co., L.P. 20190859 ...... G PDS Parent, Inc.; Peachtree Parent, Inc.; PDS Parent, Inc. 20190862 ...... G RoundTable Healthcare Partners IV, L.P.; Moberg Pharma AB (publ); RoundTable Healthcare Partners IV, L.P. 20190865 ...... G Carlyle U.S. Equity Opportunity Fund II, L.P.; Cortec Group Fund V, L.P.; Carlyle U.S. Equity Opportunity Fund II, L.P. 20190867 ...... G Gryphon Partners V, L.P.; LLR Equity Partners IV, L.P.; Gryphon Partners V, L.P.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16856 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

EARLY TERMINATIONS GRANTED FEBRUARY 1, 2019 THRU FEBRUARY 28, 2019—Continued 02/28/2019

20190825 ...... G Sentinel Capital Partners VI, L.P.; Benjamin Rutledge Wall II; Sentinel Capital Partners VI, L.P. 20190838 ...... G SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M1) L.P.; Guardant Health, Inc.; SoftBank Vision Fund (AIV M1) L.P. 20190854 ...... G Carbonite, Inc.; TCV V, L.P.; Carbonite, Inc.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and aimed to collect tire crumb rubber Theresa Kingsberry, Program Support clarity of the information to be samples from 40 synthetic turf fields Specialist, Federal Trade Commission collected; across the U.S. and from nine Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of (d) Minimize the burden of the manufacturing facilities. Under OMB Competition, Room CC–5301, collection of information on those who Control No. 0923–0058 (expiration date Washington, DC 20024, (202) 326–3100. are to respond, including, through the 08/13/2018), ATSDR/US EPA aimed to By direction of the Commission. use of appropriate automated, evaluate and characterize the human electronic, mechanical, or other April J. Tabor, exposure potential to constituents in technological collection techniques or crumb rubber infill among a Acting Secretary. other forms of information technology, convenience sample of 60 field users [FR Doc. 2019–08080 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] e.g., permitting electronic submission of (Activity 2) and to collect biological BILLING CODE 6750–01–P responses; and specimens (blood and urine) from 45 (e) Assess information collection participants (Activity 3). Preliminary costs. results from the pilot-scale study DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND To request additional information on indicate the need for further HUMAN SERVICES the proposed project or to obtain a copy investigation for a select group of of the information collection plan and chemicals to which field users may Agency for Toxic Substances and instruments, call (404) 639–7570 or potentially be exposed. Disease Registry send an email to [email protected]. Direct ATSDR is requesting a new two-year [30-Day–19–19GW] written comments and/or suggestions PRA clearance to conduct a regarding the items contained in this supplemental data collection, titled Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork notice to the Attention: CDC Desk ‘‘Exposure Characterization and Reduction Act Review Officer, Office of Management and Measurements during Activities Budget, 725 17th Street NW, Conducted on Synthetic Turf Fields In accordance with the Paperwork Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) with Tire Crumb Rubber Infill’’. The Reduction Act of 1995, the Agency for 395–5806. Provide written comments supplemental study will be a larger- Toxic Substances and Disease Registry within 30 days of notice publication. scale assessment of exposure potential (ATSDR) has submitted the information for individuals who use or play on collection request titled ‘‘Exposure Proposed Project synthetic turf fields with tire crumb Characterization and Measurements Exposure Characterization and rubber infill. The new ICR will address during Activities Conducted on Measurements during Activities key limitations of the pilot-scale study, Synthetic Turf Fields with Tire Crumb Conducted on Synthetic Turf Fields specifically, the small sample size, the Rubber Infill’’ to the Office of with Tire Crumb Rubber Infill—New— lack of a comparison population, and an Management and Budget (OMB) for Agency for Toxic Substances and extremely short data collection period review and approval. ATSDR previously Disease Registry (ATSDR). needed to meet early reporting published a ‘‘Proposed Data Collection requirements. Submitted for Public Comment and Background and Brief Description Recommendations’’ notice on December Currently in the United States, there As before, the supplemental study 26, 2018 to obtain comments from the are more than 12,000 synthetic turf will include field users who are persons public and affected agencies. ATSDR fields in use. While the Synthetic Turf who use synthetic turf fields with received one comment related to the Council has set guidelines for the crumb rubber infill and who routinely previous notice. This notice serves to content of crumb rubber used as infill in perform activities that would result in a allow an additional 30 days for public synthetic turf fields, manufacturing high level of contact to crumb rubber. and affected agency comments. processes result in differences among The study will also include persons ATSDR will accept all comments for types of crumb rubber. Additionally, the who play on natural grass fields to this proposed information collection chemical composition may vary highly provide a comparison group. project. The Office of Management and between different processes and source The field users will be administered Budget is particularly interested in materials and may vary even within a detailed questionnaire about activity comments that: granules from the same origin. patterns on synthetic turf with crumb (a) Evaluate whether the proposed From 2016–2018, the Agency for rubber infill; the questionnaire is largely collection of information is necessary Toxic Substances and Disease Registry the same as the one approved under for the proper performance of the and the United States Environmental OMB Control No. 0923–0058 with functions of the agency, including Protection Agency (ATSDR/US EPA) minor modifications. This instrument whether the information will have conducted pilot-scale research under will be used to characterize exposure practical utility; the protocol titled ‘‘Collections Related scenarios, including the nature and (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the to Synthetic Turf Fields with Crumb duration of potential exposures. agencies estimate of the burden of the Rubber Infill,’’ and under two Additionally, the questionnaire will proposed collection of information, information collection requests (ICRs). include queries on potential external including the validity of the Activity 1, under OMB Control No. sources, such as dietary sources, to methodology and assumptions used; 0923–0054 (expiration date 01/31/2017), select chemicals.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16857

ATSDR will collect urine samples development of new analytical methods grass field users. The total burden hours pre- and post-activity. The urine for potential chemicals of interest. for the research study is 184 hours samples will be analyzed for The research study will screen a total among all of the 220 respondents. There polyaromatic hydrocarbons and will of 220 participants for eligibility. The is no cost to the respondents other than also be archived in case of future target sample size is 150 for synthetic their time in the study. turf field users and is 50 for the natural

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Type of respondents Form name respondents responses per response respondent (in hrs.)

Adult/Adolescent Field Users ...... Eligibility Screening Form ...... 110 1 5/60 Adult and Adolescent Questionnaire ...... 100 1 30/60 Exposure Measurement Form ...... 100 1 20/60 Parents/Guardians of Youth/Child Field Users Eligibility Screening Form ...... 110 1 5/60 Youth and Child Questionnaire ...... 100 1 30/60 Youth/Child Field Users ...... Exposure Measurement Form ...... 100 1 20/60

Jeffrey M. Zirger, DATES: ATSDR must receive written submitting the collection to the OMB for Lead, Information Collection Review Office, comments on or before June 24, 2019. approval. To comply with this Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, requirement, we are publishing this Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. identified by Docket No. ATSDR–2019– notice of a proposed data collection as [FR Doc. 2019–08147 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 0004 by any of the following methods: described below. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P • Federal eRulemaking Portal: The OMB is particularly interested in Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions comments that will help: for submitting comments. 1. Evaluate whether the proposed DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND • Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information collection of information is necessary HUMAN SERVICES Collection Review Office, Centers for for the proper performance of the Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 functions of the agency, including Agency for Toxic Substance and Clifton Road NE, MS–D74, Atlanta, whether the information will have Disease Registry Georgia 30329. practical utility; Instructions: All submissions received 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the [60-Day–19–19ACF; Docket No. ATSDR– must include the agency name and agency’s estimate of the burden of the 2019–0004] Docket Number. ATSDR will post, proposed collection of information, without change, all relevant comments including the validity of the Proposed Data Collection Submitted to Regulations.gov. methodology and assumptions used; for Public Comment and Please note: Submit all comments 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and Recommendations through the Federal eRulemaking portal clarity of the information to be (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the collected; and AGENCY: Agency for Toxic Substances address listed above. 4. Minimize the burden of the and Disease Registry (ATSDR), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To collection of information on those who Department of Health and Human request more information on the are to respond, including through the Services (HHS). proposed project or to obtain a copy of use of appropriate automated, ACTION: Notice with comment period. the information collection plan and electronic, mechanical, or other instruments, contact Jeffery M. Zirger, technological collection techniques or SUMMARY: The Agency for Toxic Information Collection Review Office, other forms of information technology, Substances and Disease Registry Centers for Disease Control and e.g., permitting electronic submissions (ATSDR), as part of its continuing effort Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– of responses. to reduce public burden and maximize D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 5. Assess information collection costs. the utility of government information, 404–639–7570; Email: [email protected]. invites the general public and other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Project Federal agencies the opportunity to Under the Paperwork Reduction Act Human health effects of drinking comment on a proposed and/or of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), water exposures to per- and continuing information collection, as Federal agencies must obtain approval polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): A required by the Paperwork Reduction from the Office of Management and multi-site cross-sectional study (The Act of 1995. This notice invites Budget (OMB) for each collection of Multi-site Study)—NEW—Agency for comment on a proposed information information they conduct or sponsor. In Toxic Substances and Disease Registry collection project titled ‘‘Human health addition, the PRA also requires Federal (ATSDR). effects of drinking water exposures to agencies to provide a 60-day notice in per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances the Federal Register concerning each Background and Brief Description (PFAS): A multi-site cross-sectional proposed collection of information, Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances study (The Multi-site Study).’’ The including each new proposed (PFAS) are a family of chemicals used purpose of this research is to use sound collection, each proposed extension of in industrial applications and consumer study methods to see if drinking water existing collection of information, and products. PFAS contamination of exposure to PFAS is related to health each reinstatement of previously drinking water is widespread in the U.S. outcomes. approved information collection before Some estimates indicate that at least

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16858 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

sixty million residents were served by The main goal of this cross-sectional contaminated drinking water supply in 66 public water supplies that had at multi-site study is to evaluate the selected community to recruit least one sample at or above the US associations between measured and potential participants and to meet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reconstructed historic serum levels of sample size requirements for children Lifetime Health Advisory for PFAS including PFOA, PFOS, and and adults. If the selected community is perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and PFHxS, and selected health outcomes. served by a PFAS-contaminated public perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) The health outcomes of interest include water system, then the recipient will (individually or combined), which is 70 lipids, renal function and kidney obtain a list of households served by the nanograms per liter (ng/L) of water. disease, thyroid hormones and disease, water purveyor from its billing records. Industrial facilities that manufacture or liver function and disease, glycemic If the community is served by use PFAS have contaminated drinking parameters and diabetes, as well as contaminated private wells, then the water in surrounding communities in immune response and function in both recipient will obtain a list of households several states. In addition, PFOS, PFOA, children and adults. In addition, the with contaminated wells from the local perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) study will investigate PFAS differences and/or state health and environmental and other PFAS chemicals are in sex hormones and sexual maturation, agencies. constituents in aqueous film-forming vaccine response, and neurobehavioral Statistical sampling methods (e.g., a foam (AFFF), used to extinguish outcomes in children. In adults, two-stage cluster sample) may be used flammable liquid fires. The use of AFFF additional outcomes of interest include for recruitment of study participants if at military bases and other sites may cardiovascular disease, osteoarthritis all the affected households can be have resulted in the migration of PFAS and osteoporosis, endometriosis, and enumerated. If the PFAS drinking water chemicals through soils to ground water autoimmune disease. concentrations vary widely across the and/or surface water sources of drinking Under the cooperative agreement, community, then the recipient should water for the bases and/or surrounding each recipient shall propose candidate consider using targeted sampling communities around the country. study sites at communities whose approaches—including oversampling of In response to growing awareness of drinking water was impacted by AFFF areas with higher PFAS the extent of PFAS contamination across use or by industrial PFAS emissions. concentrations—to ensure a sufficiently the U.S., the Section 316(a) of the 2018 Site selection will consider the wide distribution of exposure levels National Defense Authorization Act documented levels of PFAS drinking among study participants to evaluate (Pub. L. 115–91) authorized the Agency water concentrations. The aim will be to exposure-response trends. If for Toxic Substances and Disease include sites so that a wide range in enumeration of all households is not Registry (ATSDR) to conduct a study on PFAS exposures levels are included in feasible, or if participation rates are the human health effects of PFAS the study. This will enable the expected to be low, then the recipient contamination in drinking water. The evaluation of exposure-response trends can consider non-probabilistic sampling existence of widespread contamination including effects at the lower range of approaches such as ‘‘judgment’’ and at many sites around the U.S. makes this exposures. Ground water contaminant ‘‘snowball’’ sampling approaches. a paramount effort in addressing the fate and transport models and water The recipients should consider health effects of exposures to PFAS from system distribution system models may requesting assistance from local and contaminated drinking water. be necessary to identify the areas with state health departments in its Consequently, ATSDR is requesting a contaminated drinking water, to recruitment efforts. In addition, the three-year Paperwork Reduction Act determine the period when the drinking recipient should engage community (PRA) clearance for the Multi-site Study. water was contaminated, and to organizations to assist in conducting The Multi-site Study will build on the reconstruct historical PFAS outreach about the study and preceding proof-of-concept study at the contaminant concentrations. recruitment of participants and consider Pease International Tradeport in For exposure estimation, participants establishing a community assistance Portsmouth, New Hampshire. will be categorized based on their panel (CAP). The CAP could provide ATSDR will conduct this research measured serum concentration of PFAS comments on any additional using a cooperative agreement titled compounds or on modeled estimated investigator-initiated research questions ‘‘Multi-site Study of the Health historical serum levels (e.g., referent or and hypotheses and facilitate the Implications of Exposure to PFAS- low, medium, high). Measured and involvement of the affected community Contaminated Drinking Water’’ (Notice estimated PFAS serum levels will also in decisions related to outreach about of Funding Opportunity [NOFO] No. be evaluated as continuous variables. At the study, participant recruitment CDC–RFA–TS–19–002). The expected sites with prior PFAS biomonitoring strategies, and study logistics. The CAP number of research recipients (e.g., data, the study will evaluate changes in could also assist the recipient in the entities selected for funding) is six. The PFAS concentration over time. dissemination of study findings to the program will be administered by the Each recipient shall reconstruct community. CDC Extramural Research Program historic serum PFAS concentrations. In total, ATSDR seeks to enroll at least Office (ERPO) at the National Center for This may be done by estimating half- 8,000 participants (6,000 adults and Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC). lives and elimination rates as well as by 2,000 children and their parents) from The research under this cooperative water contamination modeling to inform communities exposed to PFAS- agreement will be a two-part program. pharmacokinetic (PK) or physiologically contaminated drinking water over the First, a mandatory core research based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models. first three years of the five-year protocol for all recipients is designed to Historical serum PFAS reconstruction cooperative agreement program. aggregate data across all sites and will enable the evaluation of exposure Annualized estimates are 2,667 designed to compare data between sites. lags and vulnerable periods as well as participants (2,000 adults and 667 Next, each recipient will have the statistical analyses that can control for children). To restrict this study to option to propose additional confounding and reverse causation due drinking water exposures, adults investigator-initiated research questions to physiological factors. occupationally exposed to PFAS will and hypotheses related to the overall Each recipient shall identify and not be eligible for the study (e.g., ever goals of this NOFO. enumerate all households served by the firefighters or ever workers in an

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16859

industry using PFAS chemicals in its The study will archive leftover serum assessments of the child’s attention and manufacturing process). Likewise, and urine samples for additional behaviors (n=667 per year). children whose birth mothers were analyses of PFAS chemicals and specific To facilitate access to medical and occupationally exposed will not be effect biomarkers. The National Center school records, each recipient will reach eligible. ATSDR assumes that 5 percent for Environmental Health (NCEH) out to local medical societies, public of the people who volunteer will not laboratory will perform blood and urine school systems, and private schools, to meet eligibility requirements; therefore, PFAS analyses for all Multi-site Study enlist their cooperation with the study. a total of 8,400 people will be screened. participants. Thus, issues of inter- The recipient will ask for permission to To complete the data collection in three laboratory variability for exposure abstract participants’ medical records to years, annualized estimates for measures will be eliminated. confirm self-reported health outcomes. eligibility screening are 2,800 people Adult participants and a parent of The recipient will also seek permission (2,100 adults and 700 children) and an child participants will complete a to abstract and compare children’s annual time burden of 467 hours. The questionnaire that includes residential school records to their behavioral recipients will provide appointment history, medical history, occupational assessment results. Based on ATSDR’s reminder calls for each eligible person history, and water consumption habits experience from the Pease proof of who agrees to be enrolled (n = 2,667 per (n=2,000 adults and 667 children per concept study, ATSDR estimates that it year) for a time burden of 222 hours per year). Ideally, the parent will be the will take 48 education specialists and year. child’s birth mother, as ATSDR will ask At enrollment, each recipient will details about the child’s exposure, 150 adult and 50 pediatric medical obtain adult consent, parental pregnancy, and breastfeeding history. record specialists to complete record permission, and child assent before data For purposes of time burden abstractions across all study sites. Given collection begins. For each participant, estimation, ATSDR assumes that 20 the goal to enroll at least 2,000 adults the recipient will take body measures, percent of parents will also enroll as and 667 children per year, the annual collect blood samples to measure PFAS adults and can take the child short form time burden for medical and serum levels and several effect questionnaire (n=133 per year); educational record abstraction is biomarkers such as lipids, and thyroid, therefore, 534 parents will take the child estimated to be 1,091 hours. kidney, immune and liver function. The long form questionnaire per year. The total annualized time burden recipient will also obtain urine samples Parents and children, with requested is 5,269 hours. There is no from participants to measure PFAS administration by trained professionals, cost to the respondents other than their levels and kidney function biomarkers. will also complete neurobehavioral time. ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden Type of respondents Form name respondents responses per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

Multi-site Study Participants ...... Eligibility Screening Script ...... 2,800 1 10/60 467 Appointment Reminder Telephone Script ...... 2,667 1 5/60 222 Update Contact Information Hardcopy Form .... 2,667 1 5/60 222 Medication List ...... 2,667 1 3/60 133 Body and Blood Pressure Measures Form ...... 2,667 1 5/60 222 Blood Draw and Urine Collection Form ...... 2,667 1 10/60 444 Adult Questionnaire ...... 2,000 1 30/60 1,000 Child Questionnaire—Long Form ...... 537 1 30/60 268 Child Questionnaire—Short Form ...... 133 1 15/60 33 Parent Neurobehavioral Test Battery ...... 667 1 15/60 167 Child Neurobehavioral Test Battery ...... 667 1 90/60 1,000 Education Specialists ...... Child School Record Abstraction Form ...... 48 14 20/60 224 Medical Record Specialists ...... Medical Record Abstraction Form—Adult ...... 150 13 20/60 650 Medical Record Abstraction Form—Child ...... 50 13 20/60 217

Total ...... 5,269

Jeffrey M. Zirger, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease Lead, Information Collection Review Office, HUMAN SERVICES Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, its continuing effort to reduce public Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and burden and maximize the utility of [FR Doc. 2019–08150 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Prevention government information, invites the BILLING CODE 4163–18–P general public and other Federal [60-Day–19–0457; Docket No. CDC–2019– agencies the opportunity to comment on 0032] a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by Proposed Data Collection Submitted the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. for Public Comment and This notice invites comment on Recommendations Aggregate Reports for Tuberculosis AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Program Evaluation. The goal of the Prevention (CDC), Department of Health study is to allow CDC to collect and and Human Services (HHS). monitor indicators for key program activities, such as finding tuberculosis ACTION: Notice with comment period. infections in recent contacts of cases

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16860 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

and in other high-risk persons likely to comply with this requirement, we are optional data collection elements, will be infected and providing therapy for publishing this notice of a proposed help programs assess high-risk latent tuberculosis infection in an effort data collection as described below. populations served, and evaluate the to eliminate Tuberculosis in the United The OMB is particularly interested in adaptation and effectiveness of new States. CDC is requesting approval for comments that will help: diagnostic tests and drug regimens in 268 burden hours. This is an increase of 1. Evaluate whether the proposed treating LTBI. 42 hour from the previously approved collection of information is necessary To ensure the elimination of 226 hours. for the proper performance of the tuberculosis in the United States, CDC DATES: CDC must receive written functions of the agency, including monitors indicators for key program comments on or before June 24, 2019. whether the information will have activities, such as finding tuberculosis ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, practical utility; 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the infections in recent contacts of cases identified by Docket No. CDC–2019– agency’s estimate of the burden of the and in other persons likely to be 0032 by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: proposed collection of information, infected and providing therapy for Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions including the validity of the latent tuberculosis infection. In 2000, for submitting comments. methodology and assumptions used; CDC implemented two program • Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Ph.D., 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and evaluation reports for annual Information Collection Review Office, clarity of the information to be submission: Aggregate report of follow- Centers for Disease Control and collected; and up and treatment for contacts of 4. Minimize the burden of the Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– tuberculosis cases, and Aggregate report collection of information on those who D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329. of targeted testing and treatment for Instructions: All submissions received are to respond, including through the latent tuberculosis infection (OMB No. use of appropriate automated, must include the agency name and 0920–0457). The respondents for these electronic, mechanical, or other Docket Number. CDC will post, without reports are the 67 state and local technological collection techniques or change, all relevant comments to tuberculosis control programs receiving Regulations.gov. other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions federal cooperative agreement funding Please note: Submit all comments through the CDC Division of through the Federal eRulemaking portal of responses. 5. Assess information collection costs. Tuberculosis Elimination (DTBE). These (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the reports emphasize treatment outcomes, address listed above. Proposed Project high-priority target populations FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Aggregate Reports for Tuberculosis vulnerable to tuberculosis, and request more information on the Program Evaluation (OMB No. 0920– electronic report entry and submission proposed project or to obtain a copy of 0457, Expiration date 2/29/2020)— to CDC through the National the information collection plan and Revision—National Center for HIV/ Tuberculosis Indicators Project (NTIP), a instruments, contact Jeffrey M. Zirger, AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB secure web-based system for program Information Collection Review Office, Prevention (NCHHSTP), Centers for evaluation data. No other federal agency Centers for Disease Control and Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– collects this type of national D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: Background and Brief Description tuberculosis data, and the aggregate report of follow-up and treatment for 404–639–7570; Email: [email protected]. CDC requests approval of this revision contacts of tuberculosis cases, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the of the Aggregate Reports for aggregate report of targeted testing and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) Tuberculosis Program Evaluation, treatment for latent tuberculosis (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies previously approved under OMB No. must obtain approval from the Office of 0920–0457, for three years. There are infection are the only data source about Management and Budget (OMB) for each minor revisions to the report forms, data latent tuberculosis infection for collection of information they conduct definitions, and reporting instructions. monitoring national progress toward or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also CDC is requesting approval for 268 tuberculosis elimination with these requires Federal agencies to provide a burden hours. This is an increase of 42 activities. CDC provides ongoing 60-day notice in the Federal Register hours from the previously approved 226 assistance in the preparation and concerning each proposed collection of hours. The minor revisions that utilization of these reports at the local information, including each new contributed to an increase in data and state levels of public health proposed collection, each proposed collection burden address the change in jurisdiction. CDC also provides extension of existing collection of the national strategies for TB control respondents with technical support for information, and each reinstatement of and prevention, emphasizing treatment the NTIP software. The estimated previously approved information of individuals with latent TB infection annualized burden hours are 268. There collection before submitting the (LTBI), and at high risk of progression is no cost to respondents other than collection to the OMB for approval. To to TB disease. The revisions, which are their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden Type of respondent Form name respondents responses per response hours respondent (in hours)

Data clerks and Program Managers Follow-up and Treatment of Con- 67 1 2 134 (electronic). tacts to Tuberculosis Cases Form (3a).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16861

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS—Continued

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden Type of respondent Form name respondents responses per response hours respondent (in hours)

Data clerks and Program Managers Targeted Testing and Treatment for 67 1 2 134 (electronic). Latent Tuberculosis Infection (3b).

Total ...... 268

Jeffrey M. Zirger, are to respond, including, through the infecting serovars found in dogs. Lead, Information Collection Review Office, use of appropriate automated, Findings from this study will aid in the Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, electronic, mechanical, or other development of evidence-based, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. technological collection techniques or targeted interventions for the prevention [FR Doc. 2019–08151 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] other forms of information technology, of canine leptospirosis, be used to focus BILLING CODE 4163–18–P e.g., permitting electronic submission of human leptospirosis surveillance responses; and efforts, and guide future investigations (e) Assess information collection on leptospirosis in humans and animals DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND costs. in Puerto Rico. HUMAN SERVICES To request additional information on The information collection for which the proposed project or to obtain a copy approval is sought is in accordance with Centers for Disease Control and of the information collection plan and BSPB’s mission to prevent illness, Prevention instruments, call (404) 639–7570 or disability, or death caused by bacterial [30-Day–19–1170] send an email to [email protected]. Direct zoonotic diseases through surveillance, written comments and/or suggestions epidemic investigations, epidemiologic Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork regarding the items contained in this and laboratory research, training and Reduction Act Review notice to the Attention: CDC Desk public education. Authorizing Officer, Office of Management and In accordance with the Paperwork Legislation comes from Section 301 of Budget, 725 17th Street NW, the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 241). Successful execution of BSPB’s 395–5806. Provide written comments public health mission requires data has submitted the information within 30 days of notice publication. collection request titled Canine collection activities in collaboration Leptospirosis Surveillance in Puerto Proposed Project with the state health department in Rico to the Office of Management and Canine Leptospirosis Surveillance in Puerto Rico and with local veterinary Budget (OMB) for review and approval. Puerto Rico (OMB Control No. 0920– clinics and animal shelters participating CDC previously published a ‘‘Proposed 1170, Exp. Date 03/31/2019)— in the study. Data Collection Submitted for Public Reinstatement with Change—National These activities include collecting Comment and Recommendations’’ Center for Emerging and Zoonotic information about dogs that meet the notice on January 29, 2019 to obtain Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Centers study case definition for a suspect case comments from the public and affected for Disease Control and Prevention of leptospirosis seen at participating agencies. CDC did not receive comments (CDC). veterinary clinics and shelters. related to the previous notice. This Participating veterinarians and their Background and Brief Description notice serves to allow an additional 30 veterinary staff collect information by days for public and affected agency The Centers for Disease Control and interviewing the dog owner (shelters are comments. Prevention (CDC), National Center for an exception as dog will not have an CDC will accept all comments for this Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious owner) and reviewing medical and proposed information collection project. Diseases (NCEZID), Division of High- administrative records, as necessary. The Office of Management and Budget Consequence Pathogens and Pathology Basic information about the is particularly interested in comments (DHCPP), Bacterial Special Pathogens participating sites will also be collected that: Branch (BSPB), requests three years of for study management and to enhance (a) Evaluate whether the proposed OMB approval for a reinstatement to the data analysis. collection of information is necessary approved ICR ‘‘Canine Leptospirosis Information will be collected using for the proper performance of the Surveillance in Puerto Rico.’’ Approved paper forms and provided in Spanish. functions of the agency, including methods of information collection will Staff at participating sites find it easier whether the information will have not change. to complete a paper copy when practical utility; Active surveillance allows for the abstracting medical record information (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the collection of prospective data on acute and interviewing owners for agencies estimate of the burden of the cases to determine the incidence and information about their dog’s risk proposed collection of information, distribution of leptospirosis in dogs, factors and symptoms. Study including the validity of the assess risk factors for infection, coordinators will enter collected data methodology and assumptions used; characterize circulating Leptospira into an electronic database. (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and serovars and species, assess The types of information being clarity of the information to be applicability of vaccines currently in collected include information about the collected; use based on serovar determination, and dog’s signalment, location of residence, (d) Minimize the burden of the assess rodent, livestock, and wildlife environmental risk factors, vaccination collection of information on those who reservoirs of leptospirosis based on history, clinical signs and symptoms,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16862 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

laboratory results, and clinical outcome. understanding of leptospirosis in Puerto total of 168 hours of burden for research Approval of this reinstatement ICR will Rico. activities each year. The collected allow BSPB to continue to collect these BSPB estimates involvement of at information will not impose a cost information which can help inform least 411 respondents (385 from the burden on the respondents beyond that animal public health and will help general public and 26 veterinarians and associated with their time to provide the contribute to a One Health their veterinary staff) and estimates a required data.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Type of respondents Form name respondents responses per response respondent (in hours)

Veterinarian ...... Enrollment Questionnaire ...... 26 1 5/60 Log Sheet ...... 26 24 1/60 Case Questionnaire ...... 26 24 10/60 General public ...... Case Questionnaire ...... 624 1 5/60

Jeffrey M. Zirger, proposed collection of information, prevention solutions. Slips, trips, and Lead, Information Collection Review Office, including the validity of the falls are major sources of workplace Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, methodology and assumptions used; injury across all industry sectors and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and represent a significant burden. In the [FR Doc. 2019–08145 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] clarity of the information to be wholesale and retail trade sectors, slips, BILLING CODE 4163–18–P collected; trips, and falls account for 25% of all (d) Minimize the burden of the reported injuries. By definition, small collection of information on those who businesses employ fewer numbers of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND are to respond, including, through the people, therefore a slip, trip, or fall HUMAN SERVICES use of appropriate automated, resulting in an injury is less likely to electronic, mechanical, or other occur in any given establishment. Small Centers for Disease Control and technological collection techniques or business employers may underestimate Prevention other forms of information technology, the risks associated with occupational [30-Day–19–19BX] e.g., permitting electronic submission of slips, trips, and falls because they have responses; and not experienced them and therefore do Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork (e) Assess information collection not take the necessary steps to prevent Reduction Act Review costs. them. To request additional information on In accordance with the Paperwork the proposed project or to obtain a copy One of the best ways to prevent and Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for of the information collection plan and control occupational injuries, illnesses, Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) instruments, call (404) 639–7570 or and fatalities is to ‘‘design out’’ or has submitted the information send an email to [email protected]. Direct minimize hazards and risks. NIOSH’s collection request titled Understanding written comments and/or suggestions Prevention Through Design Initiative How Discounting Affects Decision regarding the items contained in this focuses on this concept through the Making and Adoption of Prevention notice to the Attention: CDC Desk inclusion of prevention considerations Through Design Solutions to the Office Officer, Office of Management and in all designs that impact workers. of Management and Budget (OMB) for Budget, 725 17th Street NW, Although employers’ decisions can lead review and approval. CDC previously Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) to the successful implementation of published a ‘‘Proposed Data Collection 395–5806. Provide written comments Prevention Through Design, fall- Submitted for Public Comment and within 30 days of notice publication. prevention solutions are not well Recommendations’’ notice on December understood. More information is needed 10, 2018 to obtain comments from the Proposed Project to better understand the motivational, public and affected agencies. CDC Understanding How Discounting social, and organizational factors that received no comments related to the Affects Decision Making and Adoption affect employers’ decisions to adopt fall- previous notice. This notice serves to of Prevention Through Design prevention solutions. This project will allow an additional 30 days for public Solutions—New—National Institute for combine traditional surveys with and affected agency comments. Occupational Safety and Health behavioral economic methodologies to CDC will accept all comments for this (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control understand the decision-making proposed information collection project. and Prevention (CDC). processes related to the adoption of fall- The Office of Management and Budget prevention solutions. By using is particularly interested in comments Background and Brief Description behavioral economic principles and that: As mandated in the Occupational methods, this study will pose (a) Evaluate whether the proposed Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Pub. L. hypothetical, but realistic, scenarios to collection of information is necessary 91–596), the mission of NIOSH is to small business employers to assess the for the proper performance of the conduct research and investigations on influence of several factors on the functions of the agency, including occupational safety and health. This patterns of decisions. One of the goals whether the information will have project will focus on understanding the of the study is to assess the subjective practical utility; decision-making processes of small value of fall-prevention solutions based (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the wholesale and small retail businesses in on their costs and effort required to use agencies estimate of the burden of the regards to the adoption of fall- them. To quantify the subjective value

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16863

of fall-prevention solutions, this project injured?’’), and behavioral economic problem that has been overlooked. The will use the behavioral economic discounting assessments. For the results for this study are meant for principles to assess the trade-offs small behavioral economic questions in the theory development and are not business owners make among the cost of survey, participants will be asked to intended to be nationally representative. fall prevention solutions, the amount of make choices about hypothetical, but The sample size for this survey will effort require to assemble them, and the realistic, scenarios that assess the be 100 small business employers in the amount of time they take to assemble. influence of several factors on the wholesale or retail trade sectors. This One of the behavioral economic patterns of decision-making. To date, no sample size is based on a power analysis principles is discounting, in which the study has quantitatively assessed the value of a product or outcome decreases which indicated that 100 respondents safety-related decision-making as the cost, effort, or delay associated would be sufficient to detect any processes of small business employers with it increases. For example, small- correlations between the organizational business owners may ‘‘discount’’ the from a behavioral economic perspective. or demographic variables and the value of a fall-prevention solution if it Previous studies in this area consist of behavioral economic measures of requires great effort to assemble. qualitative studies of some factors that decision making. Each web-based The survey will include instruments affect occupational safety and health of survey will take approximately 30 to obtain demographic information (age, small businesses. This study will minutes to complete, resulting in an gender, income, etc.), organizational address a knowledge gap in the annualized burden estimate of 50 hours. safety information (e.g., ‘‘Has someone professional and scientific literature by There is no cost to respondents other at your place of work ever been contributing quantitative data to a than their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Type of respondents Instrument respondents responses per response respondent (in hours)

Small business employers ...... Discounting Survey ...... 100 1 30/60

Jeffrey M. Zirger, National Tobacco Prevention and Information Collection Review Office, Lead, Information Collection Review Office, Control Public Education Campaign.’’ Centers for Disease Control and Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, This information collection request will Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. enable the Centers for Disease Control D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: [FR Doc. 2019–08146 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] and Prevention (CDC) to continue to 404–639–7570; Email: [email protected]. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P measure exposure and awareness of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the ® Tips From Former Smokers campaign Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) ® (Tips ) and to evaluate its impact on (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND campaign-targeted outcomes among must obtain approval from the Office of HUMAN SERVICES smokers and nonsmokers in the United Management and Budget (OMB) for each States. Centers for Disease Control and collection of information they conduct DATES: Prevention CDC must receive written or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also comments on or before June 24, 2019. requires Federal agencies to provide a [60-Day–19–1083 Docket No. CDC– ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 60-day notice in the Federal Register 2019–0030] identified by Docket No. CDC–2019– concerning each proposed collection of 0030 by any of the following methods: information, including each new Proposed Data Collection Submitted • Federal eRulemaking Portal: proposed collection, each proposed for Public Comment and Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions extension of existing collection of Recommendations for submitting comments. information, and each reinstatement of • Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information previously approved information AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Collection Review Office, Centers for collection before submitting the Prevention (CDC), Department of Health Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 collection to the OMB for approval. To and Human Services (HHS). Clifton Road NE, MS–D74, Atlanta, comply with this requirement, we are ACTION: Notice with comment period. Georgia 30329. publishing this notice of a proposed Instructions: All submissions received data collection as described below. SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease must include the agency name and The OMB is particularly interested in Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of Docket Number. CDC will post, without comments that will help: its continuing effort to reduce public change, all relevant comments to 1. Evaluate whether the proposed burden and maximize the utility of Regulations.gov. collection of information is necessary government information, invites the Please note: Submit all comments for the proper performance of the general public and other Federal through the Federal eRulemaking portal functions of the agency, including agencies the opportunity to comment on (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the whether the information will have a proposed and/or continuing address listed above. practical utility; information collection, as required by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. request more information on the agency’s estimate of the burden of the This notice invites comment on a proposed project or to obtain a copy of proposed collection of information, proposed information collection project the information collection plan and including the validity of the titled ‘‘Extended Evaluation of the instruments, contact Jeffrey M. Zirger, methodology and assumptions used;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16864 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

3. Enhance the quality, utility, and smoking. A key objective for the randomly from postal mailing addresses clarity of the information to be nonsmoker audience is to encourage in the United States (address-based collected; and nonsmokers to communicate with sample, or ABS); and (2) the existing 4. Minimize the burden of the smokers they may know (including GfK/Ipsos (formerly GfK) collection of information on those who family and friends) about the dangers of KnowledgePanel, an established long- are to respond, including through the smoking and to encourage them to quit. term online panel of U.S. adults. All use of appropriate automated, Tips ads also focus on increasing online surveys, regardless of sample electronic, mechanical, or other audience’s knowledge of smoking- source, will be conducted via the GfK/ technological collection techniques or related diseases, intentions to quit, and Ipsos KnowledgePanel Web portal for other forms of information technology, other related outcomes. self-administered surveys. e.g., permitting electronic submissions The goal of the proposed information Information will be collected through of responses. collection is to evaluate the reach of Web surveys to be self-administered on 5. Assess information collection costs. Tips among intended audiences and to computers in the respondent’s home or Proposed Project examine the effectiveness of these in another convenient location. Information will be collected about Extended Evaluation of the National efforts in impacting specific outcomes Tobacco Prevention and Control Public that are targeted by Tips, including quit smokers’ and nonsmokers’ awareness of Education Campaign—Revision— attempts and intentions to quit among and exposure to specific Tips National Center for Chronic Disease smokers, nonsmokers’ communications advertisements; knowledge, attitudes, Prevention and Health Promotion about the dangers of smoking, and beliefs related to smoking and (NCCDPHP), Centers for Disease Control knowledge of smoking-related diseases secondhand smoke; and other marketing and Prevention (CDC). among both audiences. This will require exposure. The surveys will also measure customized surveys that will capture all behaviors related to smoking cessation Background and Brief Description unique messages and components of (among the smokers in the sample) and In 2012, HHS/CDC launched the Tips. Information will be collected behaviors related to nonsmokers’ National Tobacco Prevention and through Web surveys to be self- encouragement of smokers to quit Control Public Education Campaign administered by adults 18 and over on smoking, recommendations of cessation (Tips). The primary objectives of Tips computers in the respondent’s home or services, and attitudes about other are to encourage smokers to quit in another convenient location. tobacco and nicotine products. smoking and to encourage nonsmokers Evaluating Tips’ impact on behavioral It is important to evaluate Tips in a to communicate with smokers about the outcomes is necessary to determine context that assesses the dynamic nature dangers of smoking. Tips airs annually campaign cost effectiveness and to of tobacco product marketing and in all U.S. media markets on broadcast allow program planning for the most uptake of various tobacco products, and national cable TV as well as other effective campaign outcomes. Because particularly since these may affect media channels including digital video, Tips content changes, it is necessary to successful cessation rates. Survey online display and banners, radio, evaluate each yearly implementation of instruments may be updated to include billboards, and other formats. Tips ads Tips. new or revised items on relevant topics, rely on evidence-based paid media The proposed information collection including cigars, noncombustible advertising that highlights the negative will include three survey collections per tobacco products, and other emerging health consequences of smoking. Tips’ year (nine surveys in total) generally trends in tobacco use. primary target audience is adult conducted before, during, and after Tips Participation is voluntary and there smokers; adult nonsmokers constitute in each year. Using the same methods are no costs to respondents other than the secondary audience. Tips paid outlined in the currently-approved their time. The total response burden is advertisements are aimed at providing information collection (OMB No. 0920– estimated at 27,933 hours over three motivation and support to smokers to 1083, exp., 2/29/2020), participants will years between early fall 2020 and quit, with information and other be recruited from two sources: (1) An December 2023. The total annualized resources to increase smokers’ chances online longitudinal cohort of adult burden hours during this period thus of success in their attempts to quit smokers and nonsmokers, sampled are estimated at 9,311.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden (Type of) Respondents Form name respondents responses per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

General Population ...... Screening & Consent (English) ...... 16,167 1 5/60 1,347 Screening & Consent (Spanish) ...... 500 1 5/60 42 Adult Smokers, ages 18–54, in the Smoker Survey Wave A (English) ... 2,587 1 20/60 862 United States. Smoker Survey Wave A (Spanish) .. 80 1 20/60 27 Smoker Survey Wave B (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave B (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17 Smoker Survey Wave C (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave C (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17 Smoker Survey Wave D (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave D (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17 Smoker Survey Wave E (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave E (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17 Smoker Survey Wave F (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave F (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16865

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS—Continued

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden (Type of) Respondents Form name respondents responses per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

Smoker Survey Wave G (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave G (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17 Smoker Survey Wave H (English) ... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave H (Spanish) .. 50 1 20/60 17 Smoker Survey Wave I (English) ..... 1,617 1 20/60 539 Smoker Survey Wave I (Spanish) ... 50 1 20/60 17 Adult Nonsmokers, ages 18–54, in Nonsmoker Survey Wave A 1,000 1 20/60 333 the United States. (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave A (Span- 100 1 20/60 33 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave B 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave B (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave C 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave C (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave D 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave D (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave E 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave E (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave F 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave F (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave G 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave G (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave H 808 1 20/60 269 (English). Nonsmoker Survey Wave H (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish). Nonsmoker Survey Wave I (English) 808 1 20/60 269 Nonsmoker Survey Wave I (Span- 25 1 20/60 8 ish).

Total ...... 9,311

Jeffrey M. Zirger, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND government information, invites the Lead, Information Collection Review Office, HUMAN SERVICES general public and other Federal Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, agencies the opportunity to comment on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and a proposed and/or continuing [FR Doc. 2019–08148 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Prevention information collection, as required by BILLING CODE 4163–18–P the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. [60-Day–19–19ACC; Docket No. CDC–2019– This notice invites comment on a 0020] proposed information collection project Proposed Data Collection Submitted titled Survey of Engineered for Public Comment and Nanomaterial Occupational Safety and Recommendations Health Practices. The goal of this project is to assess the relevance and impact of AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and NIOSH’s contribution to guidelines and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health risk mitigation practices for safe and Human Services (HHS). handling of engineered nanomaterials in ACTION: Notice with comment period. the workplace. SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease DATES: CDC must receive written Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of comments on or before June 24, 2019. its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16866 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, functions of the agency, including work, and is on schedule to award a identified by Docket No. CDC–2019– whether the information will have contract by summer 2019. NIOSH 0020 by any of the following methods: practical utility; requests a two year OMB clearance. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the The research under this project will Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions agency’s estimate of the burden of the survey companies who manufacture, for submitting comments. proposed collection of information, distribute, fabricate, formulate, use or • Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information including the validity of the provide services related to engineered Collection Review Office, Centers for methodology and assumptions used; nanomaterials. The analysis will Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and describe the survey sample, response Clifton Road NE, MS–D74, Atlanta, clarity of the information to be rates, and types of company by industry Georgia 30329. collected; and and size. Further analysis will focus on Instructions: All submissions received 4. Minimize the burden of the identifying the types of engineered must include the agency name and collection of information on those who nanomaterials being used in industry Docket Number. CDC will post, without are to respond, including through the and the types of occupational safety and change, all relevant comments to use of appropriate automated, health practices being implemented. Regulations.gov. electronic, mechanical, or other The analysis will be used to develop a Please note: Submit all comments technological collection techniques or final report which evaluates the through the Federal eRulemaking portal other forms of information technology, influence of NIOSH products, services, (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the e.g., permitting electronic submissions and outputs on industry occupational address listed above. of responses. safety and health practices. 5. Assess information collection costs. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Under this project, the following request more information on the Proposed Project activities and data collections will be proposed project or to obtain a copy of Survey of Engineered Nanomaterial conducted: the information collection plan and Occupational Safety and Health (1) Company Pre-calls. Sampled instruments, contact Jeffrey M. Zirger, Practices—New—National Institute for companies will be contacted to identify Information Collection Review Office, Occupational Safety and Health the person who will complete the Centers for Disease Control and (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control survey and to ascertain whether or not Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– and Prevention (CDC). the company handles engineered D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: nanomaterials. 404–639–7570; Email: [email protected]. Background and Brief Description (2) Survey. A web-based SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the As mandated in the Occupational questionnaire, with a mail option, will Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Pub. L. be administered to companies. The (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies 91–596), the mission of the National purpose of the survey is to learn directly must obtain approval from the Office of Institute for Occupational Safety and from companies about their use of Management and Budget (OMB) for each Health (NIOSH) is to conduct research NIOSH materials and their occupational collection of information they conduct and investigations on work-related safety and health practices concerning or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also disease and injury and to disseminate engineered nanomaterials. requires Federal agencies to provide a information for preventing identified A sample of 600 companies will be 60-day notice in the Federal Register workplace hazards (Sections 20(a)(1) compiled from lists of industry concerning each proposed collection of and (d), Attachment 1). This dual associations, research reports, marketing information, including each new responsibility recognizes the need to databases, and web-based searches. Of proposed collection, each proposed translate research into workplace the 600 selected companies we extension of existing collection of application if it is to impact worker anticipate that 500 will complete the information, and each reinstatement of safety and well-being. The goal of this survey. The company pre-call is previously approved information project is to assess the relevance and expected to require 5 minutes to collection before submitting the impact of NIOSH’s contribution to complete. The survey is expected to collection to the OMB for approval. To guidelines and risk mitigation practices require 20 minutes to complete; comply with this requirement, we are for safe handling of engineered including the time it may take publishing this notice of a proposed nanomaterials in the workplace. The respondents to look-up and retrieve data collection as described below. intended use of this data is to inform needed information. The estimated The OMB is particularly interested in NIOSH’s research agenda to enhance its annualized burden hours for the comments that will help: relevance and impact on worker safety respondents’ time to participate in this 1. Evaluate whether the proposed and health in the context of engineered information collection is 109 hours. collection of information is necessary nanomaterials. NIOSH is in the process There are no costs to the responders for the proper performance of the of procuring a contractor to perform the other than their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden Total burden Type of respondents Form name respondents responses per per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

Receptionist ...... Pre-call ...... 300 1 5/60 25 Occupational Health and Safety Specialist ...... Survey ...... 100 1 20/60 34 Industrial Production Managers ...... Survey ...... 75 1 20/60 25 Natural Science Managers ...... Survey ...... 75 1 20/60 25

Total ...... 109

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16867

Jeffrey M. Zirger, instruments, contact Jeffrey M. Zirger, evaluate tobacco prevention and control Lead, Information Collection Review Office, Information Collection Review Office, programs. Support and guidance for Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, Centers for Disease Control and these programs have been provided Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– through cooperative agreement funding [FR Doc. 2019–08149 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: and technical assistance administered BILLING CODE 4163–18–P 404–639–7570; Email: [email protected]. by CDC’s National Center for Chronic SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Disease Prevention and Health Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) Promotion (NCCDPHP). Partnerships DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies and collaboration with other federal HUMAN SERVICES must obtain approval from the Office of agencies, nongovernmental Management and Budget (OMB) for each organizations, local communities, Centers for Disease Control and collection of information they conduct public and private sector organizations, Prevention or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also and major voluntary associations have [60-Day–19–1097; Docket No. CDC–2019– requires Federal agencies to provide a been critical to the success of these 0033] 60-day notice in the Federal Register efforts. NCCDPHP cooperative concerning each proposed collection of agreements DP15–1509 (National State- Proposed Data Collection Submitted information, including each new Based Tobacco Control Programs) and for Public Comment and proposed collection, each proposed DP14–1410PPHF14 (Public Health Recommendations extension of existing collection of Approaches for Ensuring Quitline AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and information, and each reinstatement of Capacity) continue to support efforts Prevention (CDC), Department of Health previously approved information since 1999 to build state health and Human Services (HHS). collection before submitting the department infrastructure and capacity to implement comprehensive tobacco ACTION: Notice with comment period. collection to the OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are prevention and control programs. SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease publishing this notice of a proposed Through these cooperative agreements, Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of data collection as described below. health departments in all 50 states, the its continuing effort to reduce public The OMB is particularly interested in District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and burden and maximize the utility of comments that will help: Guam are funded to implement government information, invites the 1. Evaluate whether the proposed evidence-based environmental, policy, general public and other Federal collection of information is necessary and systems strategies and activities agencies the opportunity to comment on for the proper performance of the designed to reduce tobacco use, a proposed and/or continuing functions of the agency, including secondhand smoke exposure, tobacco information collection, as required by whether the information will have related disparities and associated the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. practical utility; disease, disability, and death. This notice invites comment on a 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the CDC requests OMB approval to collect proposed information collection project agency’s estimate of the burden of the information from the 53 state-based titled Monitoring and Reporting System proposed collection of information, programs funded under both DP15–1509 for the National Tobacco Control including the validity of the and DP14–1410PPHF14. Awardees will Program. This information collection is methodology and assumptions used; report information about their work requested by CDC to monitor progress in 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and plan objectives, activities, the states and territories funded through clarity of the information to be infrastructure, and performance two CDC cooperative agreements collected; and measures. Each awardee will submit an 4. Minimize the burden of the DATES: CDC must receive written Annual Work Plan Progress Report collection of information on those who comments on or before June 24, 2019. using an Excel-based Work Plan Tool. are to respond, including through the The estimated burden per response on ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, use of appropriate automated, each of the abovementioned tools is six identified by Docket No. CDC–2019– electronic, mechanical, or other hours for each. Each awardee will also 0033 by any of the following methods: technological collection techniques or • submit an Annual Performance Measure Federal eRulemaking Portal: other forms of information technology, report using an Excel-based Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions e.g., permitting electronic submissions for submitting comments. Performance Measures tool. The • of responses. Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information 5. Assess information collection costs. estimated burden per response for this Collection Review Office, Centers for tool is five hours. Additionally, each Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Proposed Project awardee will submit an Annual Progress Clifton Road NE, MS–D74, Atlanta, Monitoring and Reporting System for Report (APR) using an Excel-based APR Georgia 30329. the National Tobacco Control Program— tool. The estimated burden per response Instructions: All submissions received Reinstatement with Change—National for the APR tool is 18 hours for each. must include the agency name and Center for Chronic Disease Prevention Awardees will also submit an Annual Docket Number. CDC will post, without and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), Component Model of Infrastructure change, all relevant comments to Centers for Disease Control and (CMI) using an Excel-based CMI tool, Regulations.gov. Prevention (CDC). with an estimated burden per response Please note: Submit all comments of three hours, and an Annual Budget through the Federal eRulemaking portal Background and Brief Description Progress Report using an Excel-based (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the The Centers for Disease Control and Budget Tool, with an estimated burden address listed above. Prevention (CDC) works with states, per response of five hours. The same FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To territories, tribal organizations, and the instruments will be used for all request more information on the District of Columbia (collectively information collection and reporting proposed project or to obtain a copy of referred to as ‘‘state-based’’ programs) to throughout the OMB approval period. the information collection plan and develop, implement, manage, and Awardees will upload their information

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16868 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

to www.grantssolutions.gov on an make adjustments in the type and level the burden of chronic diseases. Finally, annual basis to satisfy routine of technical assistance provided to the information collection will allow cooperative agreement reporting them, as needed, to support attainment CDC to monitor the increased emphasis requirements. of their performance measures. on partnerships and programmatic CDC will use the information Monitoring and evaluation activities collaboration, and is expected to reduce collected to monitor each awardee’s also allow CDC to provide oversight of duplication of effort, enhance program progress and to identify facilitators and the use of federal funds, and to identify impact and maximize the use of federal challenges to program implementation and disseminate information about funds. OMB approval is requested for and achievement of outcomes. successful prevention and control three years. Participation in the Monitoring allows CDC to determine strategies implemented by awardees. information collection is required as a whether an awardee is meeting These functions are central to condition of funding. There are no costs performance and budget goals and to NCCDPHP’s broad mission of reducing to respondents other than their time.

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden Type of respondents Form name respondents responses per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

State Tobacco Control Managers ..... Annual Work Plan Progress Report 53 1 6 318 Annual Budget Progress Report ...... 53 1 5 265 Annual Performance Measures 53 1 5 265 Progress Report. Annual CMI Progress Report ...... 53 1 3 159 Annual APR Report ...... 53 1 18 954

Total ...... 1,961

Jeffrey M. Zirger, primary population-based data used to Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS– Lead, Information Collection Review Office, describe the epidemiology of HIV in the D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, United States including adult/ 404–639–7570; Email: [email protected]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. adolescent and pediatric HIV case SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the [FR Doc. 2019–08153 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] reporting, case report evaluations and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) BILLING CODE 4163–18–P updates, laboratory updates, (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies deduplication activities, investigation must obtain approval from the Office of reporting and evaluation, cluster Management and Budget (OMB) for each DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND reporting, perinatal HIV exposure HUMAN SERVICES collection of information they conduct reporting, and annual reporting of the or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also standards evaluation report. Centers for Disease Control and requires Federal agencies to provide a DATES: Prevention CDC must receive written 60-day notice in the Federal Register comments on or before June 24, 2019. concerning each proposed collection of [60-Day–19–0573; Docket No. CDC–2019– ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, information, including each new 0034] identified by Docket No. CDC–2019– proposed collection, each proposed 0034 by any of the following methods: Proposed Data Collection Submitted extension of existing collection of • Federal eRulemaking Portal: for Public Comment and information, and each reinstatement of Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions Recommendations previously approved information for submitting comments. • collection before submitting the AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Mail: Jeffrey M. Zirger, Information collection to the OMB for approval. To Prevention (CDC), Department of Health Collection Review Office, Centers for comply with this requirement, we are and Human Services (HHS). Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 publishing this notice of a proposed ACTION: Notice with comment period. Clifton Road NE, MS–D74, Atlanta, data collection as described below. Georgia 30329. SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease Instructions: All submissions received The OMB is particularly interested in Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of must include the agency name and comments that will help: its continuing effort to reduce public Docket Number. CDC will post, without 1. Evaluate whether the proposed burden and maximize the utility of change, all relevant comments to collection of information is necessary government information, invites the Regulations.gov. for the proper performance of the general public and other Federal Please note: Submit all comments functions of the agency, including agencies the opportunity to comment on through the Federal eRulemaking portal whether the information will have a proposed and/or continuing (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the practical utility; information collection, as required by address listed above. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To agency’s estimate of the burden of the This notice invites comment on a request more information on the proposed collection of information, proposed information collection project proposed project or to obtain a copy of including the validity of the titled National HIV Surveillance System the information collection plan and methodology and assumptions used; (NHSS). This data collection is for instruments, contact Jeffrey M. Zirger, 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and continuation of the National HIV Information Collection Review Office, clarity of the information to be Surveillance System which provides the Centers for Disease Control and collected; and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16869

4. Minimize the burden of the In 2018, CDC implemented activities clinics and other health care providers collection of information on those who under a new cooperative agreement to complete the HIV adult and pediatric are to respond, including through the PS18–1802: Integrated HIV Surveillance case reports. CDC estimates that use of appropriate automated, and Prevention Programs for Health approximately 854 adult HIV case electronic, mechanical, or other Departments. The purpose of PS18 1802 reports and three pediatric case reports technological collection techniques or is to implement a comprehensive HIV are processed by each health other forms of information technology, surveillance and prevention program to department annually. e.g., permitting electronic submissions prevent new HIV infections and achieve These data are recorded using of responses. viral suppression among persons living standard case report forms either on 5. Assess information collection costs. with HIV. In particular, the activities paper or electronically and entered into the electronic reporting system. Updates Proposed Project funded under the announcement promote and support improving health to case reports are also entered into the National HIV Surveillance System outcomes for persons living with HIV reporting system by health departments (NHSS) (OMB Control No. 0920–0573 through achieving and sustaining viral as additional information may be Expiration 06/30/2019)—Revision— suppression, and reducing health- received from laboratories, vital National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral related disparities by using quality, statistics, or additional providers. Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention timely, and complete surveillance and Evaluations are also conducted by (NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control program data to guide HIV prevention health departments on a subset of case and Prevention (CDC). efforts. These goals are in accordance reports (e.g. re-abstraction, validation). Background and Brief Description with the CDC’s and national prevention CDC estimates that on average goals, including the President’s new approximately 86 evaluations of case CDC is authorized under Sections 304 initiative to End the HIV Epidemic in reports, 2353 updates to case reports and 306 of the Public Health Service Act America. This information collection and 9410 updates of electronic (42 U.S.C. 242b and 242k) to collect request revision includes activities to laboratory test data will be processed by information on cases of human continue national surveillance program each of the 59 health departments immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and activities and align with program annually. In addition, all 59 health indicators of HIV disease and HIV priorities under the new cooperative departments will conduct routine disease progression including AIDS. agreement (PS18–1802). deduplication activities for new Data collected as part of the National The revisions requested in this diagnoses and cumulative case reports. HIV Surveillance System (NHSS) are the extension include minor modifications CDC estimates that health departments primary data used to monitor the extent to currently collected data elements and on average will follow-up on 2741 and characteristics of the HIV burden in forms (including the Adult Case Report reports as part of deduplication the United States. HIV surveillance data Form (ACRF) and the Pediatric Case activities annually. Case report are used to describe trends in HIV Report Form (PCRF)), modifications to information compiled over time by incidence, prevalence and data system variables used to health departments is then de-identified characteristics of infected persons and summarize geocoded address data and forwarded to CDC on a monthly used widely at the federal, state, and collected as part of the geocoding and basis to become part of the national HIV local levels for planning and evaluating data linkage activities, addition of new surveillance database. prevention programs and health-care cluster report forms for health When necessary additional services, and allocate funding for departments to report on progress for information may be reported by health prevention and care. HIV cluster response activities and departments for monitoring and As science, technology, and our addition of investigation reporting and evaluation of health department understanding of HIV have evolved, the evaluation activities to account for investigations including activities NHSS has been updated periodically. additional data reported as part of these identifying persons who are not in HIV CDC in collaboration with health activities. No changes are being medical care and linking them to HIV departments in the 50 states, the District requested to data elements collected on medical care (e.g., Data-to-Care of Columbia, and U.S. dependent areas, the Perinatal HIV Exposure Reporting activities) and other services and conducts national surveillance for cases (PHER) form, but the number of identifying and responding to clusters. of HIV infection that includes critical jurisdictions (respondents) completing CDC estimates health departments will data across the spectrum of HIV disease the form has been reduced. Minor on average process 901 responses from HIV diagnosis, to AIDS, the end- changes to the information collected in related to investigation reporting and stage disease caused by infection with the standards evaluation report form monitoring annually. HIV, and death. In addition, this (SER) are also requested to align with Clusters of HIV are groups of persons national system provides essential data changes in program activities under related by recent, rapid transmission, for to estimate HIV incidence, monitor PS18–1802. Finally, we have updated which rapid response is needed in order patterns in HIV drug resistance and our burden estimates to more accurately to intervene to interrupt ongoing genetic diversity and identify and reflect current data collection practices transmission and prevent future HIV respond to clusters of recent and rapid (e.g., adjusting the average burden per infections. Health departments may transmission, as well as provide response for electronic laboratory detect clusters through multiple means, information on perinatal exposures in updates and including a separate line including through routine analyses of the United States. The CDC surveillance item for deduplication activities Surveillance data and other data case definition has been modified previously included with case report reported to the NHSS. Data on clusters periodically to accurately monitor evaluations and including new of recent and rapid HIV transmission in disease in adults, adolescents and cumulative deduplication activities). the United States will be collected to children and reflect use of new testing CDC provides funding for 59 monitor situations necessitating public technologies and changes in HIV jurisdictions to provide adult and health intervention, assess health treatment. Information is then updated pediatric HIV case reports. Health department response, and evaluate in the case report forms and reporting department staff compile information outcomes of intervention activities. software as needed. from laboratories, physicians, hospitals, These summary data will be collected

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16870 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

through quarterly cluster report forms recent and rapid clusters of HIV efforts. An estimated 197 reports that will be completed by health transmission, necessitating the containing perinatal exposure data departments for clusters that they have completion of multiple cluster report elements will be processed on average identified and for which they are forms. CDC estimates on average health annually by each of the 16 health actively conducting response activities. departments will provide information departments reporting data collected as Health departments will complete an for 2.5 cluster initial cluster reports, five part of PHER. These supplemental data initial cluster report form when a cluster Cluster Follow-up Form reports, and 2.5 are also reported monthly to CDC. is first identified, a cluster follow-up Cluster Close-out Form reports The Standards Evaluation Report form for each quarter in which the annually. (SER) is used by CDC and Health cluster response remains active and a Perinatal HIV surveillance and Departments to improve data quality, cluster close-out form when cluster prevention activities with HIV exposure interpretation, usefulness, and response activities are closed or at reporting and perinatal services surveillance system efficiency, as well annual intervals while a cluster coordination is an integrated approach as to monitor progress toward meeting response remains active. Completion of to advancing the progress toward surveillance program objectives. The forms will be determined by the number perinatal HIV elimination goals. A information collected for the SER of clusters detected. Health departments subset of 16 health departments in the includes a brief set of questions about that do not identify recent and rapid most affected jurisdictions will be evaluation outcomes and the collection clusters of HIV transmission will not reporting using the Perinatal Exposure of laboratory data that will be reported complete any cluster report forms, while Reporting (PHER) form to monitor and one time a year by each 59 health some jurisdictions will detect multiple evaluate perinatal HIV prevention departments.

TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Average Number of Number of burden per Total burden Type of respondents Form name respondents responses per response (in hours) respondent (in hours)

Health Departments ...... Adult HIV Case Report ...... 59 854 20/60 16,795 Health Departments ...... Pediatric HIV Case Report ...... 59 3 20/60 59 Health Departments ...... Case Report Evaluations ...... 59 86 20/60 1,691 Health Departments ...... Case Report Updates ...... 59 2,353 2/60 4,627 Health Departments ...... Laboratory Updates ...... 59 9,410 0.5/60 4,627 Health Departments ...... Deduplication Activities ...... 59 2,741 10/60 26,953 Health Departments ...... Investigation Reporting and Evaluation ...... 59 901 1/60 886 Health Departments ...... Initial Cluster Report Form ...... 59 2.5 1 148 Health Departments ...... Cluster Follow-up Form ...... 59 5 30/60 148 Health Departments ...... Cluster Close-out Form ...... 59 2.5 1 148 Health Departments ...... Perinatal HIV Exposure Reporting (PHER) ...... 16 197 30/60 1,576 Health Departments ...... Annual Reporting: Standards Evaluation Report 59 1 8 472 (SER).

Total ...... 58,129

Jeffrey M. Zirger, Services (HHS) is proposing data organizations and 27 non-tribal entities. Lead, Information Collection Review Office, collection activities as part of the Health OMB previously approved data Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of Science, Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG) collection under OMB Control Number Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. to Serve TANF Recipients and Other 0970–0462 for the HPOG 2.0 National [FR Doc. 2019–08152 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Low Income Individuals. ACF has and Tribal Evaluation. The first BILLING CODE 4163–18–P developed a multi-pronged research and submission, approved in August 2015, evaluation approach for the HPOG included baseline data collection Program to better understand and assess instruments and the grant performance DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND the activities conducted and their management system. A second HUMAN SERVICES results. Two rounds of HPOG grants submission, approved in June 2017, included additional data collection for Administration for Children and have been awarded—the first in 2010 the National Evaluation impact study, Families (HPOG 1.0) and the second in 2015 (HPOG 2.0). There are federal the National Evaluation descriptive Submission for OMB Review; National evaluations associated with each round study, and the Tribal Evaluation. A and Tribal Evaluation of the 2nd of grants. HPOG grants provide funding third submission for National Generation of the Health Profession to government agencies, community- Evaluation impact study data collection Opportunity Grants (OMB #0970–0462) based organizations, post-secondary was approved in June 2018. The proposed data collection activities AGENCY: Office of Planning, Research, educational institutions, and tribal- affiliated organizations to provide described in this Federal Register and Evaluation, Administration for Notice will provide data for the impact, Children and Families, HHS. education and training services to Temporary Assistance for Needy descriptive, and cost benefit studies of ACTION: Request for public comment. the 27 non-tribal grantees participating Families (TANF) recipients and other in the National Evaluation of HPOG 2.0. SUMMARY: The Administration for low-income individuals, including Children and Families (ACF), U.S. tribal members. Under HPOG 2.0, ACF DATES: Comments due within 30 days of Department of Health and Human provided grants to five tribal-affiliated publication. OMB is required to make a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16871

decision concerning the collection of information about the operations of the 2.0 programs operate) may have information between 30 and 60 days 27 non-tribal HPOG grantees, which are influenced HPOG program design and after publication of this document in the operating 38 distinct programs. To implementation and how HPOG 2.0 Federal Register. Therefore, a comment achieve these goals, it is necessary to implementation may have influenced is best assured of having its full effect collect data about the non-tribal HPOG these local systems. if OMB receives it within 30 days of programs’ design and implementation, 4. HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation publication. HPOG partner and program networks, descriptive study partner interview ADDRESSES: Written comments and the composition and intensity of HPOG guide will collect information for the recommendations for the proposed services received by participants, systems study from HPOG 2.0 partner information collection should be sent participant characteristics and HPOG organizations. directly to the following: Office of experiences, and participant outputs 5. HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation and outcomes. The cost benefit study Management and Budget Paperwork descriptive study participant in-depth will estimate the costs of providing the Reduction Project Email: OIRA_ interview guide will collect qualitative HPOG 2.0 programs and compare the [email protected] Attn: information about the experiences of costs with gains in participant Desk Officer for the Administration for treatment group members participating employment and earnings measured in Children and Families. in HPOG 2.0 program services. Copies of the proposed collection may the impact analysis. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to collect 6. Intermediate Follow-up Survey for be obtained by emailing the HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation [email protected]. information from the 38 HPOG 2.0 programs on the cost of providing impact study will collect information Alternatively, copies can also be from both treatment and control group obtained by writing to the education and training and associated services. This Notice provides the members at the 27 non-tribal grantees, Administration for Children and approximately 36 months after baseline Families, Office of Planning, Research opportunity to comment on proposed new information collection activities for data collection and random assignment. and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW, _ the HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation’s (Instrument 18 HPOG 2.0 Intermediate Washington, DC 20201, Attn: OPRE _ _ impact, descriptive, and cost-benefit Follow-up Survey 10172018 Reports Clearance Officer. All requests, FINAL.doc) emailed or written, should be identified studies. The information collection activities 7. HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation by the title of the information collection. to be submitted in the request package impact study instrument for a Pilot SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: include: Study of Phone-Based Skills Assessment Description: The HPOG 2.0 National 1. Screening Interview to identify will collect information from HPOG 2.0 Evaluation pertains only to the 27 non- respondents for the HPOG 2.0 National study participants in a subset of non- tribal grantees that received HPOG 2.0 Evaluation descriptive study second- tribal grantee programs. The phone- funding. The design for the National round telephone interviews. based questionnaire will pilot an Evaluation features an impact study, a 2. HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation assessment of respondents’ literacy and descriptive study, and a cost benefit descriptive study second-round numeracy skills to inform the selection study. The National Evaluation is using telephone interview guide for program of survey questions for inclusion in the an experimental design to measure and management, staff, partners, and intermediate follow-up survey. analyze key participant outcomes stakeholders. These interviews will 8. HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation including completion of education and confirm or update information collected Program Cost Survey will collect training, receipt of certificates and/or in a first round of calls, approved in information from program staff at the 27 degrees, earnings, and employment in a June 2017. The second round interviews non-tribal grantees to support the cost- healthcare career. The impact will update or confirm any new benefit study. evaluation will assess the outcomes for information about the HPOG program study participants that were offered context and about program At this time, the Department does not HPOG 2.0 training, financial assistance, administration, activities and services, foresee the need for any subsequent and support services, compared to partner and stakeholder roles and requests for clearance for the HPOG 2.0 outcomes for a control group that were networks, and respondent perceptions National and Tribal Evaluations. not offered HPOG 2.0 services. ACF and of the program’s strengths. Respondents: HPOG impact study the study team estimates that the non- 3. HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation participants from the 27 non-tribal tribal grantees will randomize about descriptive study program operator HPOG 2.0 grantees (treatment and 40,000 applicants. As detailed in the interview guide will collect information control group); HPOG program burden estimates below, the study team for the systems study from HPOG 2.0 managers; HPOG program staff; and will only survey a subset of those programs operators. These interviews representatives of partner agencies and randomized. The goal of the descriptive will collect information on how local stakeholders, including support service study is to describe and assess the service delivery systems (i.e., the providers, educational and vocational implementation, systems change, economic and service delivery training partners, Workforce Investment outcomes, and other important environment in which specific HPOG Boards, and TANF agencies.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Average Total number Annual Number of burden Annual burden Instrument of respondents number of responses per hours per hours respondents respondent response

Screening interview to identify respondents for the HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation descriptive study second-round telephone interviews ...... 38 13 1 .5 7

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16872 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES—Continued

Average Total number Annual Number of burden Annual burden Instrument of respondents number of responses per hours per hours respondents respondent response

HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation descriptive study second round telephone interview protocol ...... 190 63 1 1.25 79 HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation descriptive study program operator interview guide ...... 16 5 1 1.25 6 HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation descriptive study partner interview guide ...... 112 37 1 1 37 HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation descriptive study partici- pant in-depth interview guide ...... 140 47 1 1.33 63 Intermediate follow-up survey for the HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation impact study ...... 4,000 1,333 1 1 1,333 HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation impact study instrument for a Pilot Study of Phone-Based Skills Assessment ...... 300 100 1 .75 75 HPOG 2.0 National Evaluation program cost survey ...... 38 13 1 7 91

Estimated Total Annual Burden extension of the application form titled, Administration for Children and Hours: 1,691. Child Access and Visitation Grant Families, Office of Planning, Research, Application Form, expiration 8/31/ and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW, Authority: Section 2008 of the Social 2019. There are no changes requested to Washington, DC 20201, Attn: OPRE Security Act as enacted by Section 5507 of the form. Reports Clearance Officer. All requests, the Affordable Care Act. DATES: Comments due within 30 days of emailed or written, should be identified Mary B. Jones, publication. OMB is required to make a by the title of the information collection. ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer. decision concerning the collection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 2019–08163 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] information between 30 and 60 days Description: The application compiles BILLING CODE 4184–72–P after publication of this document in the detailed information regarding program Federal Register. Therefore, a comment administration, services planned, state is best assured of having its full effect priorities, and program safeguards for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND if OMB receives it within 30 days of HUMAN SERVICES using grant funds to increase publication. noncustodial parent access to and Administration for Children and ADDRESSES: Written comments and visitation with their children. This Families recommendations for the proposed information allows OCSE to review information collection should be sent states’ Access and Visitation services for Submission for OMB Review; State directly to the following: Office of the purpose of ensuring compliance Access and Visitation Grant Management and Budget, Paperwork with federal regulation and to provide Application (OMB #0970–0482) Reduction Project, Email: OIRA_ enhanced targeted technical assistance as indicated. The application is AGENCY: Office of Child Support [email protected], Attn: submitted one time at the beginning of Enforcement, Administration for Desk Officer for the Administration for a three year grant program cycle and Children and Families, HHS. Children and Families. only updated during the three years if ACTION: Request for public comment. Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by emailing infocollection@ a grantee proposes substantive SUMMARY: The Office of Child Support acf.hhs.gov. Alternatively, copies can programmatic or administrative change. Enforcement is requesting a three-year also be obtained by writing to the Respondents: State Governments.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Total Number of Average Instrument number of responses per burden hours Total Annual respondents respondent per response burden hours burden hours

Child Access and Visitation Grant Application Form ...... 54 1 10 540 180

Estimated Total Annual Burden DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ACTION: Notice. Hours: 180. HUMAN SERVICES SUMMARY: The National Institutes of Authority: Sec. 469B. [42 U.S.C.669b]. National Institutes of Health Health (NIH), Eunice Kennedy Shriver Mary B. Jones, National Institute of Child Health and ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer. Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act Human Development (NICHD) hereby (BPCA) Priority List of Needs in announces the renewal of the Best [FR Doc. 2019–08109 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Pediatric Therapeutics Pharmaceuticals for Children Act BILLING CODE 4184–41–P (BPCA) Program. The Best AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, Pharmaceuticals for Children Act HHS. (BPCA) seeks to improve the level of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16873

information on the safe and effective use children. Please see the BPCA website Each year, the NICHD revisits the of pharmaceuticals used to treat for more information: https:// current list of needs in pediatric children. The BPCA requires that the www.nichd.nih.gov/research/supported/ therapeutics and seeks input from NIH identify the drugs of highest bpca/about. experts in pediatric research and priority for study in pediatric medicine to determine if previous needs Update on the BPCA Legislation populations, publish a list of drugs/ still exist and if new areas of needs have needs in pediatric therapeutics, and First authorized in 2002, the Best developed. fund studies in the prioritized areas. Pharmaceuticals for Children Act Below is an updated list of This notice will provide a brief (BPCA) has been reauthorized as part of therapeutic areas and drugs that have summary of recent changes in the larger Food and Drug Administration been prioritized for study since the legislation, a brief update on the current (FDA) user fee legislation three inception of the BPCA and a summary progress of the BPCA Program and additional times: 2007, 2012, and now of the NICHD’s plans and progress in all provide the current Priority List of 2017. The overall mandate for the of these areas to date. In 2017, the NIH Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics. implementation of the research program BPCA Program focused on the following ADDRESSES: The complete Priority List at NIH has remained the same areas: Treatment options in Pediatric of Needs in Pediatric Therapeutics throughout, but with clarifications each Hypertension, Biomarkers in Pediatric 2018–2019 can be found on the BPCA time: To prioritize testing of pediatric Research (various subspecialties), and website at the following address: therapeutics that do not have labeling Treatment strategies in several neonatal https://www.nichd.nih.gov/research/ for pediatric use, to sponsor clinical conditions (including Neonatal Opioid supported/bpca/activities. trials and other research to provide the Withdrawal Syndrome, also known as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. necessary data, and to submit those data Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome). Perdita Taylor-Zapata via email at to the FDA to begin the process of Meeting minutes for workshops and [email protected]; or by phone at obtaining label changes and provide lectures on the above topics can be 301–496–9584. clinicians with the appropriate found on the BPCA website https:// SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BPCA information on appropriate pediatric www.nichd.nih.gov/research/supported/ requires that the NIH, in consultation use and dosing. In August of 2017, the bpca/research-initiatives-collaborations. with the Food and Drug Administration BPCA legislation was reauthorized by For 2018, the NIH BPCA Program’s and experts in pediatric research, Congress, which renewed the NIH BPCA priorities have included: Heart failure in identify the drugs and therapeutic areas Program for five years (the FDA portion children, Kidney diseases, and Lactation of highest priority for study in pediatric of the program is permanently (in particular, neonatal and infant populations. The NIH BPCA Program authorized). The new legislation also medication exposure). The NICHD has been in existence since 2004 and is permits the NIH to prioritize research on welcomes input from the pediatric overseen by the Obstetric and Pediatric the identification of biomarkers for medical community on additional gaps Pharmacology and Therapeutics Branch pediatric diseases and conditions. In in pediatric therapeutics for future (OPPTB) of the NICHD. To date, the addition, a new provision specifically consideration. The most recent BPCA BPCA Program has prioritized over 150 allows the NIH to post the data from the stakeholders meeting was held in drugs and therapeutic areas, funded pediatric studies it funded on its public Bethesda, Maryland on March 22, 2019. more than 25 clinical studies, and website when it submits the report to More information will be provided on improved the labeling to date of eight the FDA, as required for potential label the BPCA website as it becomes drugs and one device in the ongoing changes. available. All inquiries should be submitted to Dr. Perdita Taylor-Zapata effort of advancing the knowledge of Update on BPCA Prioritization dosing, safety and effectiveness of at the contact information above. medicines used in children. However, The BPCA Priority List consists of key Priority List of Needs in Pediatric despite these and many other efforts, therapeutic needs in the medical Therapeutics 2018–2019 many gaps in our knowledge still treatment of children and adolescents remain regarding the use of therapeutics identified for further study; it is In accordance with the BPCA in children including the correct dosage, organized by therapeutic area, which legislation, the list outlines priority appropriate indications, side effects, can be a group of conditions, a subgroup needs in pediatric therapeutics for and safety concerns of pharmaceuticals of the population, or a setting of care. multiple therapeutic areas listed below. in the short- and long-term. These gaps The first priority list of off-patent drugs The complete list can be found on the result in inadequate labeling and/or needing further study under the 2002 BPCA website at the following address: wide-spread off-label use of prescription BPCA legislation was published in https://www.nichd.nih.gov/research/ drugs in children. Off-label use of a drug January 2003 in the Federal Register supported/bpca/activities. substantially limits the ability to obtain (FR Vol. 68, No. 13; Tuesday, January D Table 1: Infectious Disease Priorities important clinical information for more 21, 2003: 2789–2790). The most recent D Table 2: Cardiovascular Disease generalized use of a drug product, such priority list has been published to the Priorities as characterizing changes in drug BPCA website; more information on the D Table 3: Respiratory Disease Priorities metabolism and response during growth prioritization process, all BPCA priority D Table 4: Intensive Care Priorities and development, identifying precision- lists, and all Federal Register Notices D Table 5: Bio-defense Research based responses (i.e., impact of can be found on the BPCA website: Priorities genotype and phenotype of medication https://www.nichd.nih.gov/research/ D Table 6: Pediatric Cancer Priorities responses, the impact of obesity on supported/bpca/prioritizing-pediatric- D Table 7: Psychiatric Disorder dosing), and determining short- and therapies. The BPCA authorizing Priorities long-term effects. The mandate of the legislation requires the NIH to update D Table 8: Neurological Disease NIH BPCA Program is to fill knowledge the priority list every three years. This Priorities gaps that exist in pediatric therapeutics Notice serves as an update to the BPCA D Table 9: Neonatal Research Priorities and to promote an increase in evidence- priority list of needs in pediatric D Table 10: Adolescent Research based data about medications used in therapeutics. Priorities

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16874 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

D Table 11: Hematologic Disease accompanying list of waivers that have Development, the Office of Fair Housing Priorities been granted in the fourth quarter of and Equal Opportunity, the Office of D Table 12: Endocrine Disease Priorities calendar year 2018. Housing, and the Office of Public and and Diseases with Limited Alternative SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Indian Housing, etc.). Within each Therapies 106 of the HUD Reform Act added a program office grouping, the waivers are D Table 13: Dermatologic Disease new section 7(q) to the Department of listed sequentially by the regulatory Priorities Housing and Urban Development Act section of title 24 of the Code of Federal D Table 14: Gastrointestinal Disease (42 U.S.C. 3535(q)), which provides Regulations (CFR) that is being waived. Priorities that: For example, a waiver of a provision in D Table 15: Renal Disease Priorities 1. Any waiver of a regulation must be 24 CFR part 58 would be listed before D Table 16: Rheumatologic Disease in writing and must specify the grounds a waiver of a provision in 24 CFR part Priorities for approving the waiver; 570. D Table 17: Special Considerations. 2. Authority to approve a waiver of a Where more than one regulatory Dated: April 17, 2019. regulation may be delegated by the provision is involved in the grant of a particular waiver request, the action is Francis S. Collins, Secretary only to an individual of listed under the section number of the Director, National Institutes of Health. Assistant Secretary or equivalent rank, and the person to whom authority to first regulatory requirement that appears [FR Doc. 2019–08167 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] waive is delegated must also have in 24 CFR and that is being waived. For BILLING CODE 4140–01–P authority to issue the particular example, a waiver of both § 58.73 and regulation to be waived; § 58.74 would appear sequentially in the 3. Not less than quarterly, the listing under § 58.73. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Secretary must notify the public of all Waiver of regulations that involve the URBAN DEVELOPMENT waivers of regulations that HUD has same initial regulatory citation are in time sequence beginning with the [Docket No. FR–6101–N–04] approved, by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. These notices (each earliest-dated regulatory waiver. Notice of Regulatory Waiver Requests covering the period since the most Should HUD receive additional Granted for the Fourth Quarter of recent previous notification) shall: information about waivers granted Calendar Year 2018 a. Identify the project, activity, or during the period covered by this report undertaking involved; (the fourth quarter of calendar year AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, b. Describe the nature of the provision 2018) before the next report is published HUD. waived and the designation of the (the first quarter of calendar year 2019), ACTION: Notice. provision; HUD will include any additional c. Indicate the name and title of the waivers granted for the fourth quarter in SUMMARY: Section 106 of the Department person who granted the waiver request; the next report. of Housing and Urban Development d. Describe briefly the grounds for Accordingly, information about Reform Act of 1989 (the HUD Reform approval of the request; and approved waiver requests pertaining to Act) requires HUD to publish quarterly e. State how additional information HUD regulations is provided in the Federal Register notices of all about a particular waiver may be Appendix that follows this notice. regulatory waivers that HUD has obtained. Dated: April 16, 2019. approved. Each notice covers the Section 106 of the HUD Reform Act J. Paul Compton, Jr., quarterly period since the previous also contains requirements applicable to General Counsel. Federal Register notice. The purpose of waivers of HUD handbook provisions this notice is to comply with the that are not relevant to the purpose of Appendix—Listing of Waivers of requirements of section 106 of the HUD this notice. Regulatory Requirements Granted by Reform Act. This notice contains a list This notice follows procedures Offices of the Department of Housing of regulatory waivers granted by HUD provided in HUD’s Statement of Policy and Urban Development October 1, during the period beginning on October on Waiver of Regulations and Directives 2018 Through December 31, 2018 1, 2018 and ending on December 31, issued on April 22, 1991 (56 FR 16337). Note to Reader: More information about 2018. In accordance with those procedures the granting of these waivers, including a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For and with the requirements of section copy of the waiver request and approval, may general information about this notice, 106 of the HUD Reform Act, waivers of be obtained by contacting the person whose contact Ariel Pereira, Associate General regulations are granted by the Assistant name is listed as the contact person directly Counsel for Legislation and Regulations, Secretary with jurisdiction over the after each set of regulatory waivers granted. The regulatory waivers granted appear in the Department of Housing and Urban regulations for which a waiver was following order: Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, requested. In those cases in which a I. Regulatory waivers granted by the Office of Room 10282, Washington, DC 20410– General Deputy Assistant Secretary Community Planning and Development. 0500, telephone 202–708–3055 (this is granted the waiver, the General Deputy II. Regulatory waivers granted by the Office not a toll-free number). Persons with Assistant Secretary was serving in the of Housing. hearing- or speech-impairments may absence of the Assistant Secretary in III. Regulatory waivers granted by the Office access this number through TTY by accordance with the office’s Order of of Public and Indian Housing. calling the toll-free Federal Relay Succession. I. Regulatory Waivers Granted by the Office Service at 800–877–8339. This notice covers waivers of of Community Planning and Development For information concerning a regulations granted by HUD from For further information about the following particular waiver that was granted and October 1, 2018 through December 31, regulatory waivers, please see the name of for which public notice is provided in 2018. For ease of reference, the waivers the contact person that immediately follows this document, contact the person granted by HUD are listed by HUD the description of the waiver granted. whose name and address follow the program office (for example, the Office • Regulation: 24 CFR 92.252(d)(1) Utility description of the waiver granted in the of Community Planning and Allowance Requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16875

Project/Activity: The City of Fitchburg, during the review period to avoid the need II. Regulatory Waivers Granted by the Office Massachusetts, requested a waiver of 24 CFR to disapprove the Action Plan or Action Plan of Housing—Federal Housing 92.252(d)(1) to allow use of the utility Amendment. There were several issues Administration (FHA) allowance established by local public related to the Action Plan Amendment, as For further information about the following housing agency for two HOME-assisted submitted, that further discussion and regulatory waivers, please see the name of projects—Fitchburg Yarn Lofts and Ivory revision during the review extension the contact person that immediately follows Keys Apartments. provided by this waiver would resolve, rather the description of the waiver granted. Nature of Requirement: The regulation at than HUD disapproving the Amendment • Regulation: 24 CFR 219.220(b). 24 CFR 92.252(d)(1) requires participating which would have required grantees to take Project/Activity: Riverview Apartments I, jurisdictions to establish maximum monthly additional time to revise and resubmit their FHA Project Number 033–SH014; and allowances for utilities and services respective amendments. Additionally, the Riverview Apartments II, FHA Project (excluding telephone) and update the review period was curtailed by several Number 033–44052, Pittsburgh, PA. allowances annually. However, participating holidays and the uncertainty of a federal Riverview Apartments, Incorporated (Owner) jurisdictions are not permitted to use the government shutdown. This waiver avoided seeks approval to defer repayment of the utility allowance established by the local these delays in the award of the CDBG–DR Flexible Subsidy Operating Assistance Loans public housing authority for HOME-assisted funds to communities that continue to on the subject projects. rental projects for which HOME funds were recovery from the hurricanes. As such, good Nature of Requirement: The regulation at committed on or after August 23, 2013. cause was established, and the waiver was 24 CFR 219.220(b) (1995), which governs the Granted By: Neal J. Rackleff, Assistant granted. repayment of operating assistance provided Secretary for Community Planning and Contact: Claudette Fernandez, Director, under the Flexible Subsidy Program for Development. Office of Block Grant Assistance, Office of Troubled Properties, states ‘‘Assistance that Date Granted: October 3, 2018. Community Planning and Development, has been paid to a project owner under this Reason Waived: The HOME requirements Department of Housing and Urban subpart must be repaid at the earlier of the for establishing a utility allowances conflict Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room expiration of the term of the mortgage, with Project Based Voucher program 7272, Washington DC 20410, telephone (202) termination of mortgage insurance, 402–4592. requirements. It is not possible to use two • prepayment of the mortgage, or a sale of the different utility allowances to set the rent for Regulation: 24 CFR 91.500(a) and project.’’ a single unit and it is administratively corresponding provisions in section III.B. of Granted by: Brian D. Montgomery, burdensome to require a project owner 83 FR 40314. Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal establish and implement different utility Project/Activity: HUD’s CDBG–DR Action Housing Commissioner. allowances for HOME-assisted units and non- Plan Review Period Deadline for State of Date Granted: November 15, 2018. Texas. HOME assisted units in a project. Reason Waived: The owner requested and Nature of Requirement: This waiver Contact: Virginia Sardone, Director, Office was granted waiver of the requirement to extended HUD’s review period from 45 days of Affordable Housing Programs, Office of repay the Flexible Subsidy Operating to 60 days from the date of receipt of the Community Planning and Development, Assistance Loans in full when they became Action Plan Amendment, which is the period due. Deferring the loan payments will Department of Housing and Urban in 42 U.S.C. 12705(c)(1). Based on HUD’s Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room preserve these affordable housing resources receipt date of October 12, 2018, 24 CFR for an additional 35 years through the 10170, Washington, DC 20410, telephone 91.500(a) would require HUD to complete its (202) 708–2684. execution and recordation of a Rental Use • review of Texas’s CDBG DR Action Plan Agreement. Regulation: 24 CFR 91.500(a) and Amendment by November 26, 2018; and the corresponding provisions in section III.B. of Contact: Cindy Bridges, Senior Account Department extended the period for that Executive, Office of Housing, Department of 83 FR 40314. review to December 11, 2018. Project/Activity: HUD’s CDBG–DR Action Housing and Urban Development, 451 Granted By: David Woll Jr., Principal Seventh Street SW, Room 6168, Washington, Plan Review Period Deadline for State of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Florida, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and DC 20410, telephone (202) 402–2603. Planning and Development. Regulation: 24 CFR 219.220(b). the U.S. Virgin Islands. Date Granted: November 30, 2018. Nature of Requirement: This waiver Project/Activity: Springvale Terrace, FHA Reason Waived: The devasting impact of Project Number 000–43072, Silver Spring, extended HUD’s review period from 45 days Hurricane Harvey upon Texas is well known MD. Springvale Terrace, Incorporated to 60 days from the date of receipt of the and the need for CDBG–DR funds for (Owner) seeks approval to defer repayment of Action Plan Amendment, which is the period Houston and Harris County is great to the Flexible Subsidy Operating Assistance in 42 U.S.C. 12705(c)(1). Based on HUD’s achieve long-term recovery. HUD may Loan on the subject project. receipt date of November 16, 2018, 24 CFR disapprove an amendment if it is incomplete. Nature of Requirement: The regulation at 91.500(a) would require HUD to complete its HUB works with grantees to resolve or 24 CFR 219.220(b) (1995), which governs the review of Florida’s and Puerto Rico’s CDBG provide additional information during the repayment of operating assistance provided DR Action Plan Amendments by December review period to avoid the need to under the Flexible Subsidy Program for 30, 2018; and the Department extended the disapprove the Action Plan or Action Plan Troubled Properties, states ‘‘Assistance that period for those reviews to January 14, 2019. Amendment. There were several issues has been paid to a project owner under this Based on HUD’s receipt date of November 20, related to the Action Plan Amendment, as subpart must be repaid at the earlier of the 2018, 24 CFR 91.500(a) would require HUD submitted, that further discussion and expiration of the term of the mortgage, to complete its review of the U.S. Virgin revision during the review extension termination of mortgage insurance, Islands’ CDBG DR Action Plan Amendment provided by this waiver would resolve, rather prepayment of the mortgage, or a sale of the by January 3, 2019; and the Department than HUD disapproving the Amendment project.’’ extended that review period to January 18, which would have required the State to take Granted by: Brian D. Montgomery, 2019. additional time to revise and resubmit the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Granted By: David Woll Jr., Principal Amendment. This waiver avoided this delay Housing Commissioner. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community in the award of the CDBG–DR funds for the Date Granted: November 15, 2018. Planning and Development. city of Houston and Harris County to recover Reason Waived: The owner requested and Date Granted: December 21, 2018. from Hurricane Harvey. As such, good cause was granted waiver of the requirement to Reason Waived: The devasting impact of was established, and the waiver was granted. repay the Flexible Subsidy Operating Hurricanes Irma and Maria upon Florida, Contact: Claudette Fernandez, Director, Assistance Loan in full when it became due. Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands is Office of Block Grant Assistance, Office of Deferring the loan payment will preserve the well established and the need for CDBG–DR Community Planning and Development, affordable housing resource for an additional funds is great to achieve long-term recovery. Department of Housing and Urban 40 years through the execution and HUD may disapprove an amendment if it is Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room recordation of a Rental Use Agreement. incomplete. HUD works with grantees to 7272, Washington DC 20410, telephone (202) Contact: Cindy Bridges, Senior Account resolve or provide additional information 402–4592. Executive, Office of Housing, Department of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16876 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Housing and Urban Development, 451 Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Seventh Street SW, Room 6168, Washington, Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) DC 20410, telephone (202) 402–2603. Housing Commissioner. 402–5693 • Regulation: 24 CFR 219.220(b). Date Granted: December 21, 2018. • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(b)(2). Project/Activity: Lyon County Retirement Reason Waived: Granted waivers of certain Project/Activity: The Federal Financing Home, FHA Project Number 092–SH023T, provisions of the Federal Financing Bank Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations Marshall, Minnesota. Lyon County (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations for for an additional four (4) projects for a total Retirement Home, Incorporated (Owner) forty (40) projects utilizing the Federal of 30 projects utilizing the Federal Financing seeks approval to defer repayment of the Financing Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative through Flexible Subsidy Operating Assistance Loan through the end of Calendar Year 2019. the end of Calendar Year 2019, Substantial on the subject project. Under this initiative, FFB provides capital to Rehabilitation, California Housing Finance Nature of Requirement: The regulation at participating Housing Finance Agencies Agency (CalHFA), Sacramento, California, no 24 CFR 219.220(b) (1995), which governs the (HFAs) to make multifamily loans insured project names listed. repayment of operating assistance provided under the Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 under the Flexible Subsidy Program for Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, CFR 266.200(b)(2), Substantial Troubled Properties, states ‘‘Assistance that Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Rehabilitation. The Department will permit has been paid to a project owner under this Housing, Department of Housing and Urban the revised definition of substantial subpart must be repaid at the earlier of the Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room rehabilitation (S/R) as described in the expiration of the term of the mortgage, 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) revised MAP Guide published on January 29, termination of mortgage insurance, 402–5693. 2016, such that S/R is: Any scope of work prepayment of the mortgage, or a sale of the • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(b)(2). that either (a) Exceeds in aggregate cost a sum project.’’ Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank equal to the ‘base per dwelling unit limit’ Granted by: Brian D. Montgomery, (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations for times the applicable High Cost Factor, or (b) Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal an additional fifteen (15) projects for a total Replacement of two or more building Housing Commissioner. of 40 projects utilizing the Federal Financing systems. ‘Replacement’ is when the cost of Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative through replacement work exceeds 50 percent of the Reason Waived: The owner requested and the end of Calendar Year 2019, Substantial cost of replacing the entire system. was granted waiver of the requirement to Rehabilitation, the Massachusetts Housing The High Cost Factors for 2018 were repay the Flexible Subsidy Operating Partnership (MHP), Boston, Massachusetts, recently published through a Housing Notice Assistance Loan in full when it became due. no project names listed. (HN) on May 23, 2018 and the revised Deferring the loan payment will preserve this Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 statutory limits were published in the affordable housing resource for an additional CFR 266.200(b)(2), Substantial Federal Register on November 7, 2017. The 20 years through the execution and Rehabilitation. The Department will permit 2018 base dwelling unit amount to determine recordation of a Rental Use Agreement. the revised definition of substantial substantial rehabilitation for FHA insured Contact: Nathaniel Johnson, Senior rehabilitation (S/R) as described in the loan programs has been increased from Account Executive, Office of Housing, revised MAP Guide published on January 29, $15,000 (changed from $6,500 per unit in the Department of Housing and Urban 2016, such that S/R is: Any scope of work 2016 MAP guide) to $15,636. This amount Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room that either a) Exceeds in aggregate cost a sum will change annually based upon the change 6172, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) in the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI), 402–5156. equal to the ‘base per dwelling unit limit’ • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(b)(2). times the applicable High Cost Factor, or b) along with the statutory limits or other Project/Activity: The Federal Financing Replacement of two or more building inflation cost index published by HUD. Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations systems. ‘Replacement’ is when the cost of Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, for 40 projects utilizing the Federal replacement work exceeds 50 percent of the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Financing Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative cost of replacing the entire system. Housing Commissioner. through the end of Calendar Year 2019, The High Cost Factors for 2018 were Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Substantial Rehabilitation, Pennsylvania recently published through a Housing Notice Reason Waived: Granted waivers of certain Housing Finance Agency (PHFA), Harrisburg, (HN) on May 23, 2018 and the revised provisions of the Federal Financing Bank Pennsylvania, no project names listed. statutory limits were published in the (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations for Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 Federal Register on November 7, 2017. The four (4) projects utilizing the Federal CFR 266.200(b)(2), Substantial 2018 base dwelling unit amount to determine Financing Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative Rehabilitation. The Department will permit substantial rehabilitation for FHA insured through the end of Calendar Year 2019. the revised definition of substantial loan programs has been increased from Under this initiative, FFB provides capital to rehabilitation (S/R) as described in the $15,000 (changed from $6,500 per unit in the participating Housing Finance Agencies revised MAP Guide published on January 29, 2016 MAP guide) to $15,636. This amount (HFAs) to make multifamily loans insured 2016, such that S/R is: Any scope of work will change annually based upon the change under the Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. that either (a) Exceeds in aggregate cost a sum in the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI), Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, equal to the ‘base per dwelling unit limit’ along with the statutory limits or other Office of Multifamily Production, Office of times the applicable High Cost Factor, or (b) inflation cost index published by HUD. Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Replacement of two or more building Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room systems. ‘Replacement’ is when the cost of Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) replacement work exceeds 50 percent of the Housing Commissioner. 402–5693. cost of replacing the entire system. Date Granted: December 17, 2018. • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(b)(2). The High Cost Factors for 2018 were Reason Granted: Under this initiative, FFB Project/Activity: The Federal Financing recently published through a Housing Notice provides capital to participating Housing Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations (HN) on May 23, 2018 and the revised Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make for an additional 20 projects for a total of 38 statutory limits were published in the multifamily loans insured under the FHA projects utilizing the Federal Financing Bank Federal Register on November 7, 2017. The Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Granted (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative through the end 2018 base dwelling unit amount to determine waivers of certain provisions of the Federal of Calendar Year 2019, Substantial substantial rehabilitation for FHA insured Financing Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program Rehabilitation, Minnesota Housing Finance loan programs has been increased from regulations for fifteen (15) projects utilizing Agency (Minnesota Housing), St. Paul, $15,000 (changed from $6,500 per unit in the the Federal Financing Bank (FFB) Risk- Minnesota, no project names listed. 2016 MAP guide) to $15,636. This amount Sharing Initiative through the end of Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 will change annually based upon the change Calendar Year 2019. CFR 266.200(b)(2), Substantial in the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI), Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, Rehabilitation. The Department will permit along with the statutory limits or other Office of Multifamily Production, Office of the revised definition of substantial inflation cost index published by HUD. Housing, Department of Housing and Urban rehabilitation (S/R) as described in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16877

revised MAP Guide published on January 29, 14—Use of ‘‘New Regulation’’ Section 8 interest-bearing account. Upon renewal of a 2016, such that S/R is: Any scope of work Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) HAP Contract the excess funds can be used that either (a) Exceeds in aggregate cost a sum Contracts Residual Receipts of Offset Project- to reduce future HAP payments or other equal to the ‘base per dwelling unit limit’ Based Section 8 Housing Assistance project operations/purposes. When the HAP times the applicable High Cost Factor, or (b) Payments, if at any time PHFA determines Contract expires, is terminated, or any Replacement of two or more building that a project’s excess funds (surplus cash) extensions are terminated, any unused funds systems. ‘Replacement’ is when the cost of after project operations, reserve requirements remaining in the Residual Receipt Account at replacement work exceeds 50 percent of the and permitted distributions are met, PHFA the time of the contract’s termination must be cost of replacing the entire system. must place the excess funds into a separate returned to HUD. The High Cost Factors for 2018 were interest-bearing account. Upon renewal of a Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, recently published through a Housing Notice HAP Contract the excess funds can be used Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal (HN) on May 23, 2018 and the revised to reduce future HAP payments or other Housing Commissioner. statutory limits were published in the project operations/purposes. When the HAP Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Federal Register on November 7, 2017. The Contract expires, is terminated, or any Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB 2018 base dwelling unit amount to determine extensions are terminated, any unused funds provides capital to participating Housing substantial rehabilitation for FHA insured remaining in the Residual Receipt Account at Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make loan programs has been increased from the time of the contract’s termination must be multifamily loans insured under the FHA $15,000 (changed from $6,500 per unit in the returned to HUD. Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. 2016 MAP guide) to $15,636. This amount Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, will change annually based upon the change Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Office of Multifamily Production, Office of in the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI), Housing Commissioner. Housing, Department of Housing and Urban along with the statutory limits or other Date Granted: December 21, 2018. Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room inflation cost index published by HUD. Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, provides capital to participating Housing 402–5693. Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(c)(2). Housing Commissioner. multifamily loans insured under the FHA Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Equity Take Reason Waived: Granted waivers of certain Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, Outs. California Housing Finance Agency provisions of the Federal Financing Bank Office of Multifamily Production, Office of (CalHFA), Sacramento, California (FFB) Risk-Sharing Program regulations for Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Nature of Requirements: The Waiver of 24 twenty (20) projects utilizing the Federal Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room CFR 266.200(c)(2), Existing Projects ‘‘Equity Financing Bank (FFB) Risk-Sharing Initiative 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Take-outs’’. The Department will permit the through the end of Calendar Year 2019. 402–5693. insured mortgage to exceed the sum of the Under this initiative, FFB provides capital to • Regulation: 24CFR 266.200(c)(2). total cost of acquisition, cost of financing, participating Housing Finance Agencies Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank cost of repairs, and reasonable transaction (HFAs) to make multifamily loans insured (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Equity Take costs, or ‘‘equity take-outs’’ in refinances of under the Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Outs. Massachusetts Housing Partnership CalHFA-financed projects and those outside Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, (MHP), Boston, Massachusetts. CalHFA’s portfolio if the result is Office of Multifamily Production, Office of preservation with the following conditions: Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room CFR 266.200(c)(2), Existing Projects ‘‘Equity 1. Occupancy is no less than 93 percent for 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Take-outs’’. The Department will permit the previous 12 months; 402–5693. insured mortgage to exceed the sum of the 2. No defaults in the last 12 months of the • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(c)(2). total cost of acquisition, cost of financing, HFA loan to be refinanced; Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank cost of repairs, and reasonable transaction 3. A 20-year affordable housing deed (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Equity Take costs, or ‘‘equity take-outs’’ in refinances of restriction placed on title that conforms to Outs. Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency MHP-financed projects and those outside the Section 542(c) statutory definition; (PHFA), Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. MHP’s portfolio if the result is preservation 4. A Property Capital Needs Assessment Nature of Requirements: The Waiver of 24 with the following conditions: (PCNA) must be performed and funds CFR 266.200(c)(2), Existing Projects ‘‘Equity 1. Occupancy is no less than 93 percent for escrowed for all necessary repairs, and Take-outs’’. The Department will permit the previous 12 months; reserves funded for future capital needs; and insured mortgage to exceed the sum of the 2. No defaults in the last 12 months of the 5. For projects subsidized by Section 8 total cost of acquisition, cost of financing, HFA loan to be refinanced; Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) cost of repairs, and reasonable transaction 3. A 20-year affordable housing deed contracts: costs, or ‘‘equity take-outs’’ in refinances of restriction placed on title that conforms to a. Owner agrees to renew HAP contract(s) PHFA-financed projects and those outside the Section 542(c) statutory definition; for 20-year term, (subject to appropriations PHFA’s portfolio if the result is preservation 4. A Property Capital Needs Assessment and statutory authorization, etc.), and with the following conditions: (PCNA) must be performed and funds b. In accordance with regulations in 24 1. Occupancy is no less than 93 percent for escrowed for all necessary repairs, and CFR 883.306(e), and Housing Notice 2012– previous 12 months; reserves funded for future capital needs; and 14—Use of ‘‘New Regulation’’ Section 8 2. No defaults in the last 12 months of the 5. For projects subsidized by Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) HFA loan to be refinanced; Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) Contracts Residual Receipts of Offset Project- 3. A 20-year affordable housing deed contracts: Based Section 8 Housing Assistance restriction placed on title that conforms to a. Owner agrees to renew HAP contract(s) Payments, if at any time CalHFA determines the Section 542(c) statutory definition; for 20-year term, (subject to appropriations that a project’s excess funds (surplus cash) 4. A Property Capital Needs Assessment and statutory authorization, etc.), and after project operations, reserve requirements (PCNA) must be performed and funds b. In accordance with regulations in 24 and permitted distributions are met, CalHFA escrowed for all necessary repairs, and CFR 883.306(e), and Housing Notice 2012– must place the excess funds into a separate reserves funded for future capital needs; and 14—Use of ‘‘New Regulation’’ Section 8 interest-bearing account. Upon renewal of a 5. For projects subsidized by Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) HAP Contract the excess funds can be used Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) Contracts Residual Receipts of Offset Project- to reduce future HAP payments or other contracts: Based Section 8 Housing Assistance project operations/purposes. When the HAP a. Owner agrees to renew HAP contract(s) Payments, if at any time MHP determines Contract expires, is terminated, or any for 20-year term, (subject to appropriations that a project’s excess funds (surplus cash) extensions are terminated, any unused funds and statutory authorization, etc.), and after project operations, reserve requirements remaining in the Residual Receipt Account at b. In accordance with regulations in 24 and permitted distributions are met, MHP the time of the contract’s termination must be CFR 883.306(e), and Housing Notice 2012– must place the excess funds into a separate returned to HUD.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16878 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, multifamily loans insured under the FHA Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB Housing Commissioner. Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, provides capital to participating Housing Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB Housing, Department of Housing and Urban multifamily loans insured under the FHA provides capital to participating Housing Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, multifamily loans insured under the FHA 402–5693. Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(d). Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Office of Multifamily Production, Office of (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Underwriting 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Housing, Department of Housing and Urban of Projects with Section 8 HAP Contracts. 402–5693. Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(d). 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) (PHFA), Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank 402–5693. Nature of Requirement: The Waivers of 24 (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Underwriting • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(c)(2). CFR 266.200(d), Projects receiving Section 8 of Projects with Section 8 HAP Contracts. Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank rental subsidies or other rental subsidies. For California Housing Finance Agency (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Equity Take refinancing of Section 202 projects, and for (CalHFA), Sacramento, California. Outs. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Public Housing Authority (PHA) projects Nature of Requirement: The Waivers of 24 (Minnesota Housing), St. Paul, Minnesota converting to Section 8 through the Rental CFR 266.200(d), Projects receiving Section 8 Nature of Requirements: The Waiver of 24 Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Initiative, rental subsidies or other rental subsidies. For CFR 266.200(c)(2), Existing Projects ‘‘Equity the Department will permit PHFA to refinancing of Section 202 projects, and for Take-outs’’. The Department will permit the underwrite the financing using current or to Public Housing Authority (PHA) projects insured mortgage to exceed the sum of the be adjusted project-based Section 8 assisted converting to Section 8 through the Rental total cost of acquisition, cost of financing, rents, even though they exceed the market Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Initiative, cost of repairs, and reasonable transaction rates. This is consistent with HUD Housing the Department will permit CalHFA to costs, or ‘‘equity take-outs’’ in refinances of Notice 04–21, ‘‘Amendments to Notice 02– underwrite the financing using current or to Minnesota Housing-financed projects and 16: Underwriting Guidelines for Refinancing be adjusted project-based Section 8 assisted those outside Minnesota Housing’s portfolio of Section 202, and Section 202/8 Direct rents, even though they exceed the market if the result is preservation with the Loan Repayments’’, which grants authority rates. This is consistent with HUD Housing Notice 04–21, ‘‘Amendments to Notice 02– following conditions: only to those lenders refinancing with 16: Underwriting Guidelines for Refinancing 1. Occupancy is no less than 93 percent for mortgage programs under the National of Section 202, and Section 202/8 Direct previous 12 months; Housing Act. Loan Repayments’’, which grants authority 2. No defaults in the last 12 months of the Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, only to those lenders refinancing with HFA loan to be refinanced; Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal mortgage programs under the National 3. A 20-year affordable housing deed Housing Commissioner. Housing Act. restriction placed on title that conforms to Date Granted: December 21, 2018. Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, the Section 542(c) statutory definition; Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal 4. A Property Capital Needs Assessment provides capital to participating Housing Housing Commissioner. (PCNA) must be performed and funds Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make Date Granted: December 17, 2018. escrowed for all necessary repairs, and multifamily loans insured under the FHA Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB reserves funded for future capital needs; and Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. provides capital to participating Housing 5. For projects subsidized by Section 8 Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) Office of Multifamily Production, Office of multifamily loans insured under the FHA contracts: Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. a. Owner agrees to renew HAP contract(s) Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, for 20-year term, (subject to appropriations 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Office of Multifamily Production, Office of and statutory authorization, etc.), and 402–5693. Housing, Department of Housing and Urban • b. In accordance with regulations in 24 Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(d). Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room CFR 883.306(e), and Housing Notice 2012– Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) 14—Use of ‘‘New Regulation’’ Section 8 (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Underwriting 402–5693. Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) of Projects with Section 8 HAP Contracts. • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.200(d). Contracts Residual Receipts of Offset Project- Massachusetts Housing Partnership (MHP), Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank Based Section 8 Housing Assistance Boston, Massachusetts. (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Underwriting Payments, if at any time Minnesota Housing Nature of Requirement: The Waivers of 24 of Projects with Section 8 HAP Contracts. determines that a project’s excess funds CFR 266.200(d), Projects receiving Section 8 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (surplus cash) after project operations, rental subsidies or other rental subsidies. For (Minnesota Housing), St. Paul, Minnesota. reserve requirements and permitted refinancing of Section 202 projects, and for Nature of Requirement: The Waivers of 24 distributions are met, Minnesota Housing Public Housing Authority (PHA) projects CFR 266.200(d), Projects receiving Section 8 must place the excess funds into a separate converting to Section 8 through the Rental rental subsidies or other rental subsidies. For interest-bearing account. Upon renewal of a Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Initiative, refinancing of Section 202 projects, and for HAP Contract the excess funds can be used the Department will permit MHP to Public Housing Authority (PHA) projects to reduce future HAP payments or other underwrite the financing using current or to converting to Section 8 through the Rental project operations/purposes. When the HAP be adjusted project-based Section 8 assisted Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Initiative, Contract expires, is terminated, or any rents, even though they exceed the market the Department will permit Minnesota extensions are terminated, any unused funds rates. This is consistent with HUD Housing Housing to underwrite the financing using remaining in the Residual Receipt Account at Notice 04–21, ‘‘Amendments to Notice 02– current or to be adjusted project-based the time of the contract’s termination must be 16: Underwriting Guidelines for Refinancing Section 8 assisted rents, even though they returned to HUD. of Section 202, and Section 202/8 Direct exceed the market rates. This is consistent Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, Loan Repayments’’, which grants authority with HUD Housing Notice 04–21, Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal only to those lenders refinancing with ‘‘Amendments to Notice 02–16: Underwriting Housing Commissioner. mortgage programs under the National Guidelines for Refinancing of Section 202, Date Granted: December 17, 2018 Housing Act. and Section 202/8 Direct Loan Repayments’’, Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, which grants authority only to those lenders provides capital to participating Housing Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal refinancing with mortgage programs under Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make Housing Commissioner. the National Housing Act.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16879

Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, escrowed for all necessary repairs, and 6. Projects must comply with Davis-Bacon Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal reserves funded for future capital needs; and labor standards in accordance with 24 CFR Housing Commissioner. 13. For projects subsidized by Section 8 266.225; Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) 7. CalHFA must comply with regulations Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB contracts: stated in 24 CFR 266.210 for insured provides capital to participating Housing i. a: Owner agrees to renew HAP contract(s) advances or insurance upon completion Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make for 20-year term, (subject to appropriations transactions; multifamily loans insured under the FHA and statutory authorization, etc.), and b: In 8. The loans exceeding $50 million require Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. accordance with regulations in 24 CFR a separate waiver request; Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, 883.306(e), and Housing Notice 2012–14— 9. Occupancy is no less than 93 percent for Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Use of ‘‘New Regulation’’ Section 8 Housing previous 12 months; Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Assistance Payments (HAP) Contracts 10. No defaults in the last 12 months of the Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Residual Receipts of Offset Project-Based HFA loan to be refinanced; 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments, if at 11. A 20-year affordable housing deed 402–5693. any time IHDA determines that a project’s restriction placed on title that conforms to • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.410(e). excess funds (surplus cash) after project the Section 542(c) statutory definition; Project/Activity: Illinois Housing operations, reserve requirements and 12. A Property Capital Needs Assessment Development Authority (IHDA), Chicago, permitted distributions are met, IHDA must (PCNA) must be performed and funds Illinois, no project name or number. place the excess funds into a separate escrowed for all necessary repairs, and reserves funded for future capital needs; and Nature of Requirement: The 24 CFR interest-bearing account. Upon renewal of a 13. For projects subsidized by Section 8 266.410(e), which requires mortgages insured HAP Contract the excess funds can be used under the 542(c) Housing Finance Agency Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) to reduce future HAP payments or other Risk Sharing Program to be fully amortized contracts: project operations/purposes. When the HAP over the term of the mortgage. The waiver i. a: Owner agrees to renew HAP contract(s) Contract expires, is terminated, or any would permit IHDA to use balloon loans that for 20-year term, (subject to appropriations extensions are terminated, any unused funds would have a minimum term of 17 years and and statutory authorization, etc.), and b: In remaining in the Residual Receipt Account at a maximum amortization period of 40 years accordance with regulations in 24 CFR the time of the contract’s termination must be for the projects identified in the ‘‘Multifamily 883.306(e), and Housing Notice 2012–14— returned. Pipeline Projects’’. Use of ‘‘New Regulation’’ Section 8 Housing Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, Granted By: D Brian D. Montgomery, Assistance Payments (HAP) Contracts Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Residual Receipts of Offset Project-Based Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Housing Commissioner. Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments, if at Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Date Granted: December 6, 2018. any time CalHFA determines that a project’s Reason Waived: The waiver was granted to 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) excess funds (surplus cash) after project 402–5693. allow IHDA’s clients additional financing • operations, reserve requirements and options to their customers and to align IHDA Regulation: 24 CFR 266.410(e). permitted distributions are met, CalHFA business practices with industry standards. Project/Activity: California Housing must place the excess funds into a separate This waiver is effective through October 31, Finance Agency (CalHFA), Sacramento, interest-bearing account. Upon renewal of a 2020. The regulatory waiver is subject to the California, no project name or number. HAP Contract the excess funds can be used following conditions: Nature of Requirement: The 24 CFR to reduce future HAP payments or other 1. The waiver is limited to thirty (30) 266.410(e), which requires mortgages insured project operations/purposes. When the HAP transactions and expires on October 31, 2020. under the 542(c) Housing Finance Agency Contract expires, is terminated, or any 2. Illinois Housing Development Authority Risk Sharing Program to be fully amortized extensions are terminated, any unused funds must elect to take 50 percent or more of the over the term of the mortgage. The waiver remaining in the Residual Receipt Account at risk of loss on all transactions; would permit CalHFA to use balloon loans the time of the contract’s termination must be 3. Mortgages made under this waiver may that would have a minimum term of 17 years returned. have amortization periods of up to 40 years, and a maximum amortization period of 40 Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, but with a minimum term of 17 years; years for the projects identified in the Office of Multifamily Production, HTD, 4. All other requirements of 24 CFR ‘‘Multifamily Pipeline Projects’’. Office of Housing, Department of Housing 266.410—Mortgage Provision remain Granted by: Brian D. Montgomery, and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street applicable. The waiver is applicable only to Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal SW, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) loans made under Illinois Housing Housing Commissioner. 402–5693. Development Authority’s Risk Sharing Date Granted: December 17, 2018. • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.620(e). Agreement; Reason Waived: The waiver was granted to Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank 5. In accordance with 24 CFR 266.200(d), allow CalHFA’s clients additional financing (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Termination of the mortgage may not exceed an amount options to their customers and to align Mortgage Insurance. Pennsylvania Housing supportable by the lower of the Section 8 or CalHFA business practices with industry Finance Agency (PHFA), Harrisburg, comparable unassisted rents; standards. The regulatory waiver is subject to Pennsylvania 6. Projects must comply with Davis-Bacon the following conditions: Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 labor standards in accordance with 24 CFR 1. The waiver is limited to forty (40) CFR 266.620(e) Termination of Mortgage 266.225; transactions and expires on December 31, Insurance. As required by the Initiative, 7. Illinois Housing Development Authority 2019. PHFA agrees to indemnify HUD for all must comply with regulations stated in 24 2. CalHFA must elect to take 50 percent or amount paid to FFB if ‘‘the HFA or its CFR 266.210 for insured advances or more of the risk of loss on all transactions; successors commit fraud or make a material insurance upon completion transactions; 3. Mortgages made under this waiver may misrepresentation to the Commissioner with 8. The loans exceeding $50 million require have amortization periods of up to 40 years, respect to information culminating in the a separate waiver request; but with a minimum term of 17 years; Contract of Insurance on the mortgage, or 9. Occupancy is no less than 93 percent for 4. All other requirements of 24 CFR while the Contract of Insurance is in previous 12 months; 266.410—Mortgage Provision remain existence’’. 10. No defaults in the last 12 months of the applicable. The waiver is applicable only to Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, HFA loan to be refinanced; loans made under CalHFA’s Risk Sharing Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal 11. A 20-year affordable housing deed Agreement; Housing Commissioner. restriction placed on title that conforms to 5. In accordance with 24 CFR 266.200(d), Date Granted: December 21, 2018. the Section 542(c) statutory definition; the mortgage may not exceed an amount Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB 12. A Property Capital Needs Assessment supportable by the lower of the Section 8 or provides capital to participating Housing (PCNA) must be performed and funds comparable unassisted rents; Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16880 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

multifamily loans insured under the FHA Insurance. As required by the Initiative, Kansas, requested a waiver of the Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Minnesota Housing agrees to indemnify HUD requirement to enter into a local cooperation Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, for all amount paid to FFB if ‘‘the HFA or agreement with Doniphan County, Kansas, Office of Multifamily Production, Office of its successors commit fraud or make a covering services for IHBG-assisted housing Housing, Department of Housing and Urban material misrepresentation to the in the County. Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Commissioner with respect to information Nature of Requirement: 24 CFR 1000.240 6130, Room Washington, DC 20410, culminating in the Contract of Insurance on and 24 CFR 1000.242 require IHBG recipients telephone (202) 402–5693. the mortgage, or while the Contract of to enter into local cooperation agreements • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.620(e). Insurance is in existence’’. with the appropriate taxing authorities and Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, ensure IHBG-assisted units are exempt from (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Termination of Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal taxation. These requirements can be waived Mortgage Insurance. Massachusetts Housing Housing Commissioner. pursuant to Section 101(c) of NAHASDA and Partnership (MHP). Date Granted: December 17, 2018. 24 CFR 1000.244. Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB Granted By: Dominique Blom, General CFR 266.620(e) Termination of Mortgage provides capital to participating Housing Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Insurance. As required by the Initiative, MHP Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make Indian Housing. agrees to indemnify HUD for all amount paid multifamily loans insured under the FHA Date Granted: December 20, 2018. to FFB if ‘‘the HFA or its successors commit Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Reason Waived: Waiver of the requirement fraud or make a material misrepresentation to Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, was approved because the Housing Authority the Commissioner with respect to Office of Multifamily Production, demonstrated a good faith effort to fulfill the information culminating in the Contract of Department of Housing and Urban local cooperation agreement requirements. Insurance on the mortgage, or while the Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Contact: Wayne Sims, Administrator, Contract of Insurance is in existence’’. 6130, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Office of Public and Indian Housing, Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, 402–5693. Department of Housing and Urban • Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Regulation: 24 CFR 881.205 (c). Development, 301 NW 6th Street, Suite 200, Housing Commissioner. Project/Activity: SouthPark Apartments, Oklahoma City, OK 73102, telephone (405) Date Granted: December 17, 2018. FHA Number 043–35441, Columbus, Ohio. 609–8520. Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB Lewistown Broadway, LLC (Owner) seeks • Regulation: 24 CFR 965.653(a). provides capital to participating Housing approval to allow for new equity associated Project/Activity: Missouri Valley Housing Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make with the 4% Tax Credits and bonds from Authority (MVHA). multifamily loans insured under the FHA Ohio Housing Finance Agency to be infused Nature of Requirement: This requirement Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. into the project to be considered as ‘‘owner states that public housing agencies (PHAs) Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, initial equity’’ for the purpose of calculating must implement a policy prohibiting the use Office of Multifamily Production, Office of distributions. of prohibited tobacco products in all public Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Nature of Requirement: The regulation at housing living units and interior areas, as Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room 24 CFR 881.205 (c) defines terms applicable well as in outdoor areas within 25 feet of 6130, Room Washington, DC 20410, to determining the allowable distribution, dwelling units and administrative buildings. telephone (202) 402–5693. and under this section ‘‘an owner’s equity Granted By: General Deputy Assistant • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.620(e). investment in a project is deemed to be 10 Secretary for Public and Indian Housing. Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank percent of the replacement cost of the part of Date Granted: October 11, 2018. (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Termination of the project attributable to dwelling use Reason Waived: Based upon the Mortgage Insurance. California Housing accepted by HUD at cost certification (see information provided, the Department Finance Agency, Sacramento, California. § 881.405), unless the owner justifies a higher determined that good cause existed to allow Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 equity contribution by cost certification MVHA to maintain a Designated Smoking CFR 266.620(e) Termination of Mortgage documentation in accordance with HUD Area (DSA) less than 25 feet from the Insurance. As required by the Initiative, mortgage insurance procedures.’’ CalHFA agrees to indemnify HUD for all Granted by: Brian D. Montgomery, development as the structure was amount paid to FFB if ‘‘the HFA or its Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal constructed prior to the finalization of the successors commit fraud or make a material Housing Commissioner. rule and finds that moving the DSA would misrepresentation to the Commissioner with Date Granted: December 14, 2018. be cost prohibitive. respect to information culminating in the Reason Waived: The owner requested and Contact: Monica Shepherd, Public Housing Contract of Insurance on the mortgage, or was granted waiver of the requirement to Management and Occupancy Division, Office while the Contract of Insurance is in allow for ‘‘new’’ equity infused by Tax of Public Housing and Voucher Programs, existence’’. Credits and bonds to be included in the Office of Public and Indian Housing, Granted By: Brian D. Montgomery, calculation of the owner’s distribution to be Department of Housing and Urban Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal considered under the allowable equity as Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room Housing Commissioner. described in section 24 CFR 881.205 (c). 4208, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Date Granted: December 17, 2018. Granting this waiver is consistent with both 402–5687. • Reason Waived: Under this Initiative, FFB programmatic objectives and the Secretary’s Regulation: 24 CFR 965.653(a). provides capital to participating Housing goal of maintaining affordable housing for Project/Activity: Branson Housing Finance Agencies (HFAs) to make low-income persons. Authority (BHA), Missouri. multifamily loans insured under the FHA Contact: Kimberly Britt, Supervisory Nature of Requirement: This requirement Multifamily Risk Sharing Program. Branch Chief, Office of Housing, Department states that public housing agencies (PHAs) Contact: Patricia M. Burke, Acting Director, of Housing and Urban Development, 451 must implement a policy prohibiting the use Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Seventh Street SW, Room 6178, Washington, of prohibited tobacco products in all public Housing, Department of Housing and Urban DC 20410, telephone (202) 402–7576. housing living units and interior areas, as Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room well as in outdoor areas within 25 feet of 6130, Room Washington, DC 20410, IV. Regulatory Waivers Granted by the dwelling units and administrative buildings. telephone (202) 402–5693. Office of Public and Indian Housing Granted By: Dominique Blom, General • Regulation: 24 CFR 266.620(e). For further information about the following Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Project/Activity: Federal Financing Bank regulatory waivers, please see the name of Indian Housing. (FFB) Risk Sharing Initiative, Termination of the contact person that immediately follows Date Granted: November 15, 2018. Mortgage Insurance. Minnesota Housing the description of the waiver granted. Reason Waived: Based upon the Finance Agency (Minnesota Housing), St. • Regulation: 24 CFR 1000.240 and 24 CFR information provided, the Department Paul, Minnesota. 1000.242. determined that good cause existed to allow Nature of Requirement: The Waiver of 24 Project/Activity: Iowa Tribe of Kansas and BHA to waive the requirement to prohibiting CFR 266.620(e) Termination of Mortgage Nebraska Housing Authority of White Cloud, the use of prohibited tobacco products areas

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16881

within 25 feet of dwelling units and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Project/Activity: Housing Authority of the administrative buildings as this perimeter Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, City of Los Angeles (HACLA) requested a exceeds the PHA property boundary line and telephone (202) 708–0477. waiver of 24 CFR 982.505 (c)(4) to allow their requiring residents to smoke in areas beyond • Regulation: 24 CFR 983.301(f)(2)(ii) and agency to apply the increased payment BHA’s property line would result in 24 CFR 982.517. standard to the subsidy calculation at the significant safety issues. Project/Activity: North Little Rock Housing time the rent increase is approved instead of Contact: Monica Shepherd, Public Housing Authority (NLRHA) requested a waiver of 24 waiting until the family’s first regular Management and Occupancy Division, Office CFR 983.301(f)(2)(ii) and 24 CFR 982.517 to reexamination. of Public Housing and Voucher Programs, establish a site-specific utility allowance at Nature of Requirement: The regulation 24 Office of Public and Indian Housing, Holt District Homes, which is a Rental CFR 982.505(c)(4) states that, if the payment Department of Housing and Urban Assistance Demonstration (RAD) conversion standard amount is increased during the term Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Room site. of the HAP contract, the increased payment 4208, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) Nature of Requirement: The Public and standard amount shall be used to calculate 402–5687. Indian Housing (PIH) Notice—2018–11, H– the monthly HAP for the family beginning at • Regulation: 24 CFR 982.355(b). 2018–05, provides program requirements for the effective date of the family’s first regular Project/Activity: Shasta Housing Authority the demonstration, which includes that a reexamination on or after the effective date (SHA) in Redding, California, requested a PHA may request a waiver from HUD for the of the increased in the payment standard waiver of regulation 24 CFR 982.355(b) to aforementioned regulations in order to amount. allow the agency to stop accepting income establish a site-specific utility allowance Granted By: Dominique Blom, General portability families into its voucher program. schedule at RAD conversion sites that also Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Nature of Requirement: The regulation 24 have non-RAD PBV units at the property. Indian Housing. CFR 982.355(b) states that a receiving public Granted By: Dominique Blom, General Date Granted: October 16, 2018. housing authority (PHA) cannot refuse to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Reason Waived: This waiver was approved assist incoming portable families or direct Indian Housing. to allow assisted families to remain in their them to another neighboring PHA for Date Granted: October 4, 2018. units at an affordable rent and minimize the assistance but that HUD may determine, in Reason Waived: This waiver was approved disruption and cost of relocating in an certain instances, that a PHA is not required based on the finding that utility allowances, extremely tight market with a less than 4 to accept incoming portable families, such as as currently calculated, would be excessive percent vacancy rate. Additionally, HACLA a PHA in a declared disaster area. However, thus discouraging conservation and efficient has sufficient funding to support this the PHA must have approval in writing from use of HAP funds. Information submitted to proposal to use the increased payment HUD before refusing any incoming portable HUD, by the NLRHA provides justification standards between regularly scheduled families. for the request. reexaminations. Granted By: Dominique Blom, General Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Voucher Management and Operations Voucher Management and Operations Indian Housing. Division, Office of Public Housing and Division, Office of Public Housing and Date Granted: October 4, 2018. Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Reason Waived: This waiver was approved Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and because Shasta and Trinity Counites are Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, presidentially declared disaster areas due to Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, the Car fire burning in Northern California. telephone (202) 708–0477. telephone (202) 708–0477. Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing • Regulation: 24 CFR 982.503(a)(3). • Regulation: 24 CFR 985.101(a). Voucher Management and Operations Project/Activity: The Housing Authority of Project/Activity: Albany Housing Authority Division, Office of Public Housing and the County of Los Angeles (HACoLA) in (AHA) in, Albany New York, requested a Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Alhambra, California, requested a waiver of waiver of regulation 24 CFR 985.101(a) due Indian Housing, Department of Housing and the regulation 24 CFR 982.503(a)(3) for its to an oversight and to prove that they Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, HUD–VASH program so it could increase its submitted the HUD required SEMAP Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, payment standards for that program to 140 certification in a timely manner. telephone (202) 708–0477. percent of the 2018 40th percentile Fair Nature of Requirement: The regulation 24 • Regulation: 24 CFR 985.101(a). Market Rents (FMRs). CFR 985.101(a) requires public housing Project/Activity: Willimantic Housing Nature of Requirement: The regulation, 24 agencies (PHAs) to submit the HUD-required Authority in Willimantic, Connecticut, CFR 982.503(a)(3) states that a public Section Eight Management Assessment requested a waiver of regulation 24 CFR housing agency (PHA) voucher payment Program (SEMAP) certification within 60 985.101(a) to allow them to submit the HUD standard schedule shall establish a single calendar days after the end of its fiscal year. required SEMAP certification after to the 60- payment standard amount for each unit size. Granted By: Dominique Blom, General day deadline. For each unit size, the PHA may establish a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Nature of Requirement: The regulation 24 single payment standard amount for the Indian Housing. CFR 985.101(a) requires public housing whole FMR area or may establish a separate Date Granted: October 23, 2018. agencies (PHAs) to submit the HUD-required payment standard amount for each Reason Waived: This waiver was approved Section Eight Management Assessment designated part of the FMR area. due to documentation of technical issues Program (SEMAP) certification within 60 Granted By: Dominique Blom, General within PIC system. calendar days after the end of its fiscal year. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing Granted By: Dominique Blom, General Indian Housing. Voucher Management and Operations Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Date Granted: October 16, 2018. Division, Office of Public Housing and Indian Housing. Reason Waived: This waiver was approved Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Date Granted: October 23, 2018. because of the rising rents throughout the Los Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Reason Waived: This waiver was approved Angeles area and to better serve HUD–VASH Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, due to confirmation from the Hartford Field families. Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, office that the WHA submitted their SEMAP Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing telephone (202) 708–0477. certification prior to the deadline but Voucher Management and Operations • Regulation: 24 CFR 982.503(a)(3) and 24 experienced technical issues on HUD’s side Division, Office of Public Housing and CFR 982.503(c)(2). of the system. Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Project/Activity: Burbank Housing Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Authority (BHA) in Burbank, California, Voucher Management and Operations Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, requested a waiver of the regulation 24 CFR Division, Office of Public Housing and Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, 982.503(a)(3) and 24 CFR 982.503(c)(2) for its Voucher Programs, Office of Public and telephone (202) 708–0477. HUD–VASH program so it could increase its Indian Housing, Department of Housing and • Regulation: 24 CFR 982.505(c)(4). payment standards for that program to 120

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16882 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

percent of the 2018 Fair Market Rents (FMRs) [email protected] United States International Trade for zero and one-bedroom units. for Single Audit extensions applicable to the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) Nature of Requirement: The regulation, 24 Federal Audit Clearinghouse. determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of CFR 982.503(a)(3). states that a public Contact: Dee Ann R. Walker, Program 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that revocation of the housing agency (PHA) voucher payment Manager, NASS, Real Estate Assessment standard schedule shall establish a single Center, Office of Public and Indian Housing, antidumping duty orders on payment standard amount for each unit size. Department of Housing and Urban silicomanganese from India, For each unit size, the PHA may establish a Development, 550 12th Street SW, Suite 100, Kazakhstan, and Venezuela would be single payment standard amount for the Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) 475– likely to lead to continuation or whole FMR area or may establish a separate 7908. recurrence of material injury to an payment standard amount for each • Regulation: 24 CFR 5.801(c) and 24 CFR industry in the United States within a designated part of the FMR area. A waiver of 5.801(d)(1). reasonably foreseeable time. this regulation is necessary to establish a Project/Activity: Puerto Rico Department of separate payment standard for the HUD– Housing (RQ901). Background VASH program. The second regulation 24 Nature of Requirement: The regulation CFR 982.503(c)(2) states that the HUD office establishes certain reporting compliance The Commission, pursuant to section may approve an exception payment standard dates. The audited financial statements are 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), amount from 110 percent of the published required to be submitted to the Real Estate instituted these reviews on September 4, FMR to 120 percent of the published FMR if Assessment Center (REAC) no later than nine 2018 (83 FR 44898) and determined on the HUD Field Office determines that months after the housing authority’s (HA) December 10, 2019, that it would approval is justified by either the median fiscal year end (FYE), in accordance with the conduct expedited reviews (84 FR 8544, rent method of the 40th of 50th percentile Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A–133. March 8, 2019). rent method and that such approval is also Granted By: Dominique Blom, General The Commission made these supported by an appropriated program Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and determinations pursuant to section justification. Indian Housing. Granted By: Dominique Blom, General Date Granted: October 1, 2018. 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Reason Waived: The HA requested relief completed and filed its determinations Indian Housing. from compliance for additional time to in these reviews on April 17, 2019.2 The Date Granted: December 4, 2018. submit its financial reporting requirements views of the Commission are contained Reason Waived: This waiver was approved for the fiscal year end (FYE) of June 30, 2017. in USITC Publication 4881 (April 2019), because of the rising rents throughout the Los The HA is still recovering from damages entitled Silicomanganese from India, Angeles area and to better serve HUD–VASH resulting from hurricanes which began Kazakhstan, and Venezuela: families. September 20, 2017 and is in Category C of Investigation Nos. 731–TA–929–931 the applicable Major Disaster Declaration for Contact: Becky Primeaux, Housing (Third Review). Voucher Management and Operations Hurricane Maria. The circumstances Division, Office of Public Housing and preventing the HA from submitting its FYE By order of the Commission. Voucher Programs, Office of Public and 2017 audited financial data by the due date Issued: April 17, 2019. was acceptable. Accordingly, the HA has Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Lisa Barton, Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW, until March 31, 2019, to submit its audited Room 4216, Washington, DC 20410, financial information to the Department. The Secretary to the Commission. telephone (202) 708–0477. approval of the Financial Assessment [FR Doc. 2019–08068 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] • Regulation: 24 CFR 5.801(c) and 24 CFR Subsystem (FASS) audited financial BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 5.801(d)(1). submission only permits the extension for Project/Activity: Puerto Rico Housing filing. The HA is required to contact the Finance Authority (RQ911). HUDOIG Single Audit Coordinator at INTERNATIONAL TRADE Nature of Requirement: The regulation [email protected] COMMISSION establishes certain reporting compliance for Single Audit extensions applicable to the dates. The audited financial statements are Federal Audit Clearinghouse. [Investigation No. 337–TA–1067] required to be submitted to the Real Estate Contact: Dee Ann R. Walker, Program Assessment Center (REAC) no later than nine Manager, NASS, Real Estate Assessment Certain Road Milling Machines and months after the housing authority’s (HA) Center, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Components Thereof Commission fiscal year end (FYE), in accordance with the Department of Housing and Urban Determination To Review in Part a Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A–133. Development, 550 12th Street SW, Suite 100, Final Initial Determination; Schedule Granted By: Dominique Blom, General Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) 475– for Filing Written Submissions on Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and 7908. Remedy, the Public Interest, and Indian Housing. [FR Doc. 2019–08170 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Bonding Date Granted: October 1, 2018. BILLING CODE 4210–67–P Reason Waived: The HA requested relief AGENCY: U.S. International Trade from compliance for additional time to Commission. submit its financial reporting requirements for the fiscal year end (FYE) of June 30, 2017. INTERNATIONAL TRADE ACTION: Notice. The HA is still recovering from damages COMMISSION SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that resulting from hurricanes which began September 20, 2017 and is in Category C of [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–929–931 (Third the U.S. International Trade the applicable Major Disaster Declaration for Review)] Commission (‘‘the Commission’’) has Hurricane Maria. The circumstances determined to review in part the final preventing the HA from submitting its FYE Silicomanganese from India, initial determination (‘‘ID’’) issued by 2017 audited financial data by the due date Kazakhstan, and Venezuela the presiding administrative law judge was acceptable. Accordingly, the HA has Determination (‘‘ALJ’’) finding a violation of section until March 31, 2019, to submit its audited 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as financial information to the Department. The On the basis of the record 1 developed approval of the Financial Assessment in the subject five-year reviews, the 2 Due to the lapse in appropriations and ensuing Subsystem (FASS) audited financial cessation of Commission operations, all import submission only permits the extension for 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the injury reviews conducted under authority of title filing. The HA is required to contact the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 VII of the Act accordingly have been tolled HUDOIG Single Audit Coordinator at CFR 207.2(f)). pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16883

amended (‘‘section 337’’), in the above- section 337 has occurred with respect to subject articles from entry into the referenced investigation on October 1, the ’641 and ’340 patent. The United States, and/or (2) issue one or 2018. Commission determined to extend the more cease and desist orders that could FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: deadlines for determining whether to result in the respondents being required Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the review the final ID and/or the target date to cease and desist from engaging in General Counsel, U.S. International of the investigation by notices dated unfair acts in the importation and sale Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, February 21, 2019; February 4, 2019; of such articles. Accordingly, the Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) and November 9, 2018. We note that Commission is interested in receiving 205–3115. Copies of non-confidential these notices inadvertently misstated written submissions that address the documents filed in connection with this that the ALJ found no violation of form of remedy, if any, that should be investigation are or will be available for section 337 in this investigation, and we ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an inspection during official business hereby correct those misstatements. The article from entry into the United States hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the ALJ issued his recommended for purposes other than entry for Office of the Secretary, U.S. determination (‘‘RD’’) on remedy, the consumption, the party should so International Trade Commission, 500 E public interest and bonding on October indicate and provide information Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, 18, 2018. The RD recommended that if establishing that activities involving telephone (202) 205–2000. General the Commission finds a violation of other types of entry either are adversely information concerning the Commission section 337 in the present investigation, affecting it or are likely to do so. For may also be obtained by accessing its the Commission should: (1) Issue a background, see Certain Devices for internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. limited exclusion order (‘‘LEO’’) Connecting Computers via Telephone The public record for this investigation covering products that infringe the Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC may be viewed on the Commission’s patent claims as to which a violation of Pub. No. 2843, Comm’n Op. at 7–10 electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// section 337 has been found; (2) issue a (Dec. 1994). If the Commission contemplates some edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired cease and desist order (‘‘CDO’’); and (3) form of remedy, it must consider the persons are advised that information on require no bond during the Presidential effects of that remedy upon the public this matter can be obtained by review period. Both parties to the investigation filed interest. The factors the Commission contacting the Commission’s TDD timely petitions for review of various will consider include the effect that an terminal on (202) 205–1810. portions of the final ID, as well as timely exclusion order and/or cease and desist SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The responses to the petitions. The parties orders would have on (1) the public Commission instituted this investigation also timely filed their respective Public health and welfare, (2) competitive under section 337 of the Tariff Act of Interest Statements pursuant to 19 CFR conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 210.50(a)(4). Responses from the public production of articles that are like or (‘‘section 337’’), on August 25, 2017, were likewise received by the directly competitive with those that are based on a complaint filed by Wirtgen Commission pursuant to notice. See subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. America, Inc. of Antioch, Tennessee Notice of Request for Statements on the consumers. The Commission is (‘‘Wirtgen’’ or ‘‘Complainant’’). 82 FR Public Interest (Oct. 16, 2018). therefore interested in receiving written 40596–97 (Aug. 25, 2017). The Having examined the record in this submissions that address the complaint alleges a violation of section investigation, including the final ID, the aforementioned public interest factors 337 by reason of infringement of certain petitions for review, and the responses in the context of this investigation. claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,644,340 thereto, the Commission has determined If the Commission orders some form (‘‘the ’340 patent’’); 9,624,628 (‘‘the ’628 to review the final ID in part. In of remedy, the U.S. Trade patent’’); 9,656,530 (‘‘the ’530 patent’’); particular, the Commission has Representative, as delegated by the 7,530,641 (‘‘the ’641 patent’’); and determined to review the ALJ’s findings President, has 60 days to approve or 7,828,309 (‘‘the ’309 patent’’). The and analysis pertaining to the disapprove the Commission’s action. complaint named as respondents obviousness determinations with regard See Presidential Memorandum of July Caterpillar Bitelli SpA of Minerbio, Italy to claims 26, 35, and 36 of the ’309 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). (‘‘Caterpillar Bitelli’’); Caterpillar patent, see ID at 107–111, 120–123, During this period, the subject articles Prodotti Stradali S.r.L. of Minerbio, 124–128, 128–130, 130–136, and, on would be entitled to enter the United Italy; Caterpillar Americas CV of review, to state that these findings and States under bond, in an amount Geneva, Switzerland; Caterpillar Paving analysis lead to the conclusion that determined by the Commission and Products, Inc. of Minneapolis, MN; and claims 26, 35, and 36 are invalid as prescribed by the Secretary of the Caterpillar Inc. of Peoria, IL obvious. As a result, the Commission Treasury. (‘‘Caterpillar’’ or ‘‘Respondents’’). Id. at modifies the conclusion of law No. 18 Written Submissions: Parties to the 40596. The Office of Unfair Import on page 436 of the ID to read as follows: investigation, interested government Investigations is named as a party in ‘‘18) Caterpillar has shown through agencies, and any other interested this investigation. Id. Subsequently, the clear and convincing evidence that parties are encouraged to file written investigation was terminated as to asserted claim 36 of the ’309 Patent is submissions on the issues of remedy, respondent Caterpillar Bitelli. The invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103. the public interest and bonding. Such investigation was also terminated with Caterpillar has not shown through clear submissions should address the respect to the ’628 patent. and convincing evidence that asserted recommended determination on The evidentiary hearing on the claims 10 and 29 of the ’309 Patent are remedy, the public interest and bonding question of violation of section 337 was invalid under 35 U.S.C. 103.’’ issued on October 18, 2018, by the ALJ. held April 20–24, 2018. The ALJ issued The Commission has determined not Complainants are also requested to a final ID on violation on October 1, to review the remainder of the ID. submit proposed remedial orders for the 2018. The ID found that a violation of In connection with the final Commission’s consideration. section 337 has occurred in this disposition of this investigation, the Complainants are further requested to investigation with respect to the ’530 Commission may (1) issue an order that provide the expiration date of the ’530 and ’309 patents, and no violation of could result in the exclusion of the and ’309 patents, the HTSUS numbers

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16884 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

under which the accused articles are 210 of the Commission’s Rules of This meeting is open to the public. imported, and any known importers of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR part All attendees will be required to check- the accused products. The written 210. in at the meeting registration desk. submissions and proposed remedial By order of the Commission. Registrations will be accepted on a orders must be filed no later than the Issued: April 17, 2019. space available basis. Interested persons close of business on May 1, 2019. Reply whose registrations have been accepted Lisa Barton, submissions must be filed no later than may be permitted to participate in the the close of business on May 8, 2019. No Secretary to the Commission. discussions at the discretion of the further submissions on these issues will [FR Doc. 2019–08104 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] meeting chairman and with approval of be permitted unless otherwise ordered BILLING CODE 7020–02–P the Designated Federal Officer (DFO). by the Commission. Any member of the public may file a Persons filing written submissions written statement with the Board. must file the original document DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Written comments shall be focused on electronically on or before the deadlines the APB’s current issues under stated above and submit 8 true paper Federal Bureau of Investigation discussion and may not be repetitive of copies to the Office of the Secretary by previously submitted written noon the next day pursuant to section Meeting of the CJIS Advisory Policy Board statements. Written comments should 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of be provided to Mr. Nicky J. Megna, Practice and Procedure (19 CFR AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Acting DFO, at least seven (7) days in 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to Investigation, Department of Justice. advance of the meeting so that the the investigation number (‘‘Inv. No. ACTION: Meeting notice. comments may be made available to the 337–TA–1067’’) in a prominent place on APB for their consideration prior to the the cover page and/or the first page. (See SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is meeting. Handbook for Electronic Filing to announce the meeting of the Federal Anyone requiring special Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ Bureau of Investigation’s Criminal accommodations should notify Mr. secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ Justice Information Services (CJIS) _ _ Megna at least seven (7) days in advance handbook on electronicfiling.pdf). Advisory Policy Board (APB). The CJIS of the meeting. Persons with questions regarding filing APB is a federal advisory committee should contact the Secretary (202–205– established pursuant to the Federal Dated: April 1, 2019. 2000). Advisory Committee Act (FACA). This Nicky J. Megna, Any person desiring to submit a meeting announcement is being Acting CJIS Designated Federal Officer, document to the Commission in published as required by Section 10 of Criminal Justice Information Services confidence must request confidential the FACA. Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation. [FR Doc. 2019–08161 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] treatment. All such requests should be DATES: The APB will meet in open directed to the Secretary to the session from 9:00 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., BILLING CODE 4410–02–P Commission and must include a full on June 5, 2019. statement of the reasons why the ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place Commission should grant such at Hyatt Regency Jacksonville Riverfront DEPARTMENT OF LABOR treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents Hotel, 225 East Coastline Drive, for which confidential treatment by the Employment and Training Jacksonville, FL 32202, telephone (904) Commission is properly sought will be Administration 588–1234. treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Agency Information Collection information and documents for which Inquiries may be addressed to Ms. Activities; Comment Request; National confidential treatment is properly Jillana Plybon; Management and Dislocated Workers Emergency Grant sought, submitted to the Commission for Program Analyst; CJIS Training and Application and Reporting Procedures purposes of this Investigation may be Advisory Process Unit, Resources disclosed to and used: (i) By the Management Section; FBI CJIS Division, ACTION: Notice. Commission, its employees and Offices, Module C2, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, SUMMARY: The Department of Labor’s and contract personnel (a) for Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306–0149; telephone (304) 625–5424, facsimile (DOL’s) Employment and Training developing or maintaining the records Administration (ETA) is soliciting of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in (304) 625–5090. comments concerning a proposed internal investigations, audits, reviews, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FBI extension for the authority to conduct and evaluations relating to the CJIS APB is responsible for reviewing the information collection request (ICR) programs, personnel, and operations of policy issues and appropriate technical titled, ‘‘National Dislocated Workers the Commission including under 5 and operational issues related to the Emergency Grant Application and U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. programs administered by the FBI’s CJIS Reporting Procedures.’’ This comment government employees and contract Division, and thereafter, making request is part of continuing personnel, solely for cybersecurity appropriate recommendations to the FBI Departmental efforts to reduce purposes. All contract personnel will Director. The programs administered by paperwork and respondent burden in sign appropriate nondisclosure the CJIS Division are the Next accordance with the Paperwork agreements. All non-confidential Generation Identification, Interstate Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). written submissions will be available for Identification Index, Law Enforcement public inspection at the Office of the Enterprise Portal, National Crime DATES: Consideration will be given to all Secretary and on EDIS. Information Center, National Instant written comments received by June 24, The authority for the Commission’s Criminal Background Check System, 2019. determination is contained in section National Incident-Based Reporting ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as System, National Data Exchange, and applicable supporting documentation, amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in Part Uniform Crime Reporting. including a description of the likely

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16885

respondents, proposed frequency of in the ADDRESSES section. Comments Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). response, and estimated total burden, must be written to receive Molly E. Conway, may be obtained free by contacting consideration, and they will be Acting Assistant Secretary for Employment Sharon McDowell by telephone at 202– summarized and included in the request and Training. 693–3537 (this is not a toll-free for OMB approval of the final ICR. In [FR Doc. 2019–08125 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] number), TTY 1–877–889–5627 (this is order to ensure appropriate not a toll-free number), or by email at consideration, comments should BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P [email protected]. mention OMB control number 1205– Submit written comments about, or 0439. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR requests for a copy of, this ICR by mail Submitted comments will also be a or courier to the U.S. Department of matter of public record for this ICR and Vacancy Posting for a District Chief Labor, Employment and Training posted on the internet, without Administrative Law Judge Administration, Office of Workforce redaction. DOL encourages commenters Summary of Duties: The position of Investment, 200 Constitution Avenue not to include personally identifiable NW, Washington, DC 20210; by email: District Chief Administrative Law Judge information, confidential business data, is a field position within the [email protected]; or by Fax or other sensitive statements/ 202–693–3817. organizational structure of the Office of information in any comments. Administrative Law Judges (OALJ) of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DOL is particularly interested in the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). Sharon McDowell by telephone at 202– comments that: The District Chief Judge position reports 693–3537 (this is not a toll-free number) • Evaluate whether the proposed through one of the Associate Chief or by email at mcdowell.sharon@ collection of information is necessary Judges to the Chief Judge, who reports dol.gov. for the proper performance of the to the Deputy Secretary of Labor. OALJ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOL, as functions of the agency, including District Offices are geographically part of continuing efforts to reduce whether the information will have located within DOL’s designated paperwork and respondent burden, practical utility; regions. conducts a pre-clearance consultation • Evaluate the accuracy of the As District Chief Judge, the incumbent program to provide the general public agency’s estimate of the burden of the serves as head of one of OALJ’s eight and Federal agencies an opportunity to proposed collection of information, District Offices and is responsible for comment on proposed and/or including the validity of the the management and administrative continuing collections of information methodology and assumptions used; supervision of that office. The District before submitting them to the Office of Office is composed of Administrative • Enhance the quality, utility, and Management and Budget (OMB) for final Law Judges, attorney advisors who serve clarity of the information to be approval. This program helps to ensure as law clerks to the judges, and legal collected; and requested data can be provided in the • assistants. Each office operates self- desired format, reporting burden (time Minimize the burden of the sufficiently in that most administrative and financial resources) is minimized, collection of information on those who and support functions such as time collection instruments are clearly are to respond, including through the keeping, procurement, travel, personnel, understood, and the impact of collection use of appropriate automated, and case management and processing requirements can be properly assessed. electronic, mechanical, or other are handled at the local level, with The information collection is technological collection techniques or general policy guidance provided by the necessary for the U.S. Department of other forms of information technology, National Office. Labor’s (DOL’s) award of National e.g., permitting electronic submission of The District Chief Judge is responsible Dislocated Worker Grants (NDWGs), responses. for providing the overall administrative which are discretionary grants intended Agency: DOL–ETA. and case management leadership to temporarily expand the service Type of Review: Extension without necessary to assure the thorough and capacity at the state and local area levels changes. timely processing of all formal by providing funding assistance in Title of Collection: National proceedings before the District Office. response to major economic dislocations Dislocated Workers Emergency Grant The District Chief Judge performs the or other events, as defined in the Application and Reporting Procedures. full range of administrative functions, Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Forms: ETA 9103–1, ETA 9103–2a, including the formulation of District Act (WIOA) (Pub. L. 113–128). ETA 9103–2b, ETA 9103–3, ETA 9104, Office budgetary and personnel resource This information collection is subject ETA 9105, ETA 9106, ETA 9107. needs, execution of applicable to the PRA. A Federal agency generally personnel policies and practices, and cannot conduct or sponsor a collection OMB Control Number: 1205–0439. management of the case assignment, of information, and the public is Affected Public: State local and tribal case monitoring, and hearing processes. generally not required to respond to an governments. In addition, the District Chief Judge is information collection, unless it is Estimated Number of Respondents: expected to carry out the full range of approved by OMB under the PRA and 159. duties as an Administrative Law Judge, displays a currently valid OMB Control Frequency: Ongoing, as needed. including presiding at hearings in some Number. In addition, notwithstanding Total Estimated Annual Responses: of the most sensitive, difficult and any other provisions of law, no person 1,587 hours. controversial proceedings that come shall generally be subject to penalty for before the office. failing to comply with a collection of Estimated Average Time per Appointment Type: Excepted. information that does not display a Response: Varies. Qualifications: Applicant must valid Control Number. See 5 CFR Estimated Total Annual Burden currently hold, and must have held for 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. Hours: 1,086 hours. the past three years, a Federal Interested parties are encouraged to Total Estimated Annual Other Cost Administrative Law Judge Position, at provide comments to the contact shown Burden: $0. the AL–3 level or above, or be eligible

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16886 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

for reinstatement to an ALJ position 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the Instructions: Please submit one copy based on prior experience as an ALJ at vacancy closing date. of your comments by only one method. the AL–3 level or above. Licensure and Dated: April 17, 2019. All submissions received must include authorization to practice law under the Bryan Slater, the agency name and Control Number laws of a state, the District of Columbia, identified above for this information Assistant Secretary for Administration & the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or Management. collection. Because we continue to any territorial court established under experience delays in receiving mail in the laws of the United States. [FR Doc. 2019–08092 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] the Washington, DC area, commenters An ‘‘active’’ bar status and/or BILLING CODE 4510–20–P are strongly encouraged to transmit their membership in ‘‘good standing’’ for at comments electronically via email or to least 10 years total in at least one DEPARTMENT OF LABOR submit them by mail early. Comments, jurisdiction in which the applicant is including any personal information admitted. Judicial status is acceptable in Wage and Hour Division provided, become a matter of public lieu of ‘‘active’’ status in States that record. They will also be summarized prohibit sitting judges from maintaining Agency Information Collection and/or included in the request for OMB ‘‘active’’ status to practice law. Being in Activities; Comment Request; approval of the information collection ‘‘good standing’’ is acceptable in lieu of Proposed Extension of the Approval of request. ‘‘active’’ status in jurisdictions where Information Collection Requirements; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the licensing authority considers ‘‘good Records To Be Kept by Employers— Robert Waterman, Compliance standing’’ as having a current license to Fair Labor Standards Act Specialist, Division of Regulations, practice law. Applicant must have at Legislation, and Interpretation, Wage least seven years of relevant litigation or AGENCY: Wage and Hour Division, Department of Labor. and Hour, U.S. Department of Labor, administrative law experience. Relevant Room S–3502, 200 Constitution Avenue litigation experience can include: ACTION: Notice. NW, Washington, DC 20210; telephone: Preparing for, participating in, and/or (202) 693–0406 (this is not a toll-free conducting formal hearings, trials, or SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce number). Copies of this notice may be appeals at the federal, state, or local obtained in alternative formats (Large level; participating in settlement or plea paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation Print, Braille, Audio Tape, or Disc), negotiations in advance of such upon request, by calling (202) 693–0023 proceedings; hearing cases; preparing program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an (not a toll-free number). TTY/TTD opinions; and participating in or callers may dial toll-free (877) 889–5627 conducting arbitration, mediation, or opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of to obtain information or request other alternative dispute resolution. materials in alternative formats. Relevant administrative law experience information in accordance with the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: is litigation experience in cases initiated Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 before a governmental administrative (PRA95). This program helps to ensure I. Background that requested data can be provided in body. The Wage and Hour Division of the Applicant must have knowledge of the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is Department of Labor administers the statutes enforced by the Department of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 Labor, such as the Black Lung Benefits minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of U.S.C. 201, et seq.,which sets the Act, Service Contract Act, Longshore Federal minimum wage, overtime pay, and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the recordkeeping, and youth employment Fair Labor Standards Act, whistleblower standards of most general application. protections enforced by the Wage and Hour Division is soliciting comments concerning its proposal to See 29 U.S.C. 206; 207; 211; 212. FLSA Occupational Safety and Health requirements apply to employers of Administration, or of other similar laws. extend Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval of the employees engaged in interstate Desirable Qualifications: Experience commerce or in the production of goods in managing people, providing Information Collection: Records to be kept by Employers—Fair Labor for interstate commerce and of professional guidance, executive employees in certain enterprises, leadership, and oversight of legal or Standards Act. A copy of the proposed information request can be obtained by including employees of a public agency; adjudicatory offices. however, the FLSA contains exemptions To Be Considered: Applicant must contacting the office listed below in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT that apply to employees in certain types currently hold, and must have held for section of this Notice. of employment. See 29 U.S.C. 213, et al. the past three years, a Federal FLSA section 11(c) requires all Administrative Law Judge Position, at DATES: Written comments must be employers covered by the FLSA to the AL–3 level or above, or be eligible submitted to the office listed in the make, keep, and preserve records of for reinstatement to an ALJ position ADDRESSES section below on or before employees and of wages, hours, and based on prior experience as an ALJ at June 24, 2019. other conditions and practices of the AL–3 level or above. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments employment. See 29 U.S.C. 211(c). A Closing Date: More information, identified by Control Number 1235– FLSA covered employer must maintain including on the position duties, 0018, by either one of the following the records for such period of time and specific hiring policies, and application methods: Email: WHDPRAComments@ make such reports as prescribed by instructions, may be found on dol.gov; Mail, Hand Delivery, Courier: regulations issued by the Secretary of www.usajobs.gov, Vacancy Division of Regulations, Legislation, and Labor. Id. Announcement No. DOL–AL–OALJ–19– Interpretation, Wage and Hour, U.S. The DOL has promulgated regulations 03. Your application and ALL required Department of Labor, Room S–3502, 200 29 CFR part 516 to establish the basic supplemental documents must be Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, FLSA recordkeeping requirements. The received through www.usajobs.gov by DC 20210. DOL has also issued specific sections of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16887

regulations 29 CFR parts 10, 505, 519, Total Estimated Number of Annual current or prospective recipients of LSC 520, 525, 530, 547, 548, 549, 551, 552, Responses: 45,518,189. Basic Field Grants may apply for 553, 570, 575, and 794 to supplement Estimated Annual Total Burden approval of a subgrant. the part 516 requirements and to Hours: 1,048,482. Applications for approval to make provide for the creation and Estimated Time per Response: subgrants of calendar year 2020 Basic maintenance of records relating to various. Field Grant funds will be available the various FLSA exemptions and special Frequency: On occasion. week of April 22, 2019. Applications provisions. Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): must be submitted through LSC Grants The Wage and Hour Division (WHD) $0. at https://lscgrants.lsc.gov. Applicants uses this information to determine Total Burden Costs (oper.ation/ must submit their applications by 5:00 whether covered employers have maintenance): $0. p.m. E.D.T. on the due date identified complied with various FLSA Dated: April 17, 2019. below. requirements. Employers use the Robert M. Waterman, Applicants must submit applications records to document FLSA compliance, Division of Regulations, Legislation and for approval to make subgrants in including showing qualification for Interpretation. conjunction with their applications for various FLSA exemptions. [FR Doc. 2019–08073 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 2020 Basic Field Grant funding. 45 CFR The WHD seeks approval to extend 1627.4(b)(1). The deadlines for BILLING CODE P this information collection related to application submissions are as follows: various FLSA recordkeeping • June 3, 2019 for applicants that requirements. have not had an LSC Program Quality LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION II. Review Focus Visit (PQV) since January 1, 2017 and for applicants who are not current LSC The Department of Labor is Notice to LSC Grantees of Application Process for Subgranting 2020 Basic recipients; particularly interested in comments • June 10, 2019 for applicants that which: Field Funds • have had a PQV since January 1, 2017, Evaluate whether the proposed AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. have received a final PQV report by collection of information is necessary ACTION: April 30, 2019, and are the only for the proper performance of the Notice of application dates and format for applications for approval to applicant for the service area; functions of the agency, including • August 5, 2019 for applicants that whether the information will have make subgrants of 2020 Basic Field Grant funds. have had a PQV since January 1, 2017, practical utility; have received a final PQV report during • Enhance the quality, utility, and SUMMARY: The Legal Services the period May 1, 2019 through July 1, clarity of the information to be Corporation (LSC) is the national 2019, and are the only applicant for the collected; organization charged with administering • Evaluate the accuracy of the service area. Federal funds provided for civil legal The deadlines for the submission of agency’s estimate of the burden of the services to low-income people. LSC final and signed subgrant agreements proposed collection of information, hereby announces the submission dates are as follows: including the validity of the for applications for subgrants of 2020 • October 15, 2019 for applicants methodology and assumptions used; • Minimize the burden of the Basic Field Grant funds. LSC is also required to submit applications by June collection of information on those who providing information about where 3 and 10, 2019. • November 1, 2019 for applicants are to respond, including through the applicants may locate subgrant required to submit applications by use of appropriate automated, application forms and directions for August 5, 2019. electronic, mechanical, or other providing the information required to Applicants may also find these technological collection techniques or apply for a subgrant. deadlines on LSC’s website at http:// other forms of information technology, DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION www.lsc.gov/grants-grantee-resources/ e.g., permitting electronic submissions section for application dates. our-grant-programs/basic-field-grant/ of responses. ADDRESSES: Legal Services Corporation—Office of Compliance and basic-field-grant-key-dates. III. Current Actions Applicants may access the application Enforcement, 3333 K Street NW, Third under the ‘‘Subgrants’’ heading on their The Department of Labor seeks an Floor, Washington, DC 20007–3522. approval for the extension of this LSC Grants home page. Applicants may FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: initiate an application by selecting information collection that requires Megan Lacchini, Office of Compliance employers to make, maintain, and ‘‘Initiate Subgrant Application.’’ and Enforcement at [email protected] Applicants must then provide the preserve records in accordance with or (202) 295–1506 or visit the LSC statutory and regulatory requirements. information requested in the LSC Grants website at http://www.lsc.gov/grants- data fields, located in the Subrecipient Type of Review: Extension. grantee-resources/grantee-guidance/ Agency: DOL—Wage and Hour Profile, Subgrant Summary, and how-apply-subgrant. Division. Subrecipient Budget screens, and Title: Records to be kept by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 45 upload the following documents: Employers—Fair Labor Standards Act. CFR part 1627, LSC must publish, on an • A draft Subgrant Agreement (with OMB Control Number: 1235–0018. annual basis, ‘‘notice of the the required terms provided in Subgrant Affected Public: State, Local, and requirements concerning the format and Agreement Template); and Tribal Governments; and Private Sector contents of the application annually in • Subgrant Inquiry Form B (for new businesses or other for-profit, Not-for- the Federal Register and on LSC’s subgrants) or C (for renewal subgrants). profit institutions, Farms. website.’’ 45 CFR 1627.4(b). This Notice Applicants seeking to subgrant to an Agency Numbers: Form WH–14, Form and the publication of the Subgrant organization that is not a current LSC WH–5. Application Forms on LSC’s website grantee must also upload: Total Estimated Number of satisfy § 1627.4(b)’s notice requirement • The subrecipient’s accounting Respondents: 3,780,294. for the Basic Field Grant program. Only manual (or letter indicating that the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16888 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

subrecipient does not have one and LSC’s 2020 Basic Field Grant funding SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each why); decisions. Directorate and Office has an external • The subrecipient’s most recent Dated: April 17, 2019. advisory committee that typically meets audited financial statement (or letter Stefanie Davis, twice a year to review and provide indicating that the subrecipient does not advice on program management; discuss Assistant General Counsel. have one and why); current issues; and review and provide • The subrecipient’s current cost [FR Doc. 2019–08096 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] advice on the impact of policies, allocation policy (or letter indicating BILLING CODE 7050–01–P programs, and activities in the that the subrecipient does not have one disciplines and fields encompassed by and why); the Directorate or Office. In addition to • The subrecipient’s current fidelity NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Directorate and Office advisory bond coverage (or letter indicating that committees, NSF has several the subrecipient does not have one); • Request for Recommendations for committees that provide advice and The subrecipient’s conflict of recommendations on specific topics interest policy (or letter indicating that Membership on Directorate and Office Advisory Committees including: Astronomy and astrophysics; the subrecipient does not have one); and environmental research and education; • The subrecipient’s whistleblower equal opportunities in science and policy (or letter indicating that the ACTION: Notice. engineering; cyberinfrastructure; subrecipient does not have one) SUMMARY: The National Science international science and engineering; LSC’s Subgrant Agreement Template Foundation (NSF) requests and Forms B, and C are available on and business and operations. recommendations for membership on its A primary consideration when LSC’s website at http://www.lsc.gov/ scientific and technical Federal advisory grants-grantee-resources/grantee- formulating committee membership is committees. Recommendations should guidance/how-apply-subgrant. recognized knowledge, expertise, or consist of the name of the submitting 1 LSC encourages applicants to use demonstrated ability. Other factors that LSC’s Subgrant Agreement Template as individual, the organization or the may be considered are balance among a model subgrant agreement. If the affiliation providing the member diverse institutions, regions, and groups applicant does not use LSC’s Template, nomination, the name of the underrepresented in science, the proposed agreement must include, recommended individual, the technology, engineering, and at a minimum, the substance of the recommended individual’s curriculum mathematics. Committee members serve provisions of the Template. vita, an expression of the individual’s for varying term lengths, depending on Once submitted, LSC will evaluate the interest in serving, and the following the nature of the individual committee. application and provide applicants with recommended individual’s contact Although we welcome the instructions on any needed information: Employment address, recommendations we receive, we regret modifications to the information, telephone number, fax number, and that NSF will not be able to documents, or Draft Agreement email address. Self-recommendations acknowledge or respond positively to provided with the application. The are accepted. If you would like to make each person who contacts NSF or has applicant must then upload a final and a membership recommendation for any been recommended. NSF intends to signed subgrant agreement through LSC of the NSF scientific and technical publish a similar notice to this on an Grants by the timeframes referenced Federal advisory committees, please annual basis. NSF will keep above. This can be done by selecting send your recommendation to the recommendations active for 12 months ‘‘Upload Signed Agreement’’ to the right appropriate committee contact person from the date of receipt. of the application ‘‘Status’’ under the listed in the chart below. The chart below is a listing of the ‘‘Subgrant’’ heading on an applicant’s ADDRESSES: The mailing address for the committees seeking recommendations LSC Grants home page. National Science Foundation is 2415 for membership. Recommendations As required by 45 CFR Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA should be sent to the contact person 1627.4(b)(1)(ii), LSC will inform 22314. identified below. The chart contains applicants of its decision to disapprove Web links to individual committee web addresses where additional or approve the subgrant no later than information may be found on the NSF information about individual the date LSC informs applicants of website: NSF Advisory Committees. committees is available.

Advisory committee Contact person

Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences, https://www.nsf.gov/bio/ad- Brent Miller, Directorate for Biological Sciences; phone: (703) 292– visory.jsp. 8400; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–2988. Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science and Engi- Brenda Williams, Directorate for Computer and Information Science neering, https://www.nsf.gov/cise/advisory.jsp. and Engineering; phone: (703) 292–4554; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9074. Advisory Committee for Cyberinfrastructure, https://www.nsf.gov/cise/ Carl Anderson, Division of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure; phone: (703) aci/advisory.jsp. 292–4545; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9060. Advisory Committee for Education and Human Resources, https:// Keaven Stevenson, Directorate for Education and Human Resources; www.nsf.gov/ehr/advisory.jsp. phone: (703) 292–8600; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292– 9179. Advisory Committee for Engineering, https://www.nsf.gov/eng/advi- Cecile Gonzalez, Directorate for Engineering; phone: (703) 292–8300; sory.jsp. email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9467 Advisory Committee for Geosciences, https://www.nsf.gov/geo/advi- Melissa Lane, Directorate for Geosciences: phone: (703) 292–8500; sory.jsp. email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9042.

1 Federally registered lobbyists are not eligible for appointment to these Federal advisory committees.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16889

Advisory committee Contact person

Advisory Committee for International Science and Engineering, https:// Roxanne Nikolaus, Office of International Science and Engineering, www.nsf.gov/od/oise/advisory.jsp. phone: (703) 292–7578; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292– 9067. Advisory Committee for Mathematical and Physical Sciences, https:// Tomasz Durakiewicz, Directorate for Mathematical and Physical www.nsf.gov/mps/advisory.jsp. Sciences; phone: (703) 292–4892; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9151. Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences, Deborah Olster, Directorate for Social, Behavioral & Economic https://www.nsf.gov/sbe/advisory.jsp. Sciences; phone: (703) 292–8700; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9083. Advisory Committee for Polar Programs, https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/ Andrew Backe, Office of Polar Programs; phone: (703) 292–2454; advisory.jsp. email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9081. Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering, https:// Bernice Anderson, Office of Integrative Activities; phone: (703) 292– www.nsf.gov/od/oia/activities/ceose/. 8040; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9040. Advisory Committee for Business and Operations, https://www.nsf.gov/ Jeffrey Rich, Office of Information and Resource Management; phone: oirm/bocomm/. (703) 292–8100; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9369. Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education, Leah Nichols, Office of Integrative Activities; phone: (703) 292–8040; https://www.nsf.gov/ere/ereweb/advisory.jsp. email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9040. Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee, https://www.nsf.gov/ Elizabeth Pentecost, Division of Astronomical Sciences; phone: (703) mps/ast/aaac.jsp. 292–4907; email: [email protected]; fax: (703) 292–9452. STEM Education Advisory Panel, https://nsf.gov/ehr/ Keaven Stevenson, Directorate for Education and Human Resources; STEMEdAdvisory.jsp. Please visit website to submit recommendations.

Dated: April 17,2019. • Mail comments to: David Cullison, 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by Crystal Robinson, Office of the Chief Information Officer, email to [email protected]. The Committee Management Officer. Mail Stop: T6–A10M, U.S. Nuclear supporting statement and burden [FR Doc. 2019–08079 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Regulatory Commission, Washington, spreadsheet are available in ADAMS BILLING CODE 7555–01–P DC 20555–0001. under Accession Nos. ML18305A340 For additional direction on obtaining and ML18305A342, respectively. information and submitting comments, • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and NUCLEAR REGULATORY see ‘‘Obtaining Information and purchase copies of public documents at COMMISSION Submitting Comments’’ in the the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of White Flint North, 11555 Rockville [NRC–2018–0195] this document. Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. • NRC’s Clearance Officer: A copy of Information Collection: Packaging and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the collection of information and related Transportation of Radioactive Material David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear instructions may be obtained without AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Regulatory Commission, Washington, charge by contacting NRC’s Clearance Commission. DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– Officer, David Cullison, Office of the ACTION: Renewal of existing information 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear collection; request for comment. nrc.gov. Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 2084; email: Infocollects.Resource@ Commission (NRC) invites public I. Obtaining Information and nrc.gov. comment on the renewal of Office of Submitting Comments Management and Budget (OMB) B. Submitting Comments approval for an existing collection of A. Obtaining Information Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– information. The information collection Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 0195 in the subject line of your is entitled, ‘‘Packaging and 0195 when contacting the NRC about comment submission, in order to ensure Transportation of Radioactive Material.’’ the availability of information for this that the NRC is able to make your DATES: Submit comments by June 24, action. You may obtain publicly- comment submission available to the 2019. Comments received after this date available information related to this public in this docket. will be considered if it is practical to do action by any of the following methods: The NRC cautions you not to include so, but the Commission is able to ensure • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to identifying or contact information in consideration only for comments http://www.regulations.gov and search comment submissions that you do not received on or before this date. for Docket ID NRC–2018–0195. want to be publicly disclosed in your ADDRESSES: You may submit comments • NRC’s Agencywide Documents comment submission. The NRC will by any of the following methods: Access and Management System post all comment submissions at http:// • Federal Rulemaking website: Go to (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- www.regulations.gov as well as enter the http://www.regulations.gov and search available documents online in the comment submissions into ADAMS, for Docket ID NRC–2018–0195. Address ADAMS Public Documents collection at and the NRC does not routinely edit questions about docket IDs in http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ comment submissions to remove Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; adams.html. To begin the search, select identifying or contact information. telephone: 301–287–9127; email: ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then If you are requesting or aggregating [email protected]. For technical select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS comments from other persons for questions, contact the individual listed Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, submission to the NRC, you should in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION please contact the NRC’s Public inform those persons not to include CONTACT section of this document. Document Room (PDR) reference staff at identifying or contact information that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16890 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

they do not want to be publicly ensure that all activities are completed DATES: Comments must be filed by May disclosed in their comment submission. using an NRC-approved quality 23, 2019. A request for a hearing must Your request should state that the NRC assurance program. be filed by June 24, 2019. does not routinely edit comment III. Specific Requests for Comments ADDRESSES: You may submit comments submissions to remove such information by any of the following methods (unless before making the comment The NRC is seeking comments that this document describes a different submissions available to the public or address the following questions: method for submitting comments on a entering the comment into ADAMS. 1. Is the proposed collection of specific subject): information necessary for the NRC to • II. Background Federal Rulemaking website: Go to properly perform its functions? Does the http://www.regulations.gov and search In accordance with the Paperwork information have practical utility? for Docket ID NRC–2019–0099. Address Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 2. Is the estimate of the burden of the questions about NRC dockets IDs in Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting information collection accurate? Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; public comment on its intention to 3. Is there a way to enhance the telephone: 301–287–9127; email: request the OMB’s approval for the quality, utility, and clarity of the [email protected]. For technical information collection summarized information to be collected? questions, contact the individual(s) below. 4. How can the burden of the listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 1. The title of the information information collection on respondents CONTACT section of this document. collection: 10 CFR part 71, ‘‘Packaging be minimized, including the use of • Mail comments to: Office of and Transportation of Radioactive automated collection techniques or Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– Material.’’ other forms of information technology? 2. OMB approval number: 3150–0008. A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 3. Type of submission: Extension. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 4. The form number, if applicable: of April 2019. 0001, ATTN: Program Management, Not applicable. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Announcements and Editing Staff. 5. How often the collection is required David C. Cullison, For additional direction on obtaining or requested: On occasion. Application NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief information and submitting comments, for package certification may be made at Information Officer. see ‘‘Obtaining Information and any time. Required reports are collected [FR Doc. 2019–08138 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION and evaluated on a continuous basis as BILLING CODE 7590–01–P section of events occur. this document. 6. Who will be required or asked to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: respond: All NRC specific licensees who NUCLEAR REGULATORY Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear place byproduct, source, or special COMMISSION Reactor Regulations, U.S. Nuclear nuclear material into transportation, and Regulatory Commission, Washington, all persons who wish to apply for NRC [NRC–2019–0099] DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– approval of package designs for use in 1927, email: [email protected]. such transportation. Biweekly Notice: Applications and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 7. The estimated number of annual Amendments to Facility Operating responses: 634 responses. Licenses and Combined Licenses I. Obtaining Information and 8. The estimated number of annual Involving No Significant Hazards Submitting Comments respondents: 220 respondents. Considerations A. Obtaining Information 9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019– information collection requirement or Commission. 0099, facility name, unit number(s), request: 30,589 hours. ACTION: Biweekly notice. plant docket number, application date, 10. Abstract: The NRC regulations in and subject when contacting the NRC part 71 of title 10 of the Code of Federal SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Atomic about the availability of information for Regulations (CFR) establish Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the this action. You may obtain publicly- requirements for packaging, preparation Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory available information related to this for shipment, and transportation of Commission (NRC) is publishing this action by any of the following methods: licensed material, and prescribe regular biweekly notice. The Act • Federal Rulemaking website: Go to procedures standards, and requirements requires the Commission to publish http://www.regulations.gov and search for approval by NRC of packaging and notice of any amendments issued, or for Docket ID NRC–2019–0099. shipping procedures for fissile material proposed to be issued, and grants the • NRC’s Agencywide Documents and for quantities of licensed material in Commission the authority to issue and Access and Management System excess of Type A quantities. The NRC make immediately effective any (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- collects information pertinent to 10 CFR amendment to an operating license or available documents online in the part 71 for three reasons; to issue a combined license, as applicable, upon a ADAMS Public Documents collection at package approval; to ensure that any determination by the Commission that http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ incidents or package degradation or such amendment involves no significant adams.html. To begin the search, select defect are appropriately captured, hazards consideration, notwithstanding ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For evaluated and, if necessary, corrected to the pendency before the Commission of problems with ADAMS, please contact minimize future potential occurrences; a request for a hearing from any person. the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) and to ensure that any incidents or This biweekly notice includes all reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– package degradation or defect are notices of amendments issued, or 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ appropriately captured, evaluated and, proposed to be issued, from March 26, nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number if necessary, corrected to minimize 2019 to April 8, 2019. The last biweekly for each document referenced (if it is future potential occurrences; and to notice was published on April 9, 2019. available in ADAMS) is provided the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16891

first time that it is mentioned in this operation of the facility in accordance Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, document. with the proposed amendment would Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and not (1) involve a significant increase in the Commission or a presiding officer purchase copies of public documents at the probability or consequences of an will rule on the petition and, if the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One accident previously evaluated; or (2) appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be White Flint North, 11555 Rockville create the possibility of a new or issued. Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. different kind of accident from any As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the accident previously evaluated; or (3) petition should specifically explain the B. Submitting Comments involve a significant reduction in a reasons why intervention should be Please include Docket ID NRC–2019– margin of safety. The basis for this permitted with particular reference to 0099, facility name, unit number(s), proposed determination for each the following general requirements for plant docket number, application date, amendment request is shown below. standing: (1) The name, address, and and subject in your comment The Commission is seeking public telephone number of the petitioner; (2) submission. comments on this proposed the nature of the petitioner’s right under The NRC cautions you not to include determination. Any comments received the Act to be made a party to the identifying or contact information that within 30 days after the date of proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of you do not want to be publicly publication of this notice will be the petitioner’s property, financial, or disclosed in your comment submission. considered in making any final other interest in the proceeding; and (4) The NRC will post all comment determination. the possible effect of any decision or submissions at http:// Normally, the Commission will not order which may be entered in the www.regulations.gov as well as enter the issue the amendment until the proceeding on the petitioner’s interest. comment submissions into ADAMS. expiration of 60 days after the date of In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), The NRC does not routinely edit publication of this notice. The the petition must also set forth the comment submissions to remove Commission may issue the license specific contentions which the identifying or contact information. amendment before expiration of the 60- petitioner seeks to have litigated in the If you are requesting or aggregating day period provided that its final proceeding. Each contention must comments from other persons for determination is that the amendment consist of a specific statement of the submission to the NRC, then you should involves no significant hazards issue of law or fact to be raised or inform those persons not to include consideration. In addition, the controverted. In addition, the petitioner identifying or contact information that Commission may issue the amendment must provide a brief explanation of the they do not want to be publicly prior to the expiration of the 30-day bases for the contention and a concise disclosed in their comment submission. comment period if circumstances statement of the alleged facts or expert Your request should state that the NRC change during the 30-day comment opinion which support the contention does not routinely edit comment period such that failure to act in a and on which the petitioner intends to submissions to remove such information timely way would result, for example in rely in proving the contention at the before making the comment derating or shutdown of the facility. If hearing. The petitioner must also submissions available to the public or the Commission takes action prior to the provide references to the specific entering the comment into ADAMS. expiration of either the comment period sources and documents on which the or the notice period, it will publish in petitioner intends to rely to support its II. Background the Federal Register a notice of position on the issue. The petition must Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the issuance. If the Commission makes a include sufficient information to show Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended final no significant hazards that a genuine dispute exists with the (the Act), the NRC is publishing this consideration determination, any applicant or licensee on a material issue regular biweekly notice. The Act hearing will take place after issuance. of law or fact. Contentions must be requires the Commission to publish The Commission expects that the need limited to matters within the scope of notice of any amendments issued, or to take this action will occur very the proceeding. The contention must be proposed to be issued, and grants the infrequently. one which, if proven, would entitle the Commission the authority to issue and petitioner to relief. A petitioner who A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing make immediately effective any fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 and Petition for Leave To Intervene amendment to an operating license or CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one combined license, as applicable, upon a Within 60 days after the date of contention will not be permitted to determination by the Commission that publication of this notice, any persons participate as a party. such amendment involves no significant (petitioner) whose interest may be Those permitted to intervene become hazards consideration, notwithstanding affected by this action may file a request parties to the proceeding, subject to any the pendency before the Commission of for a hearing and petition for leave to limitations in the order granting leave to a request for a hearing from any person. intervene (petition) with respect to the intervene. Parties have the opportunity action. Petitions shall be filed in to participate fully in the conduct of the III. Notice of Consideration of Issuance accordance with the Commission’s hearing with respect to resolution of of Amendments to Facility Operating ‘‘Agency Rules of Practice and that party’s admitted contentions, Licenses and Combined Licenses and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR part 2. Interested including the opportunity to present Proposed No Significant Hazards persons should consult a current copy evidence, consistent with the NRC’s Consideration Determination of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC’s regulations regulations, policies, and procedures. The Commission has made a are accessible electronically from the Petitions must be filed no later than proposed determination that the NRC Library on the NRC’s website at 60 days from the date of publication of following amendment requests involve http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- this notice. Petitions and motions for no significant hazards consideration. collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of leave to file new or amended Under the Commission’s regulations in the regulations is available at the NRC’s contentions that are filed after the § 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Public Document Room, located at One deadline will not be entertained absent Regulations (10 CFR), this means that White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 a determination by the presiding officer

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16892 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

that the filing demonstrates good cause an oral or written statement of his or her www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR position on the issues but may not getting-started.html. Once a participant 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition otherwise participate in the proceeding. has obtained a digital ID certificate and must be filed in accordance with the A limited appearance may be made at a docket has been created, the filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic any session of the hearing or at any participant can then submit Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this prehearing conference, subject to the adjudicatory documents. Submissions document. limits and conditions as may be must be in Portable Document Format If a hearing is requested, and the imposed by the presiding officer. Details (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF Commission has not made a final regarding the opportunity to make a submissions is available on the NRC’s determination on the issue of no limited appearance will be provided by public website at http://www.nrc.gov/ significant hazards consideration, the the presiding officer if such sessions are site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A Commission will make a final scheduled. filing is considered complete at the time determination on the issue of no the document is submitted through the B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) significant hazards consideration. The NRC’s E-Filing system. To be timely, an final determination will serve to All documents filed in NRC electronic filing must be submitted to establish when the hearing is held. If the adjudicatory proceedings, including a the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 final determination is that the request for hearing and petition for p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. amendment request involves no leave to intervene (petition), any motion Upon receipt of a transmission, the E- significant hazards consideration, the or other document filed in the Filing system time-stamps the document Commission may issue the amendment proceeding prior to the submission of a and sends the submitter an email notice and make it immediately effective, request for hearing or petition to confirming receipt of the document. The notwithstanding the request for a intervene, and documents filed by E-Filing system also distributes an email hearing. Any hearing would take place interested governmental entities that notice that provides access to the after issuance of the amendment. If the request to participate under 10 CFR document to the NRC’s Office of the final determination is that the 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance General Counsel and any others who amendment request involves a with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR have advised the Office of the Secretary significant hazards consideration, then 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at that they wish to participate in the any hearing held would take place 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E- proceeding, so that the filer need not before the issuance of the amendment Filing process requires participants to serve the document on those unless the Commission finds an submit and serve all adjudicatory participants separately. Therefore, imminent danger to the health or safety documents over the internet, or in some applicants and other participants (or of the public, in which case it will issue cases to mail copies on electronic their counsel or representative) must an appropriate order or rule under 10 storage media. Detailed guidance on apply for and receive a digital ID CFR part 2. making electronic submissions may be certificate before adjudicatory A State, local governmental body, found in the Guidance for Electronic documents are filed so that they can Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC obtain access to the documents via the agency thereof, may submit a petition to website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/ E-Filing system. the Commission to participate as a party e-submittals.html. Participants may not A person filing electronically using under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition submit paper copies of their filings the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system should state the nature and extent of the unless they seek an exemption in may seek assistance by contacting the petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. accordance with the procedures NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk The petition should be submitted to the described below. through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located Commission no later than 60 days from To comply with the procedural on the NRC’s public website at http:// the date of publication of this notice. requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- The petition must be filed in accordance days prior to the filing deadline, the submittals.html, by email to with the filing instructions in the participant should contact the Office of [email protected], or by a toll- ‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ the Secretary by email at free call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC section of this document, and should [email protected], or by telephone Electronic Filing Help Desk is available meet the requirements for petitions set at 301–415–1677, to (1) request a digital between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern forth in this section, except that under identification (ID) certificate, which Time, Monday through Friday, 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local allows the participant (or its counsel or excluding government holidays. governmental body, or Federally representative) to digitally sign Participants who believe that they recognized Indian Tribe, or agency submissions and access the E-Filing have a good cause for not submitting thereof does not need to address the system for any proceeding in which it documents electronically must file an standing requirements in 10 CFR is participating; and (2) advise the exemption request, in accordance with 2.309(d) if the facility is located within Secretary that the participant will be 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, submitting a petition or other filing stating why there is good cause for local governmental body, Federally- adjudicatory document (even in not filing electronically and requesting recognized Indian Tribe, or agency instances in which the participant, or its authorization to continue to submit thereof may participate as a non-party counsel or representative, already holds documents in paper format. Such filings under 10 CFR 2.315(c). an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). must be submitted by: (1) First class If a hearing is granted, any person Based upon this information, the mail addressed to the Office of the who is not a party to the proceeding and Secretary will establish an electronic Secretary of the Commission, U.S. is not affiliated with or represented by docket for the hearing in this proceeding Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a party may, at the discretion of the if the Secretary has not already Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: presiding officer, be permitted to make established an electronic docket. Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or a limited appearance pursuant to the Information about applying for a (2) courier, express mail, or expedited provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person digital ID certificate is available on the delivery service to the Office of the making a limited appearance may make NRC’s public website at http:// Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16893

Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Description of amendment request: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. The amendments would modify a significant reduction in the margin of Participants filing adjudicatory Technical Specification (TS) 3.5.2, safety? documents in this manner are Response: No. ECCS [Emergency Core Cooling This LAR proposes administrative non- responsible for serving the document on System]—Operating’’; TS 3.6.6, technical changes only. The proposed all other participants. Filing is ‘‘Containment Spray System’’; TS 3.7.5, changes do not alter the manner in which considered complete by first-class mail ‘‘Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System’’; safety limits, limiting safety systems settings as of the time of deposit in the mail, or TS 3.7.6, ‘‘Component Cooling Water or limiting conditions for operation are by courier, express mail, or expedited (CCW) System’’; TS 3.7.7, ‘‘Nuclear determined. The safety analysis acceptance delivery service upon depositing the Service Water System (NSWS)’’; TS criteria are not affected by these changes. The document with the provider of the 3.7.9, ‘‘Control Room Area Ventilation proposed changes will not result in plant service. A presiding officer, having operation in a configuration outside the System (CRAVS)’’; TS 3.7.11, ‘‘Auxiliary design basis. The proposed changes do not granted an exemption request from Building Filtered Ventilation Exhaust adversely affect systems that respond to using E-Filing, may require a participant System (ABFVES)’’; TS 3.8.1, ‘‘AC safety shutdown the plant and to maintain or party to use E-Filing if the presiding [Alternate Current] Sources— the plant in a safe shutdown condition. officer subsequently determines that the Operating’’; and TS 3.8.4, ‘‘DC [Direct Given the above discussion, it is concluded reason for granting the exemption from Current] Sources—Operating,’’ to the proposed amendment does not involve a use of E-Filing no longer exists. remove expired TS footnotes. significant reduction in the safety margin. Documents submitted in adjudicatory Additionally, the amendments would The NRC staff has reviewed the proceedings will appear in the NRC’s fix an editorial error in Section 3.0, ‘‘SR licensee’s analysis and, based on this electronic hearing docket which is [Surveillance Requirement] review, it appears that the three available to the public at https:// APPLICABILITY,’’ specifically, SR standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded 3.0.5. satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff pursuant to an order of the Commission Basis for proposed no significant proposes to determine that the or the presiding officer. If you do not hazards consideration determination: amendment request involves no have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the significant hazards consideration. as described above, click cancel when licensee has provided its analysis of the Attorney for licensee: Kate B. Nolan, the link requests certificates and you issue of no significant hazards Deputy General Counsel, Duke Energy will be automatically directed to the consideration, which is presented Carolinas, LLC, 550 South Tryon NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where below: Street—DEC45A Charlotte, NC 28202– you will be able to access any publicly- 1802. available documents in a particular 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. hearing docket. Participants are consequences of an accident previously Markley. requested not to include personal evaluated? Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC and Exelon privacy information, such as social Response: No. Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. security numbers, home addresses, or This LAR [license amendment request] 50–333, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear personal phone numbers in their filings, proposes administrative non-technical Power Plant, Oswego County, New unless an NRC regulation or other law changes only. These proposed changes do not York. requires submission of such adversely affect accident initiators or Date of amendment request: March 7, information. For example, in some precursors nor alter the design assumptions, 2019. A publicly-available version is in conditions, or configurations of the facility. ADAMS under Accession No. instances, individuals provide home The proposed changes do not alter or prevent addresses in order to demonstrate the ability of structures, systems, and ML19066A251. proximity to a facility or site. With components (SSCs) to perform their intended Description of amendment request: respect to copyrighted works, except for function to mitigate the consequences of an The amendment would revise the James limited excerpts that serve the purpose initiating event within the assumed limits. A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant of the adjudicatory filings and would Given the above discussion, it is concluded Technical Specification requirements constitute a Fair Use application, the proposed amendment does not regarding ventilation system testing in participants are requested not to include significantly increase the probability or accordance with Technical consequences of an accident previously Specifications Task Force (TSTF) copyrighted materials in their evaluated. submission. 2. Does the proposed amendment create Traveler, TSTF–522, Revision 0, ‘‘Revise For further details with respect to the possibility of a new or different kind of Ventilation System Surveillance these license amendment application(s), accident from any accident previously Requirements to Operate for 10 Hours see the application for amendment evaluated? per Month’’ (ADAMS Accession No. which is available for public inspection Response: No. ML100890316). The NRC approved in ADAMS and at the NRC’s PDR. For This LAR proposes administrative non- TSTF–522, Revision 0, as part of the additional direction on accessing technical changes only. The proposed consolidated line item improvement changes will not alter the design information related to this document, requirements of any Structure, System or process on September 20, 2012 (77 FR see the ‘‘Obtaining Information and Component (SSC) or its function during 58421). Submitting Comments’’ section of this accident conditions. No new or different Basis for proposed no significant document. accidents result from the proposed changes. hazards consideration determination: The changes do not involve a physical As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket alteration of the plant or any changes in licensee has provided its analysis of the Nos. 50–369 and 50–370, McGuire methods governing normal plant operation. issue of no significant hazards Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, The changes do not alter assumptions made consideration, which is presented Mecklenburg County, North Carolina in the safety analysis. Given the above discussion, it is concluded below: Date of amendment request: February the proposed amendment does not create the 1. Does the proposed amendment involve 5, 2019. A publicly-available version is possibility of a new or different kind of a significant increase in the probability or in ADAMS under Accession No. accident from any accident previously consequences of an accident previously ML19042A117. evaluated. evaluated?

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16894 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Response: No. Attorney for licensee: Donald P. installed), a change in the method of plant The proposed change replaces an existing Ferraro, Assistant General Counsel, operation, or new operator actions. The Surveillance Requirement to operate the SGT Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 200 proposed changes do not introduce failure [Standby Gas Treatment] System equipped Exelon Way, Suite 305, Kennett Square, modes that could result in a new accident, with electric heaters for a continuous 10-hour and the proposed changes do not alter period every 31 days with a requirement to PA 19348. assumptions made in the safety analysis. The operate the systems for 15 continuous NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. proposed changes remove ERO positions no minutes with heaters operating. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, longer credited or considered necessary in The system is not an accident initiator and Docket No. 50–244, R. E. Ginna Nuclear support of Emergency Plan implementation. therefore, these changes do not involve a Power Plant, Wayne County, New York Therefore, the proposed changes to the significant increase in the probability of an Date of amendment request: January Ginna Emergency Plan do not create the accident. The proposed system and filter 15, 2019. A publicly-available version is possibility of a new or different kind of testing change is consistent with current in ADAMS under Accession No. accident from any accident previously regulatory guidance for the system and will ML19017A136. evaluated. continue to assure that the system performs Description of amendment request: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve the design function which may include a significant reduction in a margin of safety? mitigating accidents. Thus, the change does The amendment would revise the emergency response organization (ERO) Response: No. not involve a significant increase in the Margin of safety is associated with consequences of an accident. positions identified in the Emergency confidence in the ability of the fission Therefore, it is concluded that this change Plan for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor does not involve a significant increase in the Plant. coolant system pressure boundary, and probability or consequences of an accident Basis for proposed no significant containment structure) to limit the level of previously evaluated. hazards consideration determination: radiation dose to the public. 2. Does the proposed amendment create As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the The proposed changes do not adversely the possibility of a new or different kind of licensee has provided its analysis of the affect existing plant safety margins or the accident from any accident previously issue of no significant hazards reliability of the equipment assumed to evaluated? operate in the safety analyses. There are no Response: No. consideration, which is presented below: changes being made to safety analysis The proposed change replaces an existing assumptions, safety limits, or limiting safety Surveillance Requirement to operate the SGT The NRC staff has reviewed the system settings that would adversely affect System for a continuous 10-hour period licensee’s analysis and, based on this plant safety as a result of the proposed every 31 days with a requirement to operate review, it appears that the three changes. Margins of safety are unaffected by the system for 15 continuous minutes with standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are the proposed changes to the ERO staffing. heaters operating. satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff The proposed changes are associated with The change proposed for the ventilation proposes to determine that the the Ginna Emergency Plan staffing and do system does not change any system not impact operation of the plant or its operations or maintenance activities. Testing amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. response to transients or accidents. The requirements will be revised and will proposed changes do not affect the Technical continue to demonstrate that the Limiting 1. Does the proposed amendment involve Specifications. The proposed changes do not Conditions for Operation are met, and the a significant increase in the probability or involve a change in the method of plant system components are capable of consequences of an accident previously operation, and no accident analyses will be performing their intended safety functions. evaluated? affected by the proposed changes. Safety The change does not create new failure Response: No. analysis acceptance criteria are not affected modes or mechanisms and no new accident The proposed changes to the Ginna by these proposed changes. The proposed precursors are generated. Emergency Plan do not increase the changes to the Emergency Plan will continue Therefore, it is concluded that this change probability or consequences of an accident. to provide the necessary onsite ERO response does not create the possibility of a new or The proposed changes do not impact the staff. different kind of accident from any accident function of plant Structures, Systems, or Therefore, the proposed changes to the previously evaluated. Components (SSCs). The proposed changes Ginna Emergency Plan do not involve a 3. Does the proposed amendment involve do not affect accident initiators or accident significant reduction in a margin of safety. a significant reduction in a margin of safety? precursors, nor do the changes alter design Response: No. assumptions. The proposed changes do not Based on this review, it appears that The proposed change replaces an existing alter or prevent the ability of the onsite ERO the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) Surveillance Requirement to operate the SGT to perform their intended functions to are satisfied. Therefore the NRC staff System equipped with electric heaters for a mitigate the consequences of an accident or proposes to determine that the continuous 10-hour period every 31 days event. The proposed changes remove ERO amendment request involves no with a requirement to operate the systems for positions no longer credited or considered significant hazards consideration. 15 continuous minutes with heaters necessary in support of Emergency Plan operating, if needed. Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, implementation. Associate General Counsel, Exelon The design basis for the ventilation Therefore, the proposed changes to the systems’ heaters is to heat the incoming air Ginna Emergency Plan do not involve a Generation Company, LLC, 4300 which reduces the relative humidity. The significant increase in the probability or Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. heater testing change proposed will continue consequences of an accident previously NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. to demonstrate that the heaters are capable of evaluated. IV. Notice of Issuance of Amendments heating the air and will perform their design 2. Does the proposed amendment create function. The proposed change is consistent the possibility of a new or different kind of to Facility Operating Licenses and with regulatory guidance. accident from any accident previously Combined Licenses The NRC staff has reviewed the evaluated? During the period since publication of licensee’s analysis and, based on this Response: No. the last biweekly notice, the review, it appears that the three The proposed changes have no impact on Commission has issued the following the design, function, or operation of any standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are plant SSCs. The proposed changes do not amendments. The Commission has satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff affect plant equipment or accident analyses. determined for each of these proposes to determine that the The proposed changes do not involve a amendments that the application amendment request involves no physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new complies with the standards and significant hazards consideration. or different type of equipment will be requirements of the Atomic Energy Act

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16895

of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the are listed in the Safety Evaluation and did not change the NRC staff’s Commission’s rules and regulations. enclosed with the amendments. original proposed no significant hazards The Commission has made appropriate Renewed Facility Operating License consideration determination as findings as required by the Act and the Nos. NPF–41, NPF–51, and NPF–74: The published in the Federal Register. Commission’s rules and regulations in amendments approved allocated The Commission’s related evaluation 10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in response time verification usage for a of the amendment is contained in a the license amendment. specific set of replacement components Safety Evaluation dated March 29, 2019. A notice of consideration of issuance in lieu of directly measured response No significant hazards consideration of amendment to facility operating time testing. comments received: No. Date of initial notice in Federal license or combined license, as Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Register: July 31, 2018 (83 FR 36973). applicable, proposed no significant Docket No. STN50–455, Byron Station, The supplemental letters dated October hazards consideration determination, Unit No. 2, Ogle County, Illinois and opportunity for a hearing in 12, 2018, and January 31, 2019, connection with these actions, was provided additional information that Date of amendment request: March 8, published in the Federal Register as clarified the application, did not expand 2018, as supplemented by letters dated indicated. the scope of the application as originally July 2, 2018; December 18, 2018; and Unless otherwise indicated, the noticed, and did not change the NRC January 16, 2019. Brief description of amendment: The Commission has determined that these staff’s original proposed no significant amendment revised Technical amendments satisfy the criteria for hazards consideration determination as Specification (TS) 4.2.1 to authorize use categorical exclusion in accordance published in the Federal Register. of two lead test assemblies containing a with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant The Commission’s related evaluation limited number of accident tolerant fuel to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental of the amendments is contained in a lead test rods during Byron Station, Unit impact statement or environmental Safety Evaluation dated April 3, 2019. No. 2, refueling cycles 22, 23, and 24. assessment need be prepared for these No significant hazards consideration The lead test assemblies are non- amendments. If the Commission has comments received: No. limiting under steady state reactor prepared an environmental assessment Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. conditions and will comply with fuel under the special circumstances 50–400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power limits specified in the core operating provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has Plant, Unit 1, Wake County, North limits report and TSs under all made a determination based on that Carolina operational conditions. assessment, it is so indicated. Date of amendment request: October Date of issuance: April 3, 2019. For further details with respect to the 19, 2017, as supplemented by letters Effective date: As of the date of action see (1) the applications for dated January 11, 2018, and September issuance and shall be implemented amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) 19, 2018. prior to startup with the lead test the Commission’s related letter, Safety Brief description of amendment: The assemblies. Evaluation and/or Environmental amendment revised the Renewed Amendment No: 207. A publicly- Assessment as indicated. All of these Facility Operating License to authorize available version is in ADAMS under items can be accessed as described in revision of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Accession No. ML19038A017; the ‘‘Obtaining Information and Power Plant Updated Final Safety documents related to this amendment Submitting Comments’’ section of this Analysis Report to incorporate the are listed in the related Safety document. process based on the Tornado Missile Evaluation enclosed with the Arizona Public Service Company, et al., Risk Evaluator Methodology described amendment. Docket Nos. STN 50–528, STN 50–529, in its application, as supplemented. Renewed Facility Operating License and STN 50–530, Palo Verde Nuclear This methodology will only be applied No. NPF–66: The amendment revised Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and to discovered conditions where tornado the Renewed Facility Operating License 3, Maricopa County, Arizona missile protection is not currently and TSs. provided and cannot be used to avoid Date of initial notice in Federal Date of application for amendments: providing tornado missile protection in Register: November 6, 2018 (83 FR May 25, 2018, as supplemented by the plant modification process. 55573). The supplements dated July 2, letters dated October 12, 2018, and Date of issuance: March 29, 2019. 2018, and December 18, 2018, provided January 31, 2019. Effective date: As of the date of additional information that clarified the Brief description of amendments: The issuance and shall be implemented application, did not expand the scope of amendments documented approval of within 90 days of issuance. the application as originally noticed, elimination of periodic response time Amendment No.: 169. A publicly- and did not change the NRC staff’s testing for a specific pressure available version is in ADAMS under original proposed no significant hazards transmitter, consistent with the Palo Accession No. ML18347A385; consideration determination as Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit documents related to this amendment published in the Federal Register. The Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Technical are listed in the Safety Evaluation supplement dated January 16, 2019, Specifications. enclosed with the amendment. changed the scope of the application as Date of issuance: April 3, 2019. Renewed Facility Operating License originally noticed by eliminating the Effective date: As of the date of No. NPF–63: The amendment revised license condition and requesting a issuance and shall be implemented the Renewed Facility Operating License. change to TS 4.2.1. The change in scope within 30 days from the date of Date of initial notice in Federal and the updated proposed significant issuance. Register: February 13, 2018 (83 FR hazards consideration was published in Amendment Nos.: 208 (Unit 1), 208 6221). The supplemental letter dated the Federal Register on February 1, (Unit 2), and 208 (Unit 3). A publicly- September 19, 2018, provided 2019 (84 FR 1240). available version is in ADAMS under additional information that clarified the The Commission’s related evaluation Accession No. ML19070A218. application, did not expand the scope of of the amendment is contained in a Documents related to these amendments the application as originally noticed, Safety Evaluation dated April 3, 2019.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16896 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

No significant hazards consideration NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC, NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, comments received: No. Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301, Point Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301, Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Florida Power & Light Company, Docket Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc Nos. 50–250 and 50–251, Turkey Point County, Wisconsin County, Wisconsin Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Date of amendment request: July 30, Miami-Dade County, Florida Date of amendment request: March 2018. 31, 2017, as supplemented by letters Date of amendment request: October Brief description of amendments: The dated April 12, 2018 (two); May 29, 17, 2018; as supplemented by letters amendments revised the Point Beach 2018; August 30, 2018; and March 13, dated October 24, 2018; December 3, Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Technical 2019. 2018; and January 31, 2019. Specifications (TSs), consistent with Brief description of amendments: The NRC-approved Technical Specifications Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Point Beach Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–547, amendments modified the Renewed Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, operating Revision 1, ‘‘Clarification of Rod Facility Operating Licenses by revising licenses by adding a license condition to Position Requirements.’’ The paragraph 3.D, ‘‘Transition License resolve construction truss design code amendments provide time to repair rod Conditions,’’ to eliminate reliance on nonconformances. The amendments movement failures that do not affect rod NRC approval of the Flowserve Reactor approved a risk-informed approach to operability, correct conflicts between Coolant Pump (RCP) Seal Topical resolve legacy design code the TSs, increase consistency between Report as a condition of Turkey Point nonconformances associated with the subject TSs, and improve the format Nuclear Generating’s transition to construction trusses in the containment and presentation. National Fire Protection Association buildings of Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Date of issuance: March 27, 2019. Standard 805, and instead documented Units 1 and 2, following the guidance in Effective date: As of the date of the guidance outlined in NRC-approved issuance and shall be implemented Regulatory Guide 1.174, Revision 2, ‘‘An Topical Report WCAP–16175–P–A, within 90 days of issuance. Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Revision 0, ‘‘Model for Failure of RCP Amendment Nos.: 264 (Unit 1) and Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions Seals Given Loss of Seal Cooling in CE 267 (Unit 2). A publicly-available on Plant-Specific Changes to the [Combustion Engineering] NSSS version is in ADAMS under Accession Licensing Basis,’’ issued May 2011. [Nuclear Steam Supply System] Plants.’’ No. ML19052A544; documents related A non-proprietary version of WCAP– Date of issuance: March 26, 2019. to these amendments are listed in the 16175–P–A, Revision 0, can be found in Effective date: As of the date of Safety Evaluation enclosed with the ADAMS under Accession No. issuance and shall be implemented in amendments. ML071130383. accordance with the requirements Renewed Facility Operating License specified in paragraphs 4.I and 4.H of Nos. DPR–24 and DPR–27: The Date of issuance: March 27, 2019. amendments revised the Renewed Renewed Facility Operating License Effective date: As of the date of Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Nos. DPR–24 and DPR–27, respectively. issuance and shall be implemented Date of initial notice in Federal within 30 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 263 (Unit 1) and Register: November 6, 2018 (83 FR 266 (Unit 2). A publicly-available Amendment Nos.: 286 (Unit No. 3) 55575). version is in ADAMS under Accession and 280 (Unit No. 4). A publicly- The Commission’s related evaluation No. ML18345A110; documents related of the amendments is contained in a available version is in ADAMS under to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation dated March 27, 2019. Accession No. ML19064A903; Safety Evaluation enclosed with the No significant hazards consideration documents related to these amendments amendments. comments received: No. are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, Docket Nos. DPR–24 and DPR–27: The No. 50–443, Seabrook Station, Unit No. Renewed Facility Operating License amendments revised the Renewed 1, Rockingham County, New Hampshire Nos. DPR–31 and DPR–41: The Facility Operating Licenses. amendments revised the Renewed Date of amendment request: March Facility Operating Licenses. Date of initial notice in Federal 16, 2018. Register: June 19, 2017 (82 FR 27890). Description of amendment request: Date of initial notice in Federal The supplemental letters dated April 12, The amendment revised the frequencies Register: December 26, 2018 (83 FR 2018 (two); May 29, 2018; August 30, for performing the relative pressure 66318). The supplemental letters dated 2018; and March 13, 2019, provided measurement and the assessment of the December 3, 2018, and January 31, 2019, additional information that clarified the control room envelope boundary provided additional information that application, did not expand the scope of required by Technical Specification clarified the application, did not expand the application as originally noticed, 6.7.6.l, ‘‘Control Room Envelope the scope of the application as originally and did not change the NRC staff’s Habitability Program.’’ noticed, and did not change the NRC original proposed no significant hazards Date of issuance: March 29, 2019. staff’s original proposed no significant consideration determination as Effective date: As of the date of hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. issuance and shall be implemented published in the Federal Register. within 90 days of issuance. The Commission’s related evaluation The Commission’s related evaluation Amendment No.: 160. A publicly- of the amendments is contained in a of the amendments is contained in a available version is in ADAMS under Safety Evaluation dated March 26, 2019. Safety Evaluation dated March 27, 2019. Accession No. ML19065A215; No significant hazards consideration documents related to this amendment No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. are listed in the Safety Evaluation comments received: No. enclosed with the amendment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16897

Renewed Facility Operating License Brief description of amendments: The reference to performing dose assessment No. NPF–86: The amendment revised amendments revised the Renewed using containment pressure indication. the Renewed Facility Operating License Facility Operating Licenses by changing Date of issuance: April 1, 2019. and Technical Specifications. license conditions associated with the Effective date: As of the date of Date of initial notice in Federal fire protection program controlled by 10 issuance and shall be implemented Register: July 3, 2018 (83 FR 31186). CFR 50.48(c), ‘‘National Fire Protection within 180 days from the date of The Commission’s related evaluation Association Standard NFPA 805.’’ The issuance. of the amendment is contained in a amended license conditions incorporate Amendment No.: 220. A publicly- Safety Evaluation dated March 29, 2019. changes made to Table S–2, ‘‘Plant available version is in ADAMS under No significant hazards consideration Modifications Committed,’’ in Accession No. ML19052A546; comments received: No. Tennessee Valley Authority letter dated documents related to this amendment PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50– October 18, 2018, as supplemented by are listed in the Safety Evaluation 354, Hope Creek Generating Station, letters dated February 13, 2019, and enclosed with the amendment. Salem County, New Jersey March 8, 2019, which describes Renewed Facility Operating License Date of amendment request: April 13, modifications necessary to transition No. NPF–42. The amendment revised 2018, as supplemented by two letters into full compliance with 10 CFR the Wolf Creek Generating Station dated October 17, 2018. 50.48(c). Radiological Emergency Response Plan. Brief description of amendment: The Date of issuance: April 2, 2019. Date of initial notice in Federal amendment revised Hope Creek Effective date: As of the date of Register: July 3, 2018 (83 FR 31187). Generating Station Technical issuance and shall be implemented The supplemental letter dated Specification 3.8.3.1, ‘‘Distribution— immediately. November 19, 2018, provided additional Operating,’’ to increase the alternating Amendment Nos.: 307 (Unit 1), 330, information that clarified the current inverters allowed outage time (Unit 2), and 290 (Unit 3). A publicly- application, did not expand the scope of from 24 hours to 7 days. The change available version is in ADAMS under the application as originally noticed, was based on application of the Hope Accession No. ML19037A137; and did not change the NRC staff’s Creek Generating Station probabilistic documents related to these amendments original proposed no significant hazards risk assessment in support of a risk- are listed in the Safety Evaluation consideration determination as informed extension and on additional enclosed with the amendments. published in the Federal Register. considerations and compensatory Renewed Facility Operating License The Commission’s related evaluation actions. Nos. DPR–33, DPR–52, and DPR–68: The of the amendment is contained in a Date of issuance: March 27, 2019. amendments revised the Renewed Safety Evaluation dated April 1, 2019. Effective date: As of the date of Facility Operating Licenses. No significant hazards consideration issuance and shall be implemented Federal comments received: No. within 60 days of the date of issuance. Date of initial notice in Amendment No.: 215. A publicly- Register: December 18, 2018 (83 FR Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day available version is in ADAMS under 64897). The supplemental letters dated of April, 2019 Accession No. ML19065A156; February 13, 2019, and March 8, 2019, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. documents related to this amendment provided additional information that Kathryn M. Brock, are listed in the Safety Evaluation clarified the application, did not expand Deputy Director, Division of Operating enclosed with the amendment. the scope of the application as originally Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Renewed Facility Operating License noticed, and did not change the NRC Regulation. No. NPF–57: The amendment revised staff’s original proposed no significant [FR Doc. 2019–07933 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] the Renewed Facility Operating License hazards consideration determination as BILLING CODE 7590–01–P and Technical Specifications. published in the Federal Register. Date of initial notice in Federal The Commission’s related evaluation Register: June 19, 2018 (83 FR 28462). of the amendments is contained in a NUCLEAR REGULATORY Two supplemental letters dated October Safety Evaluation dated April 2, 2019. COMMISSION No significant hazards consideration 17, 2018, provided additional [NRC–2019–0100] information that clarified the comments received: No. application, did not expand the scope of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Safety Related Concrete Structures for the application as originally noticed, Corporation, Docket No. 50–482, Wolf Nuclear Power Plants (Other Than and did not change the NRC staff’s Creek Generating Station, Unit 1, Coffey Reactor Vessels and Containments) original proposed no significant hazards County, Kansas consideration determination as AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory published in the Federal Register. Date of amendment request: May 9, Commission. The Commission’s related evaluation 2018, as supplemented by letter dated ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request of the amendment is contained in a November 19, 2018. for comment. Safety Evaluation dated March 27, 2019. Brief description of amendment: The No significant hazards consideration amendment revised the Wolf Creek SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory comments received: No. Generating Station Radiological Commission (NRC) is issuing for public Emergency Response Plan to (1) reduce comment draft regulatory guide (DG), Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket the number of required emergency DG–1283, ‘‘Safety Related Structures for Nos. 50–259, 50–260, and 50–296, response organization positions, (2) Nuclear Power Plants (Other than Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, standardize activation times for the Reactor Vessels and Containments).’’ and 3, Limestone County, Alabama technical support center to 75 minutes, This proposed guide, revision 3, of RG Date of amendment request: October (3) replace the current full-time normal 1.142, of the same name, was revised to 18, 2018, as supplemented by letters work hours licensed medical endorse an updated version of American dated February 13, 2019, and March 8, practitioner position with on-shift first Concrete Institute code (ACI) 349–2013, 2019. aid responders, and (4) remove ‘‘Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16898 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Related Concrete Structures and available documents online in the DG–1283 is proposed revision 3 of RG Commentary.’’ ADAMS Public Document collection at 1.142 of the same name. This revision DATES: Submit comments by June 24, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ of the guide (Revision 3) was updated to 2019. Comments received after this date adams.html. To begin the search, select endorse, with certain exceptions, ACI will be considered if it is practical to do ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For 349–13, ‘‘Code Requirements for so, but the NRC is able to ensure problems with ADAMS, contact the Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete consideration only for comments NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) Structures and Commentary,’’ except for reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– received on or before this date. Appendix D, ‘‘Anchoring to Concrete.’’ 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ Although a time limit is given, Appendix D to ACI 349–13 is separately nrc.gov. The DG–1283 is available in comments and suggestions in endorsed by RG 1.199, ‘‘Anchoring ADAMS under Accession No. connection with items for inclusion in Components and Structural Supports in ML16172A240. guides currently being developed or Concrete’’. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and improvements in all published guides purchase copies of public documents at III. Backfitting and Issue Finality are encouraged at any time. the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One As discussed in the ‘‘Implementation’’ ADDRESSES: You may submit comments White Flint North, 11555 Rockville section of DG–1283, the NRC has no by any of the following methods (unless Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. current intention to impose this draft this document describes a different B. Submitting Comments regulatory guide on holders of current method for submitting comments on a operating licenses or combined licenses. specific subject): Please include Docket ID NRC–2019– • Accordingly, the issuance of this draft Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 0100 in your comment submission, in regulatory guide, if finalized, would not http://www.regulations.gov and search order to ensure that the NRC is able to constitute ‘‘backfitting’’ as defined in for Docket ID NRC–2019–0100. Address make your comment submission section 50.109(a)(1) of title 10 of the questions about NRC dockets IDs in available to the public in this docket. Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) of Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; The NRC cautions you not to include the Backfit Rule or be otherwise telephone: 301–287–9127; email: identifying or contact information that inconsistent with the applicable issue [email protected]. For technical you do not want to be publicly finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. questions, contact the individual(s) disclosed in your comment submission. This draft regulatory guide may be listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION The NRC posts all comment applied to applications for operating CONTACT section of this document. submissions at http:// • licenses and combined licenses Mail comments to: Office of www.regulations.gov as well as enters docketed by the NRC as of the date of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– the comment submissions into ADAMS. issuance of the final regulatory guide, as A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory The NRC does not routinely edit well as future applications for operating Commission, Washington, DC 20555– comment submissions to remove licenses and combined licenses 0001, ATTN: Program Management, identifying or contact information. submitted after the issuance of the Announcements and Editing Staff. If you are requesting or aggregating regulatory guide. Such action would not For additional direction on obtaining comments from other persons for constitute backfitting as defined in 10 information and submitting comments, submission to the NRC, then you should CFR 50.109(a)(1) or be otherwise see ‘‘Obtaining Information and inform those persons not to include inconsistent with the applicable issue Submitting Comments’’ in the identifying or contact information that finality provision in 10 CFR part 52, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of they do not want to be publicly inasmuch as such applicants or this document. disclosed in their comment submission. potential applicants are not within the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Your request should state that the NRC scope of entities protected by the Backfit Madhumita Sircar, telephone: 301–415– does not routinely edit comment Rule or the relevant issue finality 1804; email: [email protected], submissions to remove such information provisions in 10 CFR part 52. and Edward O’Donnell, telephone: 301– before making the comment submissions available to the public or Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day 415–3317; email: Edward.Odonnell@ of April, 2019. nrc.gov. Both are staff members of the entering the comment submissions into For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, ADAMS. Thomas H. Boyce, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, II. Additional Information Washington, DC 20555–0001. Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic The NRC is issuing for public Issues Branch, Division of Engineering, Office SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comment a DG in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory of Nuclear Regulatory Research. I. Obtaining Information and Guide’’ series. This series was [FR Doc. 2019–08093 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Submitting Comments developed to describe and make BILLING CODE 7590–01–P available to the public information A. Obtaining Information regarding methods that are acceptable to Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019– the NRC staff for implementing specific 0100 when contacting the NRC about parts of the NRC’s regulations, RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD the availability of information regarding techniques that the staff uses in Sunshine Act Meetings this action. You may obtain publically- evaluating specific issues or postulated available information related to this events, and data that the staff needs in TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., April 30, action, by any of the following methods: its review of applications for permits 2019. • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to and licenses. PLACE: http://www.regulations.gov and search The DG, entitled, ‘‘Safety Related 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, for Docket ID NRC–2019–0100. Concrete Structures for Nuclear Power Illinois 60611. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Plants (Other than Reactor Vessels and STATUS: Closed. Access and Management System Containments),’’ is temporarily MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: (1) Internal (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly identified by its task number, DG–1283. Personnel Matter.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16899

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: concerning the purpose of and basis for month. However, the EOMs are p.m.- Stephanie Hillyard, Secretary to the the proposed rule change and discussed settled. Board, Phone No. 312–751–4920. any comments it received on the The Exchange now proposes to amend Dated: April 19, 2019. proposed rule change. The text of these Supplementary Material .07(c) to ISE Stephanie Hillyard, statements may be examined at the Rule 2009 so that the duration of the pilot program for these nonstandard Secretary to the Board. places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set expirations will be through November 4, [FR Doc. 2019–08323 Filed 4–19–19; 4:15 pm] forth in sections A, B, and C below, of 2019. The Exchange continues to have BILLING CODE 7905–01–P the most significant aspects of such sufficient systems capacity to handle statements. p.m.-settled options on broad-based indexes with nonstandard expirations SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s dates and has not encountered any COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and issues or adverse market effects as a Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule result of listing them. Additionally, [Release No. 34–85672; File No. SR–ISE– Change 2019–11] there is continued investor interest in 1. Purpose these products. The Exchange will make Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq public on its website any data and ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and ISE filed a proposed rule change for the listing and trading on the Exchange, analysis it submits to the Commission Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed under the pilot program. Rule Change To Extend the Pilot on a twelve month pilot basis, of p.m.- Period for the Exchange’s settled options on broad-based indexes 2. Statutory Basis 5 Nonstandard Expirations Pilot with nonstandard expirations dates. The Exchange believes that its Program The pilot program permits both Weekly proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) Expirations and End of Month (‘‘EOM’’) of the Act,7 in general, and furthers the April 17, 2019. expirations similar to those of the a.m.- objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,8 Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the settled broad-based index options, in particular, in that its designed to Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the except that the exercise settlement value 1 2 promote just and equitable principles of ‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, of the options subject to the pilot are trade, to remove impediments to and notice is hereby given that on April 10, based on the index value derived from perfect the mechanism of a free and 2019, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘ISE’’ or the the closing prices of component stocks. open market and a national market ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities This pilot was subsequently extended system, and, in general to protect and Exchange Commission (the 6 through May 6, 2019. investors and the public interest. The ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule Supplementary Material .07(a) to ISE Exchange believes the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II Rule 2009 provides that the Exchange change will protect investors and the below, which Items have been prepared may open for trading Weekly public interest by providing the by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the Expirations on any broad-based index Exchange, the Commission and proposal as a ‘‘non-controversial’’ eligible for standard options trading to investors the benefit of additional time proposed rule change pursuant to expire on any Monday, Wednesday, or to analyze nonstandard expiration Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Friday (other than the third Friday-of- options. By extending the pilot program, Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.4 The the-month or days that coincide with an investors may continue to benefit from Commission is publishing this notice to EOM expiration). Weekly Expirations a wider array of investment solicit comments on the proposed rule are subject to all provisions of Exchange opportunities. Additionally, both the change from interested persons. Rule 2009 and are treated the same as Exchange and the Commission may options on the same underlying index I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s continue to monitor the potential for that expire on the third Friday of the Statement of the Terms of Substance of adverse market effects of p.m.- expiration month. Unlike the standard the Proposed Rule Change settlement on the market, including the monthly options, however, Weekly underlying cash equities market, at the The Exchange proposes to a proposal Expirations are p.m.-settled. [sic] to extend the pilot period for the Pursuant to Supplementary Material expiration of these options. Exchange’s nonstandard expirations .07(b) to ISE Rule 2009(b) the Exchange B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s pilot program, currently set to expire on may open for trading End of Month Statement on Burden on Competition May 6, 2019. (‘‘EOM’’) Expirations on any broad- The Exchange does not believe that The text of the proposed rule change based index eligible for standard is available on the Exchange’s website at the proposed rule change will impose options trading to expire on the last any burden on competition not http://ise.cchwallstreet.com/, at the trading day of the month. EOMs are principal office of the Exchange, and at necessary or appropriate in furtherance subject to all provisions of Rule 2009 of the purposes of the Act. Options with the Commission’s Public Reference and treated the same as options on the Room. nonstandard expirations would be same underlying index that expire on available for trading to all market II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the third Friday of the expiration participants. Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82458 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Change (January 8, 2018), 83 FR 1636 (January 12, 2018) Statement on Comments on the (approving SR–ISE–2017–111) (Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Received From In its filing with the Commission, the Proposed Rule Change To Establish a Nonstandard Members, Participants, or Others Exchange included statements Expirations Pilot Program). 6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85030 No written comments were either (February 1, 2019), 84 FR 2633 (February 7, 2019) 1 solicited or received. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). (approving SR–ISE–2019–01) (Notice of Filing and 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). To Extend the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). Program). 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16900 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

III. Date of Effectiveness of the to determine whether the proposed rule For the Commission, by the Division of Proposed Rule Change and Timing for change should be approved or Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Commission Action disapproved. authority.14 Jill M. Peterson, Because the proposed rule change IV. Solicitation of Comments does not: (i) Significantly affect the Assistant Secretary. protection of investors or the public Interested persons are invited to [FR Doc. 2019–08105 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] interest; (ii) impose any significant submit written data, views, and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P burden on competition; and (iii) become arguments concerning the foregoing, operative for 30 days from the date on including whether the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE which it was filed, or such shorter time change is consistent with the Act. COMMISSION as the Commission may designate, it has Comments may be submitted by any of become effective pursuant to Section the following methods: [Release No. 34–85673; File No. SR–ICC– 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and 2019–004] subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b–4 Electronic Comments thereunder.10 Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE • Use the Commission’s internet A proposed rule change filed Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing of pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Proposed Rule Change, Security- Act 11 normally does not become rules/sro.shtml); or Based Swap Submission, or Advance operative for 30 days after the date of its • Send an email to rule-comments@ Notice Relating to ICC’s Model filing. However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 12 sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Validation Framework permits the Commission to designate a ISE–2019–11 on the subject line. shorter time if such action is consistent April 17, 2019. Paper Comments with the protection of investors and the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the public interest. The Exchange has asked • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Send paper comments in triplicate ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 the Commission to waive the 30-day to Secretary, Securities and Exchange operative delay so that investors may notice is hereby given that on April 5, Commission, 100 F Street NE, 2019, ICE Clear Credit LLC (‘‘ICC’’) filed continue to trade nonstandard Washington, DC 20549–1090. expiration options listed by the with the Securities and Exchange Exchange as part of the pilot program on All submissions should refer to File Commission the proposed rule change, an uninterrupted basis. The Number SR–ISE–2019–11. This file security-based swap submission, or Commission believes that waiving the number should be included on the advance notice as described in Items I, 30-day operative delay is consistent subject line if email is used. To help the II and III below, which Items have been with the protection of investors and the Commission process and review your prepared by ICC. The Commission is public interest as it will allow the pilot comments more efficiently, please use publishing this notice to solicit program to continue uninterrupted, only one method. The Commission will comments on the proposed rule change, thereby avoiding investor confusion that post all comments on the Commission’s security-based swap submission, or could result from a temporary internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ advance notice from interested persons. interruption in the pilot program. rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Accordingly, the Commission hereby submission, all subsequent Terms of Substance of the Proposed waives the operative delay and amendments, all written statements Rule Change, Security-Based Swap designates the proposed rule change with respect to the proposed rule Submission, or Advance Notice operative upon filing.13 change that are filed with the The principal purpose of the At any time within 60 days of the Commission, and all written proposed rule change is to revise the filing of the proposed rule change, the communications relating to the ICC Model Validation Framework. Commission summarily may proposed rule change between the These revisions do not require any temporarily suspend such rule change if Commission and any person, other than changes to the ICC Clearing Rules it appears to the Commission that such those that may be withheld from the (‘‘Rules’’). action is necessary or appropriate in the public in accordance with the public interest, for the protection of provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the investors, or otherwise in furtherance of available for website viewing and Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the the purposes of the Act. If the printing in the Commission’s Public Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Commission takes such action, the Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Swap Submission, or Advance Notice Washington, DC 20549 on official Commission shall institute proceedings In its filing with the Commission, ICC business days between the hours of included statements concerning the 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the purpose of and basis for the proposed 10 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule19b– filing also will be available for rule change, security-based swap 4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to inspection and copying at the principal give the Commission written notice of its intent to submission, or advance notice and office of the Exchange. All comments file the proposed rule change, along with a brief discussed any comments it received on received will be posted without change. description and text of the proposed rule change, the proposed rule change, security- at least five business days prior to the date of filing Persons submitting comments are based swap submission, or advance of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time cautioned that we do not redact or edit as designated by the Commission. The Exchange notice. The text of these statements may personal identifying information from has satisfied this requirement. be examined at the places specified in 11 comment submissions. You should 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). Item IV below. ICC has prepared 12 submit only information that you wish 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), 13 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day to make available publicly. All operative delay, the Commission also has submissions should refer to File considered the proposed rule’s impact on 14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See Number SR–ISE–2019–11 and should be 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). submitted on or before May 14, 2019. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16901

and (C) below, of the most significant certain percentage as a Materiality A safeguarding of securities and funds aspects of these statements. Model Change. which are in the custody or control of The proposed revisions to the the clearing agency or for which it is (A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the ‘Documentation Requirements’ section responsible; and to comply with the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the relate to the Model Inventory, which is provisions of the Act and the rules and Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based maintained by the ICC Risk Department regulations thereunder. ICC believes Swap Submission, or Advance Notice and contains key information about all that the proposed rule change is (a) Purpose Model Components and Model Changes. consistent with the requirements of the The Model Validation Framework ICC proposes revisions to its Model Act and the rules and regulations specifies documentation requirements Validation Framework. ICC believes thereunder applicable to ICC, in for the type of information maintained 4 such revisions will facilitate the prompt particular, to Section 17(A)(b)(3)(F) , in the Model Inventory. ICC proposes and accurate clearance and settlement of because ICC believes that the proposed updates to the documentation rule change will promote the prompt securities transactions and derivative requirements to include retired Model agreements, contracts, and transactions and accurate clearance and settlement of Components and to remove information securities transactions, derivatives for which it is responsible. The considered not relevant for purposes of proposed revisions are described in agreements, contracts, and transactions, the Model Inventory. and contribute to the safeguarding of detail as follows. The proposed updates to the The Model Validation Framework sets securities and funds associated with ‘Independent Initial Validation’ section security-based swap transactions in forth ICC’s model validation procedures. relate to the priority scale used by Through the model validation ICC’s custody or control, or for which independent validators. The Model ICC is responsible. The Model procedures, ICC determines the Validation Framework requires appropriateness of changes to the risk Validation Framework provides independent initial validators to classify assurances as to the suitability of modeling components (‘‘Model their findings based on a priority scale, Components’’) of ICC’s risk management changes to Model Components and the consisting of high, medium, and low appropriateness of the configuration and system and the appropriateness of the priority ratings. ICC proposes to amend configuration and calibration of ICC’s calibration of ICC’s risk management the low priority rating to allow ICC, in system, including the appropriateness of risk management system. ICC’s consultation with the Risk Committee, proposed changes consist of risk requirements. The proposed to take no action with respect to the changes to the Model Validation clarification updates related to the corresponding item if it does not reflect classification of Model Components, Framework provide additional detail a potential deficiency. and transparency regarding ICC’s model documentation requirements, the ICC proposes clarifying changes to the validation procedures, which enhance priority scale used by independent ‘Independent Periodic Review’ section. ICC’s approach to identifying potential validators, and the annual validation of ICC proposes to include additional Model Components and related information regarding how it tracks the weaknesses in ICC’s risk management practices. ICC proposes to make such annual validation of Model Components system by providing a process for changes effective following Commission and related practices. The proposed reviewing and enhancing ICC’s risk approval of the proposed rule change. changes specify that independent management system. Moreover, ICC ICC proposes to revise the ‘Risk validators perform periodic reviews of believes that having policies and Management System Models’ section to Model Components and related procedures that clearly and accurately account for Model Components that are practices at least every twelve months document ICC’s model validation no longer utilized. Currently, the Model and that ICC relies on the date of the procedures are an important component Validation Framework notes new Model engagement letter to track this twelve to the effectiveness of ICC’s risk Components, which consider risk month requirement. As part of the management system, which promotes drivers that are not currently included independent periodic review, the Model the prompt and accurate clearance and in the risk management system, and Validation Framework also directs settlement of securities transactions, enhancements to Model Components, independent validators to classify their derivatives agreements, contracts, and which improve upon the methodologies findings based on the priority scale. ICC transactions and the safeguarding of used by the risk management system to proposes amendments to the low securities and funds which are in the consider a given risk driver or drivers priority rating to note that custody or control of ICC or for which (collectively, ‘‘Model Change’’). ICC corresponding items may reflect it is responsible. As such, the proposed proposes to amend the Model deficiencies that create immaterial risks rule change is designed to promote the Validation Framework to also consider and that ICC, in consultation with the prompt and accurate clearance and retired Model Components, which are Risk Committee, may take no action settlement of securities transactions, no longer utilized in the risk with respect to the corresponding item derivatives agreements, contracts, and management system. if it does not reflect a potential transactions and to contribute to the In the ‘Model Change Qualification deficiency. safeguarding of securities and funds and Materiality’ section, ICC proposes to associated with security-based swap include a quantitative measure to define (b) Statutory Basis transactions in ICC’s custody or control, certain Model Changes. ICC classifies Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 3 or for which ICC is responsible within Model Changes as either Materiality A requires, among other things, that the the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of or Materiality B, depending on how rules of a clearing agency be designed to the Act.5 substantially the Model Change affects promote the prompt and accurate In addition, the proposed rule change the risk management system’s clearance and settlement of securities is consistent with the relevant assessment of risk for the related risk transactions, and to the extent requirements of Rule 17Ad–22.6 Rule driver or drivers. ICC proposes to applicable, derivative agreements, characterize any Model Change that contracts and transactions; to assure the 4 Id. leads to a decrease/increase of the total 5 Id. pre-funded financial resources over a 3 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 6 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16902 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

17Ad–22(b)(2) 7 requires ICC to minimum, a default by the two CP consistent with the requirements of Rule establish, implement, maintain and families to which it has the largest 17Ad–22(d)(8).15 enforce written policies and procedures exposures in extreme but plausible (B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on reasonably designed to use margin market conditions, consistent with the Burden on Competition requirements to limit its credit requirements of Rule 17Ad–22(b)(3).10 exposures to participants under normal Rule 17Ad–22(b)(4) 11 requires ICC to ICC does not believe the proposed market conditions and use risk-based establish, implement, maintain and rule change would have any impact, or models and parameters to set margin enforce written policies and procedures impose any burden, on competition. requirements and review such margin reasonably designed to provide for an The proposed changes to ICC’s Model requirements and the related risk-based annual model validation consisting of Validation Framework will apply models and parameters at least monthly. evaluating the performance of the uniformly across all market participants. As described above, the Model clearing agency’s margin models and the Therefore, ICC does not believe the Validation Framework sets forth ICC’s related parameters and assumptions proposed rule change imposes any model validation procedures, which associated with such models by a burden on competition that is provide assurances as to the qualified person who is free from inappropriate in furtherance of the appropriateness of changes to Model influence from the persons responsible purposes of the Act. Components; the appropriateness of the for the development or operation of the configuration and calibration of ICC’s (C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on models being validated. The proposed Comments on the Proposed Rule risk management system, including changes to the Model Validation through ongoing monitoring and Change, Security-Based Swap Framework require independent Submission, or Advance Notice validation; and the use of independent validators to perform periodic reviews initial and annual validations. Such Received From Members, Participants or of Model Components and related procedures serve to promote the Others practices at least every twelve months soundness of Model Components and to and include additional detail regarding Written comments relating to the ensure that ICC’s risk management tracking the annual validation of Model proposed rule change have not been system is effective and appropriate in Components and related practices, solicited or received. ICC will notify the addressing the risks associated with thereby ensuring that ICC provide for an Commission of any written comments clearing security based swap-related annual model validation consisting of received by ICC. portfolios. Namely, the Model evaluating the performance of ICC’s Validation Framework provides a III. Date of Effectiveness of the margin models and the related process for continually reviewing and Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based enhancing ICC’s risk management parameters and assumptions associated Swap Submission, or Advance Notice system, including risk requirements, with such models by a qualified person and Timing for Commission Action who is free from influence from the thereby promoting ICC’s use of margin Within 45 days of the date of requirements to limit its credit persons responsible for the development or operation of the models being publication of this notice in the Federal exposures to participants under normal Register or within such longer period market conditions and ICC’s use of risk- validated, consistent with Rule 17Ad– 12 up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may based models and parameters to set 22(b)(4). 13 designate if it finds such longer period margin requirements and review such Rule 17Ad–22(d)(8) requires ICC to to be appropriate and publishes its margin requirements and the related establish, implement, maintain and reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which risk-based models and parameters at enforce written policies and procedures the self-regulatory organization least monthly, consistent with Rule reasonably designed to have governance consents, the Commission will: 8 arrangements that are clear and 17Ad–22(b)(2). (A) By order approve or disapprove Rule 17Ad–22(b)(3) 9 requires ICC to transparent to fulfill the public interest such proposed rule change, or establish, implement, maintain and requirements in Section 17A of the enforce written policies and procedures Act.14 The Model Validation Framework (B) institute proceedings to determine reasonably designed to maintain clearly assigns and documents whether the proposed rule change sufficient financial resources to responsibility and accountability for should be disapproved. withstand, at a minimum, a default by oversight of the Model Validation IV. Solicitation of Comments the two Clearing Participant (‘‘CP’’) Framework and the performance of families to which it has the largest model validation procedures. The Interested persons are invited to exposures in extreme but plausible proposed revisions allow ICC, in submit written data, views, and market conditions. The Model consultation with the Risk Committee, arguments concerning the foregoing, Validation Framework supports ICC’s to take no action with respect to certain including whether the proposed rule ability to maintain sufficient risk items from independent validator change, security-based swap requirements and enhances ICC’s reports. As such, the governance submission, or advance notice is approach to identifying potential arrangements in the Model Validation consistent with the Act. Comments may weaknesses in the risk management Framework are clear and transparent, be submitted by any of the following system by requiring ICC to review and such that information relating to the methods: improve its risk management system, assignment of responsibilities and the Electronic Comments including through the use of requisite involvement of ICC personnel, • Use the Commission’s internet independent initial and annual ICC departments, the Risk Committee, comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ validations, thereby ensuring that ICC and the Board is clearly documented, continues to maintain sufficient rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ financial resources to withstand, at a 10 Id. 11 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(4). sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 7 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(2). 12 Id. ICC–2019–004 on the subject line. 8 Id. 13 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(8). 9 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(3). 14 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. 15 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(8).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16903

Paper Comments SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE set forth in sections A, B, and C below, COMMISSION of the most significant parts of such Send paper comments in triplicate to statements. Secretary, Securities and Exchange [Release No. 34–85674; File No. SR– Commission, 100 F Street NE, NYSENAT–2019–09] A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Washington, DC 20549. Statement of the Purpose of, and the Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule All submissions should refer to File National, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Change Number SR–ICC–2019–004. This file Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed number should be included on the Rule Change To Amend Its Schedule of 1. Purpose subject line if email is used. To help the Fees and Rebates The Exchange proposes to amend its Commission process and review your April 17, 2019. Schedule of Fees and Rebates to (1) comments more efficiently, please use Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the charge a fee for removing liquidity; (2) only one method. The Commission will Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the offer the current adding tier fees post all comments on the Commission’s ‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 (Adding Tier 1, Adding Tier 2, Adding internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ notice is hereby given that, on April 9, Tier 3, Adding Tier 4, and Step Up rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 2019, NYSE National, Inc. (‘‘NYSE Adding Tier) for adding displayed submission, all subsequent National’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with liquidity in Tape B and Tape C amendments, all written statements the Securities and Exchange securities and introduce separate fees with respect to the proposed rule Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the for adding displayed liquidity in Tape A change, security-based swap proposed rule change as described in securities; and (3) replace the current Taking Tier with three Taking Tiers submission, or advance notice that are Items I and II below, which Items have (Tiers 1, 2 and 3). filed with the Commission, and all been prepared by the self-regulatory The Exchange proposes to implement written communications relating to the organization. The Commission is the rule change on April 9, 2019.4 proposed rule change, security-based publishing this notice to solicit swap submission, or advance notice comments on the proposed rule change Proposed Rule Change from interested persons. between the Commission and any Liquidity Removing Fees person, other than those that may be I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s withheld from the public in accordance Statement of the Terms of Substance of The Exchange currently does not with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will the Proposed Rule Change charge a fee for executions on the be available for website viewing and Exchange of orders that remove The Exchange proposes to amend its liquidity from the Exchange in printing in the Commission’s Public Schedule of Fees and Rebates to (1) Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, securities priced at or above $1.00. The charge a fee for removing liquidity; (2) Exchange proposes to charge a fee of Washington, DC 20549, on official offer the current adding tier fees $0.0005 per share for executions on the business days between the hours of (Adding Tier 1, Adding Tier 2, Adding Exchange of orders that remove 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such Tier 3, Adding Tier 4, and Step Up liquidity from the Exchange in filings will also be available for Adding Tier) for adding displayed securities priced at or above $1.00, inspection and copying at the principal liquidity in Tape B and Tape C unless a better tiered credit or fee set office of ICE Clear Credit and on ICE securities and introduce separate fees forth in the Schedule of Fees and Clear Credit’s website at https:// for adding liquidity in Tape A Rebates applies. Hence, for example, an www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation. securities; and (3) replace the current ETP Holder that would meet the All comments received will be posted Taking Tier with three Taking Tiers requirements for the proposed Taking without change. Persons submitting (Tiers 1, 2 and 3). The Exchange Tier 1 credit discussed below would not comments are cautioned that we do not proposes to implement the rule change be charged the proposed fee of $0.0005 redact or edit personal identifying on April 9, 2019. The proposed rule per share for removing liquidity. information from comment submissions. change is available on the Exchange’s Proposed Changes to Adding Tiers You should submit only information website at www.nyse.com, at the that you wish to make available principal office of the Exchange, and at Adding Tier 1 publicly. All submissions should refer the Commission’s Public Reference Room. Under current Adding Tier 1, the to File Number SR–ICC–2019–004 and Exchange offers the following fees for should be submitted on or before May II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s transactions in stocks with a per share 14, 2019. Statement of the Purpose of, and price of $1.00 or more when adding For the Commission, by the Division of Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule liquidity to the Exchange if the ETP Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Change Holder has at least 0.015% of Adding authority.16 In its filing with the Commission, the average daily volume (‘‘ADV’’) as a Jill M. Peterson, self-regulatory organization included percent of US consolidated ADV (‘‘CADV’’): 5 Assistant Secretary . statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change • $0.0020 per share for displayed [FR Doc. 2019–08107 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] and discussed any comments it received orders; BILLING CODE 8011–01–P on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at 4 The Exchange originally filed to amend the the places specified in Item IV below. Schedule of Fees and Rebates on March 29, 2019 The Exchange has prepared summaries, (SR–NYSENAT–2019–06). SR–NYSE–2019–06 [sic] was subsequently withdrawn and replaced by this filing. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 5 The Adding Tier 1 volumes are currently 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. waived. See footnote * in the current Schedule of 16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Fees and Rebates.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16904 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

• $0.0018 per share for orders that set calculated monthly, and 0.10% or more liquidity to the Exchange if the ETP a new Exchange BBO; Adding ADV as a % of US CADV, the Holder quotes at least 5% of the NBBO • $0.0022 per share for non-displayed proposed fees would be as follows: in 600 or more symbols on an average orders; and • $0.0005 per share for adding daily basis, calculated monthly: • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders. displayed orders in Tape B and C • $0.0012 per share for adding The Exchange proposes to retain the securities and $0.0008 per share in Tape displayed orders; current fee structure for Tape B and A securities; • $0.0012 per share for orders that set Tape C securities and introduce new • $0.0005 per share for orders that set a new Exchange BBO; fees for Tape A securities. a new Exchange BBO in Tape B and C • $0.0014 per share for adding non- For transactions in stocks with a per securities and $0.0008 per share in Tape displayed orders; and • share price of $1.00 or more when A securities; $0.0005 per share for MPL orders. adding liquidity to the Exchange if the • $0.0007 per share for adding non- The Exchange proposes to retain the ETP Holder has at least 0.015% of displayed orders in Tape B and C current fee structure for Tape B and Adding ADV as a percent of CADV, the securities and $0.0010 per share in Tape Tape C securities and introduce new proposed fees would be as follows: A securities; and fees for Tape A securities. • $0.0020 per share for displayed • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders, For transactions in stocks with a per orders in Tapes B and C securities and which would remain unchanged. share price of $1.00 or more when $0.0022 per share for displayed orders adding liquidity to the Exchange if the Adding Tier 3 ETP Holder quotes at least 5% of the in Tape A securities; • $0.0018 per share for orders that set Under current Adding Tier 3, the NBBO in 600 or more symbols on an a new Exchange BBO in Tapes B and C Exchange offers the following fees for average daily basis, calculated monthly, the proposed fees would be as follows: securities and $0.0020 per share in Tape transactions in stocks with a per share • $0.0012 per share for adding A securities; price of $1.00 or more when adding displayed orders in Tape B and C • $0.0022 per share for non-displayed liquidity to the Exchange if the ETP securities and $0.0014 per share in Tape orders in Tapes B and C securities and Holder quotes at least 5% of the NBBO in 2000 or more symbols on an average A securities; $0.0024 per share for non-displayed • $0.0012 per share for orders that set daily basis, calculated monthly, and orders in Tape A securities; and a new Exchange BBO in Tape B and C • executes 0.10% or more Adding ADV as $0.0005 per share for MPL orders, securities and $0.0014 per share in Tape which would remain unchanged. a percentage of US CADV: • A securities; $0.0009 per share for adding • $0.0014 per share for adding non- Adding Tier 2 displayed orders; • displayed orders in Tape B and C Under current Adding Tier 2, the $0.0009 per share for orders that set securities and $0.0016 per share in Tape Exchange offers the following fees for a new Exchange BBO; • A securities; and transactions in stocks with a per share $0.0011 per share for adding non- • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders, price of $1.00 or more when adding displayed orders; and which would remain unchanged. liquidity to the Exchange if the ETP • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders. Holder quotes: (i) At least 5% of the The Exchange proposes to retain the Step Up Adding Tier NBBO 6 in 1,000 or more symbols on an current fee structure for Tape B and Under the current Step [sic] Adding average daily basis, calculated monthly, Tape C securities and introduce new Tier, the Exchange offers the following and 0.20% or more Adding ADV as a fees for Tape A securities. fees for transactions in stocks with a per percentage of US CADV, or (ii) at least For transactions in stocks with a per share price of $1.00 or more when 5% of the NBBO in 2,500 or more share price of $1.00 or more when adding liquidity to the Exchange if the symbols on an average daily basis, adding liquidity to the Exchange if the ETP Holder has 0.04% or more of calculated monthly, and 0.10% or more ETP Holder quotes at least 5% of the Adding ADV as a percent of US CADV Adding ADV as a % of US CADV: NBBO in 2000 or more symbols on an over the ETP Holder’s Adding ADV as • $0.0005 per share for adding average daily basis, calculated monthly, a % of US CADV in November 2018: displayed orders; and executes 0.10% or more Adding • $0.0015 per share for adding • $0.0005 per share for orders that set ADV as a percentage of US CADV, the displayed orders; a new Exchange BBO; proposed fees would be as follows: • $0.0015 per share for orders that set • $0.0007 per share for adding non- • $0.0009 per share for adding a new Exchange BBO3 [sic]; displayed orders; and displayed orders in Tape B and C • $0.0017 per share for adding non- • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders. securities and $0.0012 per share in Tape displayed orders; and The Exchange proposes to retain the A securities; • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders. current fee structure for Tape B and • $0.0009 per share for orders that set The Exchange proposes to retain the Tape C securities and introduce new a new Exchange BBO in Tape B and C current fee structure for Tape B and fees for Tape A securities. securities and $0.0012 per share in Tape Tape C securities and introduce new For transactions in stocks with a per A securities; fees for Tape A securities. share price of $1.00 or more when • $0.0011 per share for adding non- For transactions in stocks with a per adding liquidity to the Exchange if the displayed orders in Tape B and C share price of $1.00 or more when ETP Holder quotes: (i) At least 5% of the securities and $0.0014 per share in Tape adding liquidity to the Exchange if the NBBO in 1,000 or more symbols on an A securities; and ETP Holder has 0.04% or more of average daily basis, calculated monthly, • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders, Adding ADV as a percent of US CADV and 0.20% or more Adding ADV as a which would remain unchanged. over the ETP Holder’s Adding ADV as a % of US CADV in November 2018 the percentage of US CADV, or (ii) at least Adding Tier 4 5% of the NBBO in 2,500 or more proposed fees would be as follows: • symbols on an average daily basis, Under current Adding Tier 4, the $0.0015 per share for adding Exchange offers the following fees for displayed orders in Tape B and C 6 See footnote ** in the current Schedule of Fees transactions in stocks with a per share securities and $0.0018 per share in Tape and Rebates. price of $1.00 or more when adding A securities;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16905

• $0.0015 per share for orders that set liquidity. For example, an ETP Holder Tape C securities priced at or above a new Exchange BBO in Tape B and C with at least 0.0125% Adding ADV as $1.00 are reasonable, equitable and not securities and $0.0018 per share in Tape a % of US CADV in a given month unfairly discriminatory, as follows. A securities; would receive a credit of ($0.0018) per The proposed Adding Tier 1, Adding • $0.0017 per share for adding non- share for removing liquidity from the Tier 2, Adding Tier 3, Adding Tier 4 displayed orders in Tape B and C Exchange under proposed Taking Tier 2 and Step Up Adding Tier fees for adding securities and $0.0020 per share in Tape and would not pay the proposed fee of liquidity in Tape B and C securities and A securities; and $0.0005 per share for removing liquidity the proposed Adding Tier 1, Adding • $0.0005 per share for MPL orders, discussed above. Tier 2, Adding Tier 3, Adding Tier 4 which would remain unchanged. The proposed changes are not and Step Up Adding Tier fees for Tape A securities for ETP Holders meeting Proposed Changes to Taking Tiers otherwise intended to address any other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of the current requirements for each tier, Under the current Taking Tier, the any problems that ETP Holders would which the Exchange does not propose to Exchange offers the following credits for have in complying with the proposed change, are reasonable because the transactions in stocks with a per share change. proposed rates would contribute to price of $1.00 or more when removing incent ETP Holders to provide increased liquidity from the Exchange if the ETP 2. Statutory Basis liquidity on the Exchange. Specifically, Holder has at least 50,000 shares of The Exchange believes that the the proposed rates for Tapes B and C, Adding ADV: proposed rule change is consistent with which the Exchange does not propose to • ($0.0020) per share for orders; and Section 6(b) of the Act,7 in general, and change, would continue to provide the • ($0.0002) per share for MPL orders. furthers the objectives of Sections same incentives to ETP Holders to The Exchange proposes to replace the 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,8 in provide liquidity to the Exchange on current Taking Tier with three Taking particular, because it provides for the those tapes while the higher rates for Tiers, as follows. equitable allocation of reasonable dues, Tape A would incentive ETP Holders to Proposed Taking Tier 1 would offer fees, and other charges among its provide additional liquidity on the the same credits as the current Taking members, issuers and other persons Exchange in Tape A securities, both of Tier—($0.0020) per share for orders and using its facilities and does not unfairly which benefit all ETP Holders. The ($0.0002) per share for MPL orders—for discriminate between customers, proposed fees in Tape A securities are transactions in stocks with a per share issuers, brokers or dealers. also equitable and not unfairly price of $1.00 or more when removing discriminatory because those fees would Liquidity Removing Fees liquidity from the Exchange if the ETP be consistent with or lower than the Holder has at least: The Exchange believes that charging • applicable rate on other marketplaces 0.025% Adding ADV as a $0.0005 per share for removing liquidity that charge for adding liquidity. For percentage of US CADV; or from the Exchange will incentivize • example, Cboe BYX charges a standard 0.0125% Adding ADV as a submission of additional liquidity to a fee of $0.0019 per share, and their percentage of US CADV and 0.032% public exchange, thereby promoting lowest fee for adding is $0.0012.10 removing ADV as a percentage of US price discovery and transparency and In addition, the Exchange believes CADV; or enhancing order execution • that the proposed Adding Tier 1, 0.00125% Adding ADV as a opportunities for ETP Holders. Adding Tier 2, Adding Tier 3, Adding percentage of US CADV and 0.25% Specifically, the Exchange believes that Tier 4 and Step Up Adding Tier fees for removing ADV as a percentage of US introducing a charge for removing adding liquidity in Tape B and C CADV. liquidity would incentivize ETP Holders securities and the proposed Adding Tier Under proposed Taking Tier 2, the to send additional liquidity to the 1, Adding Tier 2, Adding Tier 3, Adding Exchange would offer the following Exchange in order to receive a higher Tier 4 and Step Up Adding Tier fees for credits for transactions in stocks with a credit and avoid the proposed fee by Tape A securities fees are equitable and per share price of $1.00 or more when meeting the higher liquidity not unfairly discriminatory as all removing liquidity from the Exchange if requirements for a Taking Tier credit. similarly situated market participants the ETP Holder has at least 0.0125% The Exchange also believes that the will be subject to the same fees on an Adding ADV as a percentage of US proposed fee is equitable because it equal and non-discriminatory basis. CADV: would apply to all similarly situated • ($0.0018) per share for orders; and Proposed Changes to Taking Tiers • ETP Holders. The proposed fee also is ($0.0002) per share for MPL orders, equitable and not unfairly The Exchange believes that the which would remain unchanged. discriminatory because it would be proposed replacement of the current Finally, under proposed Taking Tier consistent with the applicable rate on Taking Tier with three taking tiers for 3, the Exchange would offer the other marketplaces. For example, orders that remove liquidity in following credits for transactions in Investors Exchange charges a Standard securities priced at or above $1.00 are stocks with a per share price of $1.00 or Match Fee of $0.0009 and a Reduced reasonable, equitable and not unfairly more when removing liquidity from the Match Fee of $0.0003.9 discriminatory, as follows. Exchange if the ETP Holder has at least The proposed Taking Tier 1 credits of 50,000 shares of Adding ADV: Proposed Changes to Adding Tiers • ($0.0020) per share for orders that ($0.0010) per share for orders; and The Exchange believes that the remove liquidity and ($0.0002) per • ($0.0002) per share for MPL orders, proposed changes to the tiered adding share for MPL for ETP Holders with at which would remain unchanged. requirements for displayed and non- least (1) 0.025% Adding ADV as a As previously noted, an ETP Holder displayed orders in Tape A, Tape B and percentage of US CADV, or (2) 0.0125% that meets the requirements of either Adding ADV as a percentage of US proposed Taking Tiers 1, 2 or 3 would 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). be eligible for the relevant rate and 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) & (5). 10 See Cboe BYX U.S. Equities Exchange Fee would not be charged the proposed fee 9 See Investors Exchange Fee Schedule, available Schedule, available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/ of $0.0005 per share for removing at https://iextrading.com/trading/fees/. equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16906 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

CADV and 0.032% removing ADV as a deem fee levels at a particular venue to Electronic Comments percentage of US CADV, or (3) be excessive or rebate opportunities • 0.00125% Adding ADV as a percentage available at other venues to be more Use the Commission’s internet of US CADV and 0.25% removing ADV favorable. In such an environment, the comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ as a percentage of US CADV; the Exchange must continually adjust its rules/sro.shtml); or proposed Taking Tier 2 credits of fees and rebates to remain competitive • Send an email to rule-comments@ ($0.0018) per share and ($0.0002) per with other exchanges and with sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– share for MPL for ETP Holders with at alternative trading systems that have NYSENAT–2019–09 on the subject line. least 0.0125% Adding ADV as a % of been exempted from compliance with US CADV; and (3) the proposed Taking the statutory standards applicable to Paper Comments Tier 3 credits of ($0.0010) per share and exchanges. Because competitors are free • Send paper comments in triplicate ($.0002) per share for ETP Holders with to modify their own fees and credits in to Secretary, Securities and Exchange at least 50,000 Adding ADV in securities response, and because market with a per share price of $1.00 or more participants may readily adjust their Commission, 100 F Street NE, when removing liquidity from the order routing practices, the Exchange Washington, DC 20549–1090. Exchange is reasonable, equitable and believes that the degree to which fee All submissions should refer to File not unfairly discriminatory because the changes in this market may impose any Number SR–NYSENAT–2019–09. This proposed fees are in line with the fees burden on competition is extremely file number should be included on the for removing liquidity on other limited. As a result of all of these subject line if email is used. To help the exchanges.11 For example, Cboe BYX considerations, the Exchange does not Commission process and review your offers tiered credits of ($0.0015), believe that the proposed changes will comments more efficiently, please use ($0.0016), and ($0.0017) per share.12 impair the ability of ETP Holders or The Exchange notes that the ($0.0002) only one method. The Commission will competing order execution venues to post all comments on the Commission’s per share credit for taking MPL is maintain their competitive standing in internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ unchanged from the current Taking the financial markets. Tier. rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Finally, the Exchange believes that it C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s submission, all subsequent is subject to significant competitive Statement on Comments on the amendments, all written statements forces, as described below in the Proposed Rule Change Received From with respect to the proposed rule Exchange’s statement regarding the Members, Participants, or Others change that are filed with the burden on competition. No written comments were solicited Commission, and all written For the foregoing reasons, the or received with respect to the proposed communications relating to the Exchange believes that the proposal is rule change. proposed rule change between the consistent with the Act. Commission and any person, other than III. Date of Effectiveness of the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Proposed Rule Change and Timing for those that may be withheld from the Statement on Burden on Competition Commission Action public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of The foregoing rule change is effective the Act,13 the Exchange believes that the available for website viewing and upon filing pursuant to Section printing in the Commission’s Public proposed rule change would not impose 14 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, any burden on competition that is not subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 15 Washington, DC 20549 on official necessary or appropriate in furtherance thereunder. At any time within 60 days business days between the hours of of the purposes of the Act. Instead, the of the filing of such proposed rule Exchange believes that the proposed change, the Commission summarily may 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the changes would encourage the temporarily suspend such rule change if filing also will be available for submission of additional liquidity to a it appears to the Commission that such inspection and copying at the principal public exchange, thereby promoting action is necessary or appropriate in the office of the Exchange. All comments price discovery and transparency and public interest, for the protection of received will be posted without change. enhancing order execution investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Persons submitting comments are opportunities for ETP Holders. The the purposes of the Act. If the cautioned that we do not redact or edit Exchange believes that this could Commission takes such action, the personal identifying information from promote competition between the Commission shall institute proceedings comment submissions. You should Exchange and other execution venues, under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 16 of the Act to submit only information that you wish including those that currently offer determine whether the proposed rule to make available publicly. All similar order types and comparable change should be approved or submissions should refer to File transaction pricing, by encouraging disapproved. Number SR–NYSENAT–2019–09 and additional orders to be sent to the IV. Solicitation of Comments should be submitted on or before May Exchange for execution. 14, 2019. Finally, the Exchange notes that it Interested persons are invited to operates in a highly competitive market submit written data, views, and For the Commission, by the Division of in which market participants can arguments concerning the foregoing, Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 17 readily favor competing venues if they including whether the proposed rule authority. change is consistent with the Act. Jill M. Peterson, 11 See CBOE BYX Exchange Fee Schedule at Comments may be submitted by any of Assistant Secretary. https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/ fee_schedule/byx/. the following methods: [FR Doc. 2019–08102 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 12 See Cboe BYX U.S. Equities Exchange Fee BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Schedule, available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/ 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/. 15 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). 16 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16907

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s ‘‘Member’’ 4 and capitalize references to COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and ‘‘system’’ to reflect the defined term Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule ‘‘System.’’ 5 Finally, cross-references to [Release No. 34–85671; File No. SR–MRX– Change rule numbers will be updated where appropriate. 2019–08] 1. Purpose Rule 722 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq The Exchange proposes to introduce MRX, LLC; Notice of Filing of a Complex Order Functionality on MRX The Exchange proposes to adopt a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt that is identical to the Complex Order new Rule 722, titled ‘‘Complex Orders.’’ Complex Order Functionality Functionality offered today on ISE. The This proposed new rule will: (1) Define Exchange specifically proposes to: (1) various terms related to Complex April 17, 2019. Adopt a new Rule 722, titled ‘‘Complex Orders; (2) indicate the types of Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Orders’’ to describe the functionality; (2) Complex Orders that may be entered Securities Exchange Act of 1934 amend the definition of Professional into the System; (3) describe the (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Order within Section 100 (a)(54) to applicability of various rules (e.g., notice is hereby given that on April 12, account for Complex Orders and add a minimum increments, complex 2019, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (‘‘MRX’’ or definition for Professional Customer strategies and rules regarding ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities within Section 100 (a)(54A); (3) amend internalization); (4) describe the manner and Exchange Commission Rule 702, ‘‘Trading Halts,’’ to account in which complex strategies are (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule for Complex Orders; (4) amend Rule executed; (5) describe complex change as described in Items I and II 710, ‘‘Minimum Trading Increments,’’ to exposure; (6) describe the manner in below, which Items have been prepared account for Complex Orders; (5) amend which Stock Option and Stock-Complex by the Exchange. The Commission is Rule 714, ‘‘Automatic Execution of Orders will be handled; (7) describe publishing this notice to solicit Orders’’ to note a limitation with respect Trade Value Allowance; (8) describe comments on the proposed rule change to the Anti-Internalization protection; various aspects of the Complex Opening from interested persons. (6) amend Rule 715, ‘‘Order Types,’’ to Process; and (9) describe the trading of define two new order types, ‘‘legging Qualified Contingent Cross and I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s orders’’ and ‘‘QCC with Stock Orders,’’ Complex Qualified Contingent Cross Statement of the Terms of Substance of and amend the Ouch to Trade Options Orders. Proposed MRX Rule 722 is the Proposed Rule Change and Specialized Quote Feed protocols; identical to ISE Rule 722. The Exchange proposes to adopt (7) amend the title of Rule 716 from Complex Exposure Complex Order Functionality.3 The ‘‘Block Trades’’ to ‘‘Auction proposed amendments to adopt Mechanisms’’ and introduce a new Proposed Supplementary Material .01 to MRX Rule 722 provides that Members Complex Order Functionality are Complex Facilitation Mechanism and may elect to have their Complex Orders identical to corresponding Nasdaq ISE, Complex Solicited Order Mechanism; that are marketable upon entry exposed LLC (‘‘ISE’’) Rules. (8) adopt a new Nasdaq MRX Spread Feed within Rule 718(a)(5); (9) amend for up to one second before those orders The text of the proposed rule change Rule 720, ‘‘Nullification and are automatically executed. Specifically, is available on the Exchange’s website at Adjustment of Options Transactions the proposed rule describes an auction http://nasdaqmrx.cchwallstreet.com/, at including Obvious Errors’’ to account process whereby Complex Orders that the principal office of the Exchange, and for Complex Orders; (10) amend Rule improve upon the best price for the at the Commission’s Public Reference 721, ‘‘Crossing Orders,’’ to adopt new same complex strategy on the Complex Room. Complex Customer Cross Orders, Order Book upon entry may be exposed for up to one second.6 II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Complex Qualified Contingent Cross Statement of the Purpose of, and Orders, Qualified Contingent Cross Stock Option and Stock-Complex Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Orders with Stock and Complex Orders Change Qualified Contingent Cross with Stock Orders; (11) amend Rule 723 to adopt a Proposed Supplementary Material .02 In its filing with the Commission, the new Complex Price Improvement to MRX Rule 722 describes an Exchange included statements Mechanism; (12) adopt new Rule 724, automated process for the concerning the purpose of and basis for entitled ‘‘Complex Order Risk communication of stock-option orders the proposed rule change and discussed Protections’’ to adopt various Complex by electronically transmitting the orders any comments it received on the Order risk protections; (13) amend the related to the stock leg(s) for execution proposed rule change. The text of these Pricing Schedule within Options 7, on behalf of the parties to the trade. statements may be examined at the Sections 6 and 7 to reflect the new MRX places specified in Item IV below. The data feed at no cost; and (14) and other 4 The term ‘‘Member’’ means an organization that Exchange has prepared summaries, set universal changes. Each change will be has been approved to exercise trading rights discussed below in detail. associated with Exchange Rights. See Rule forth in sections A, B, and C below, of 100(a)(30). the most significant aspects of such Universal Changes 5 The term ‘‘System’’ means the electronic system statements. operated by the Exchange that receives and In addition to the amendments disseminates quotes, executes orders and reports transactions. See Rule 100(a)(63). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). described below, the Exchange proposes 6 A Complex Order improves upon the best price 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. to make several changes throughout its for the same complex strategy on the Complex 3 MRX proposes to amend the Complex Order rules. In particular, the Exchange Order Book if it is a Limit Order to buy priced functionality within Rules 100(a)(54) and (54A); proposes to capitalize references to higher than the best bid, a Limit Order to sell priced 702, 710, 714, 715, 716, 718, 720, 721, 722, 723, and lower than the best offer, or a Market Order to buy 724 (collectively ‘‘Complex Order Functionality’’). ‘‘member’’ to reflect the defined term or sell.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16908 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Trade Value Allowance rule. The Exchange proposes to relocate Electronic Access Member can execute Proposed Supplementary Material .03 the text of Rule 716(a) within current a transaction wherein the Electronic to MRX Rule 722 describes the manner Rule 716(c) and re-letter that Rule as Access Member seeks to facilitate a in which Stock-Option Strategies and 716(a). The Exchange also proposes to block-size Complex Order it represents Stock Complex Strategies would be make clear that the Block Order as agent, and/or a transaction wherein handled when different minimum Mechanism applies only to single-leg the Electronic Access Member solicited trading increments are allowed for the transactions and therefore does not interest to execute against a block-size stock and options legs of such trades. apply to Complex Orders. The Exchange Complex Order it represents as agent. proposes to remove the ‘‘(b)’’ from Rule Proposed MRX Rule 716(c) is identical Complex Opening Process 716 so that the following text will apply to ISE Rule 716(c). to the entirety of Rule 716 and all A Complex Opening Process is Complex Solicited Order Mechanism proposed at Supplementary Material .04 mechanisms within the rule, including to MRX Rule 722. The rule provides that proposed relocated text, ‘‘For purposes MRX proposes to adopt a new after each of the individual component of this Rule, a ‘‘broadcast message’’ Complex Solicited Order Mechanism at legs have opened, or reopened following means an electronic message that is sent proposed MRX Rule 716(e). The a trading halt, Complex Options by the Exchange to all Members, and a Complex Solicited Order Mechanism is Strategies would be opened pursuant to ‘‘Response’’ means an electronic a process by which an Electronic Access the Complex Opening Price message that is sent by Members in Member can attempt to execute Determination described in proposed response to a broadcast message.’’ This Complex Orders it represents as agent Supplementary Material .05 to MRX rule text, as written, is being amended against contra orders that it solicited Rule 722, and Stock-Option Strategies so that it is clear that the rule text according to Rule 716(d). Proposed and Stock-Complex Strategies will be applies to all mechanisms within this MRX Rule 716(e) is identical to ISE Rule opened pursuant to the Complex rule, including the Complex Facilitation 716(e). Additionally, the Exchange Uncrossing Process described in and Solicited Order Mechanisms which proposes to eliminate Supplementary proposed Supplementary Material .06(b) are proposed to be added in Rule 716(b) Material .03, which is currently to MRX Rule 722.7 and (e), respectively, as proposed below. reserved, and .04 to Rule 716, which is Complex Options Strategies are In addition, the Exchange proposes to being relocated as discussed above. The opened pursuant to an Opening Process relocate and expand rule text within Exchange proposes to amend that attempts to execute Complex Supplementary Material .04 to Rule Supplementary Material .05 9 to Rule Orders on the Complex Order Book at a 716 8 to this introductory paragraph so 716 to renumber it .03. The Exchange single price that is within Boundary that with the relocation it also will proposes to renumber Supplementary Prices that are constrained by the NBBO apply to the entire rule. The Exchange Material .06 10 to Rule 716 as .04. The for the individual legs, thereby serving proposes to provide, ‘‘Also for purposes Exchange proposes to eliminate an important price discovery function. of this rule, the time given to Members references to Supplementary Material Proposed Supplementary Material to enter Responses for any of the below .07 and .08 to Rule 716, which are .06(b) to Rule 722 describes the auction mechanisms shall be designated currently reserved. The Exchange Exchange’s process for uncrossing the by the Exchange via circular, but no less proposes to renumber Supplementary Complex Order Book when a resting than 100 milliseconds and no more than Material .09 11 to Rule 716 as .07. As Complex Order that is locked or crossed 1 second.’’ Today, this rule text applies proposed to be amended, the entirety of with other interest becomes executable to all mechanisms within the rule, the the MRX Supplementary Material to during regular trading or as part of the Block Order Mechanism, Facilitation Rule 716 will be identical to the entirety Complex Opening Process. The Mechanism and Solicited Order of the Supplementary Material of ISE Complex Uncrossing Process applies to Mechanisms. As amended, the rule text Rule 716. Complex Options Strategies, Stock- will apply to the proposed Complex Concurrent Auctions Option Strategies, and Stock-Complex Facilitation and Solicited Order Strategies. Mechanisms as well. Proposed MRX The Exchange proposes to adopt new Rule 716(a) and (b) are identical to ISE MRX Rules 716(f) and (g) regarding the Minimum Increments Rule 716(a) and (b). processing of concurrent auctions. The The Exchange proposes to amend Complex Facilitation Mechanism Exchange will not operate multiple MRX Rule 710, ‘‘Minimum Increments,’’ concurrent auctions for a complex to provide the increments for trading in The Exchange proposes to amend strategy. Specifically, proposed MRX complex strategies. Additionally, the MRX Rule 716 to re-letter the Rule 716(f) provides that only one Exchange proposes a minor technical Facilitation Mechanism from ‘‘(d)’’ to Exposure Auction, Complex Price amendment to spell out ‘‘one cent.’’ ‘‘(b).’’ In addition, the Exchange Improvement Mechanism auction, Proposed MRX Rule 710 is identical to proposes to adopt a new Complex Complex Facilitation Mechanism ISE Rule 710. Facilitation Mechanism in new MRX auction, or Complex Solicited Order Rule 716(c). With this proposal, Auction Mechanisms Electronic Access Members may use the 9 Supplementary .05 to Rule 716 prohibits Block Order Mechanism Complex Facilitation Mechanism in Members from utilizing the Solicited Order new rule Rule 716(c) above to execute Mechanism to circumvent MRX Rule 717(d) The Exchange proposes to retitle MRX block-size Complex Orders at a net limiting principal transactions. Rule 716, currently titled ‘‘Block price. The Complex Facilitation 10 Supplementary .06 to Rule 716 permits orders and responses entered into the Facilitation and Trades,’’ as ‘‘Auction Mechanisms,’’ Mechanism is a process by which an because the new title more accurately Solicited Order Mechanisms to receive executions at the mid-price between the standard minimum describes the rule text contained in this 8 Supplementary Material .04 to Rule 716 trading increments for the option series (‘‘Split provides, ‘‘The time given to Members to enter Prices’’). 7 The Complex Uncrossing Process is also used Responses under paragraphs (c)(1), (d)(1) and (e)(1) 11 Supplementary Material .09 to Rule 716 allows during regular trading when a resting Complex shall be designated by the Exchange via circular, orders and responses to be entered into the Block Order that is locked or crossed with other interest but no less than 100 milliseconds and no more than Mechanism and receive executions at penny becomes executable. 1 second.’’ increments.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16909

Mechanism auction, pursuant to part of a qualified contingent trade, as Complex Order Risk Protections proposed Rule 722, Supplementary that term is defined in Supplementary The Exchange proposes to adopt 13 Material .01 or proposed Rule 723(e) or Material .01 to MRX Rule 715. Complex Order Protections at proposed proposed Rule 716(c) and (e), Proposed MRX Rule 721(c), as proposed MRX Rule 724. Proposed MRX Rule 724 respectively, will be ongoing at any to be amended, and proposed Rule is identical to ISE Rule 724. The given time in a Complex Strategy, and 721(d) are identical to ISE Rules 721(c) Complex Order Protections include: such auctions will not queue or overlap and (d) respectively. Price limits, Vertical Spread Protections, in any manner. Proposed MRX Rule Qualified Contingent Cross With Stock Calendar Spread Protections, Butterfly 716(g) describes concurrent complex Spread Protections, Box Spread and single leg auctions. Proposed MRX The Exchange proposes to adopt Protections, Limit Order Spread Rule 716(f) and (g) are identical to ISE Qualified Contingent Cross (‘‘QCC’’) Protections, Size Limitation and Price Rule 716(f) and (g). Orders with Stock at proposed MRX Level Protection. Complex Price Improvement Rule 721(e). The proposal adopts a Price Limits Mechanism definition of QCC with Stock Orders.14 The proposed definition is identical to The Exchange proposes to adopt a The Exchange proposes to amend ISE Rule 722(b)(15). The proposed QCC Price Limits protection at proposed MRX Rule 723 to adopt a new Complex with Stock Order facilitates the MRX Rule 724(a). This protection will Price Improvement Mechanism at execution of the stock component of prevent the legs of a complex strategy proposed MRX Rule 723(e). The Price qualified contingent trades.15 The from trading through the NBBO for the Improvement Mechanism exposes Exchange proposes to adopt rule text at series or any stock component by a paired orders to all Members for a configurable amount calculated as the 12 proposed MRX Rule 721(e) to provide specified period of time to provide an detail explaining how a QCC with Stock lesser of (i) an absolute amount not to opportunity for price improvement. The Order is processed. Proposed MRX Rule exceed $0.10, and (ii) a percentage of Exchange proposes to make the Price 721(e) is identical to ISE Rule 721(e). the NBBO not to exceed 500%, as Improvement Mechanism available for Additionally, the Exchange proposes to determined by the Exchange on a class, the execution of Complex Orders. define QCC with Stock within proposed series, or underlying basis. Proposed MRX Rule 723(e) is identical new Rule 715(t). This defined term is Vertical Spread Protections to ISE Rule 723(e). identical to ISE Rule 715(t). Finally, the The Exchange proposes to adopt a Complex Customer Cross Order Exchange proposes to re-letter the Vertical Spread Protection at proposed definition of Opening Sweep as 715(u), The Exchange proposes to amend MRX Rule 724(b)(1). Pursuant to this as proposed this amendment will make MRX Rule 721, Crossing Orders. The proposal, a Vertical Spread is an order the rule identical to ISE Rule 715(u). Exchange proposes to add a title within to buy a call (put) option and to sell Rule 721(a), ‘‘Customer Cross Orders.’’ another call (put) option in the same 13 Pursuant to current Rule 715(j), Qualified security with the same expiration but at This will distinguish this paragraph Contingent Cross Orders are orders to buy or sell from new proposed Rule 721(b), titled at least 1,000 contracts that are identified as being a higher (lower) strike price at proposed ‘‘Complex Customer Cross Order.’’ The part of a qualified contingent trade, as that term is Rule 724(b)(1). The System will reject Exchange proposes to adopt a new defined in Supplementary Material .01 to Rule 715. Vertical Spread orders when entered The definition of Qualified Contingent Cross trade with a net price of less than zero (minus Customer Complex Cross Orders at is substantively identical to the Commission’s proposed MRX Rule 721(b). With this definition of a Qualified Contingent Transaction a pre-set value) and will prevent the proposal, Complex Orders may be (‘‘QCT’’) for which the Commission, by order, has execution of a Vertical Spread order at entered as Customer Cross Orders, provided trade-through relief in the equities market. a price that is less than zero (minus a which are currently defined in MRX Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57620 (April pre-set value) when entered as a market 4, 2008), 73 FR 19271 (April 9, 2008) (the ‘‘QCT order to sell. The System will also reject Rule 715(i). MRX Rule 721(a), as Release’’). Pursuant to Supplementary Material .01 proposed to be amended, and proposed to Rule 715, a Qualified Contingent Cross trade a Vertical Spread order or quote when MRX Rule 721(b) are identical to ISE must meet the following conditions: (i) At least one entered with a net price greater than the Rules 721(a) and (d) respectively. component must be an NMS Stock; (ii) all the value of the higher strike price minus components must be effected with a product or the lower strike price (plus a pre-set Complex Qualified Contingent Cross price contingency that either has been agreed to by all the respective counterparties or arranged for by value), and will prevent the execution of Orders a broker-dealer as principal or agent; (iii) the a Vertical Spread order at a price that is The Exchange proposes to re-letter execution of one component must be contingent greater than the value of the higher upon the execution of all other components at or strike price minus the lower strike price MRX 721(b) as 721(c) and to add a title near the same time; (iv) the specific relationship ‘‘Qualified Contingent Cross Orders’’ to between the component orders (e.g., the spread (plus a pre-set value) when entered as the rule. The Exchange proposes to between the prices of the component orders) must a Market Order to buy. adopt a new Complex Qualified be determined by the time the contingent order is placed; (v) the component orders must bear a Calendar Spread Protections Contingent Cross Orders (‘‘Complex derivative relationship to one another, represent QCC’’) at proposed MRX Rule 721(d). The Exchange proposes to adopt a different classes of shares of the same issuer, or Calendar Spread Protection at proposed Proposed MRX Rule 721(d) describes involve the securities of participants in mergers or MRX Rule 724(b)(2). Pursuant to this Complex QCC Orders which are with intentions to merge that have been announced or cancelled; and (iv) the transaction must be fully proposal, a Calendar Spread is an order automatically executed upon entry as hedged (without regard to any prior existing to buy a call (put) option with a longer long as certain conditions are satisfied. position) as a result of other components of the expiration and to sell another call (put) Pursuant to current Rule 715(j), contingent trade. Consistent with the QCT Release option with a shorter expiration in the Qualified Contingent Cross Orders are members must demonstrate that the transaction is fully hedged using reasonable risk-valuation same security at the same strike price at orders to buy or sell at least 1,000 methodologies. proposed Rule 724(b)(2). The System contracts that are identified as being 14 See also proposed Rule 722(b)(15). will reject a Calendar Spread order 15 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80090 12 The exposure period shall be no less than 100 (February 22, 2017), 82 FR 12150 (February 28, when entered with a net price of less milliseconds and no more than 1 second. See MRX 2017) (SR–ISE–2017–12) (‘‘QCC with Stock than zero (minus a pre-set value), and Rule 723(c). Notice’’). will prevent the execution of a Calendar

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16910 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Spread order at a price that is less than other exchanges at any price for the Types of Orders zero (minus a pre-set value) when options series. Complex Orders will be The Exchange is proposing to amend entered as a market order to sell. executed at each successive price level MRX Rule 715 to define legging orders until the maximum number of price Butterfly and Box Spread Protections within Rule 715(k) and QCC with Stock levels is reached. On any component leg at proposed Rule 715(t). Proposed MRX The Exchange proposes to adopt a where the maximum number of price Rule 715(k) and (t) are identical to ISE Butterfly Spread Protection at proposed levels has been reached, the protection Rule 715(k) and (t). Additionally, the MRX Rule 724(b)(3) and a Box Spread will be triggered and any balance will be Exchange proposes to re-letter ‘‘Opening Protection at proposed Rule 724(b)(4). canceled. Sweep’’ as ‘‘u’’ and capitalize the term Pursuant to this proposal, a Butterfly ‘‘System’’ which is defined. These spread is a three legged Complex Order Professional Definition proposed changes will make the rule with certain characteristics.16 Pursuant The Exchange proposes to amend the text in MRX Rule 715 identical to ISE to this proposal, a Box spread is a four definition of Professional Orders within Rule 715. legged Complex Order with certain Rule 100(a)(54). Proposed MRX Rule The Exchange proposes to amend the 17 characteristics. Butterfly and Box 100(a)(54) is identical to ISE Rule MRX Supplementary Material .03 to Spreads will be rejected outside of 1(a)(54). Specifically, the Exchange Rule 715 to indicate both ‘‘Ouch to certain parameters to avoid potential proposes to amend the calculation of Trade Options’’ or ‘‘OTTO’’ and the executions at prices that exceed the Professional Orders to include rule text ‘‘Specialized Quote Feed’’ or ‘‘SQF’’ minimum and maximum possible indicating the manner in which protocols may connect, send and receive intrinsic value of the spread by a Complex Orders should be counted. message related to complex instruments. specified amount. With this proposal, a cancel and replace Proposed MRX Supplementary Material Limit Order Price Protection order which replaces a prior order shall .03(b) and (c) to Rule 715 are identical be counted as a second order, or to Supplementary Material .03(b) and (c) MRX proposes to adopt a Limit Order multiple new orders in the case of to ISE Rule 715. Price Protection at MRX Rule 724(c)(1). Complex Order comprising 9 options This protection will limit the amount by legs or more. Additionally, Complex Data Feeds and Trade Information which the net price of an incoming Orders consisting of 8 legs or fewer will The Exchange proposes to adopt a Limit Complex Order to buy may exceed be counted as a single order, and MRX Spread Feed at proposed MRX the net price available from the respecting Complex Orders of 9 Rule 718(a)(5) at no cost as noted in individual options series on the options 18 legs or more, each leg will proposed Options 7, Section 6(iii)(5). Exchange and the national best bid or count as a separate order. Stock orders The Spread Feed contains various offer for any stock leg, and by which the shall not count toward the number of information regarding Complex Orders. net price of an incoming Limit Complex legs. Proposed MRX Rule 718(a)(5) is Order to sell may be below the net price identical to ISE Rule 718(a)(5). available from the individual options Trading Halts Additionally, the Exchange purposes to series on the Exchange and the national The Exchange proposes to amend define the term ‘‘Professional Customer’’ best bid or offer for any stock leg. Limit MRX Rule 702(d)(2) to describe how at proposed MRX Rule 100(a)(54A). The Complex Orders that exceed the pricing Market Complex Orders, which are MRX Spread Feed introduces this term, limit will be rejected. proposed within proposed MRX Rule which exists within ISE Rule Size Limitation 722, will be handled during a trading 100(a)(54A). Proposed MRX Rule halt. Proposed MRX Rule 702 is 100(a)(54A) is identical to ISE Rule MRX proposes to adopt a Size identical to ISE Rule 702. 100(a)(54A). Limitation protection at proposed MRX Rule 724(c)(2) the same as provided for Automatic Execution of Orders Nullification and Adjustment of Options in ISE Rule 724(c)(2). This protection Transactions Including Obvious Errors The Exchange proposes to amend will limit the number of contracts (and MRX Rule 714, ‘‘Automatic Execution of The Exchange proposes to amend shares in the case of a Stock-Option Orders,’’ which lists the various single- MRX Rule 720, titled ‘‘Nullification and Strategy or Stock-Complex Strategy) any legged risk protections available to Adjustment of Options Transactions single leg of an incoming Complex Members. The Exchange proposes to including Obvious Errors’’ which Order may specify. Orders or quotes that exclude Complex Orders from the Anti- permits the Exchange to nullify a exceed the maximum number of Internalization 19 protection. The transaction or adjust the execution price contracts (or shares) will be rejected. Exchange currently provides that Anti- of a transaction for Complex Orders. Price Level Protection Internalization does not apply in any Additionally, the Exchange proposes to renumber current Supplementary MRX proposes to adopt a Price Level auction and proposes to also state that Anti-Internalization functionality shall Material .04 to .06 within Rule 720. Protection at proposed MRX Rule Proposed MRX Rule 720 is identical to 724(c)(3). Pursuant to this proposal, the not apply with respect to Complex Order transactions. Proposed MRX Rule ISE Rule 720 including the Price Level Protection will limit the Supplementary Material. number of price levels at which an 714(b)(3)(A) is identical to ISE Rule incoming Complex Order to sell (buy) 714(b)(3)(A). 2. Statutory Basis will be executed automatically with the The Exchange believes that its bids or offers of each component leg 18 Orders that have nine legs, where one leg is a stock, will be considered one order. Stock orders proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) when there are no bids (offers) from shall not count toward the number of legs. of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 19 Anti-Internalization prevents quotes and orders (the ‘‘Act’’) 20 in general, and furthers 16 This strategy will utilize a combination of entered by Market Makers from executing against the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the either all calls or all puts of the same expiration quotes and orders entered on the opposite side of Act 21 in particular, in that it is designed date in the same underlying to limit risk. the market by the same Market Maker using the 17 This strategy utilizes a combination of put/call same Market Maker identifiers, or alternatively, if pairs of options with the same expiration date in selected by the Member, the same Exchange 20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). the same underlying to limit risk. account number or member firm identifier. 21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16911

to promote just and equitable principles III. Date of Effectiveness of the inspection and copying at the principal of trade, to remove impediments to and Proposed Rule Change and Timing for office of the Exchange. All comments perfect the mechanism for a free and Commission Action received will be posted without change. open market and a national market Within 45 days of the date of Persons submitting comments are system, and, in general, to protect publication of this notice in the Federal cautioned that we do not redact or edit investors and the public interest. MRX’s Register or within such longer period personal identifying information from adoption of Complex Order up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may comment submissions. You should Functionality will allow MRX to designate if it finds such longer period submit only information that you wish compete with other options exchanges to be appropriate and publishes its to make available publicly. All that offer complex functionality.22 The reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which submissions should refer to File Exchange believes that the proposed the self-regulatory organization Number SR–MRX–2019–08 and should be submitted on or before May 14, 2019. rule change will better enable Members consents, the Commission will: and investors to make informed (A) By order approve or disapprove For the Commission, by the Division of decisions regarding the use of Complex such proposed rule change, or Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.25 Orders on the Exchange. As described (B) institute proceedings to determine Jill M. Peterson, more fully above, MRX’s Complex Order whether the proposed rule change Assistant Secretary. Functionality is identical to the should be disapproved. [FR Doc. 2019–08103 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Complex Order Functionality offered IV. Solicitation of Comments today on ISE.23 BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Interested persons are invited to B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s submit written data, views, and Statement on Burden on Competition arguments concerning the foregoing, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE including whether the proposed rule COMMISSION The Exchange does not believe that change is consistent with the Act. [Release No. 34–85678; File No. SR–BOX– the proposed rule change will impose Comments may be submitted by any of 2019–11] any burden on competition that is not the following methods: necessary or appropriate in furtherance Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Electronic Comments of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Exchange notes that it operates in a • Use the Commission’s internet Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed highly competitive market in which comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Rule Change To Amend the Fee market participants can readily direct rules/sro.shtml); or Schedule on the BOX Options Market • order flow to competing venues who Send an email to rule-comments@ LLC (‘‘BOX’’) Facility To Modify Its offer similar functionality. The sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Strategy QOO Order Fee Cap and Exchange believes that offering Complex MRX–2019–08 on the subject line. Rebate Order Functionality on MRX will Paper Comments April 17, 2019. enhance competition among the various • Send paper comments in triplicate Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the markets for Complex Order execution, to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the potentially resulting in more active Commission, 100 F Street NE, ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Complex Order trading on all Washington, DC 20549–1090. notice is hereby given that on April 4, exchanges. The Exchange does not All submissions should refer to File 2019, BOX Exchange LLC (the believe its proposal to offer Complex Number SR–MRX–2019–08. This file ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities Order Functionality will create an number should be included on the and Exchange Commission undue burden on inter-market subject line if email is used. To help the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule competition as various other options Commission process and review your change as described in Items I, II, and markets offer Complex Order comments more efficiently, please use III below, which Items have been functionality.24 only one method. The Commission will prepared by the Exchange. The With respect to intra-market post all comments on the Commission’s Exchange filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the competition, all Members are permitted internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ Act,3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,4 to submit Complex Orders into MRX. rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the which renders the proposal effective Further, the Exchange will uniformly submission, all subsequent upon filing with the Commission. The apply the proposed rules to any Member amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule Commission is publishing this notice to that submits a Complex Order into solicit comments on the proposed rule MRX. change that are filed with the Commission, and all written change from interested persons. C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s communications relating to the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the proposed rule change between the Statement of the Terms of the Substance Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission and any person, other than of the Proposed Rule Change Members, Participants, or Others those that may be withheld from the The Exchange is filing with the public in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission No written comments were either provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be solicited or received. (‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change available for website viewing and to amend the Fee Schedule to amend printing in the Commission’s Public 22 See NYSE American LLC Rule 971.2NY, ISE Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 25 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Rule 722, Phlx Rule 1098, Cboe Interpretations and Washington, DC 20549, on official 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Policies .01 to Cboe Rule 6.41 and MIAX Rule 518. business days between the hours of 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 23 See note 3 above. 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 24 See note 22 above. filing also will be available for 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16912 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

the Fee Schedule [sic] on the BOX proposes to include dividend strategies the other strategies in the BOX Fee Options Market LLC (‘‘BOX’’) options in the daily Strategy QOO Order Fee Schedule are not subject to the same facility. While changes to the fee Cap and Rebate. As such, Floor requirement. As such, the Exchange schedule pursuant to this proposal will Participant transactions will also be believes it is reasonable and appropriate be effective upon filing, the changes will capped at $1,000 for all dividend to separate dividend strategies from the become operative on May 1, 2019. The strategies executed on the same trading other strategies in the BOX Fee text of the proposed rule change is day in the same options class. The Schedule. Further, the Exchange available from the principal office of the Exchange notes that the proposed fee believes that including dividend Exchange, at the Commission’s Public cap is similar to a fee cap at another strategies in the Strategy QOO Order Reference Room and also on the options exchange in the industry.6 rebate is appropriate as Floor Brokers Exchange’s internet website at http:// Further, the Exchange proposes to are eligible to receive a $500 rebate for boxexchange.com. include dividend strategies in the Floor presenting all other strategies to the Broker Strategy QOO Rebate. As BOX Trading Floor. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed, on each trading day, Floor The Exchange believes the proposed Statement of the Purpose of, and Brokers are eligible to receive a $500 fee cap for dividend strategies is Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule rebate for presenting certain Strategy equitable and not unfairly Change QOO Orders on the Trading Floor. The discriminatory because it provides In its filing with the Commission, the rebate will be applied once the $1,000 incentives for all Participants to submit Exchange included statements fee cap is met for dividend strategies these types of strategy orders to the BOX concerning the purpose of and basis for executed on the same trading day in the Trading Floor, which brings increased the proposed rule change and discussed same options class. liquidity and order flow to the floor for any comments it received on the the benefit of all market participants. proposed rule change. The text of these 2. Statutory Basis Further, the Exchange believes that statements may be examined at the The Exchange believes that the including dividend strategies in the places specified in Item IV below. The proposal is consistent with the Strategy QOO Order rebate is equitable Exchange has prepared summaries, set requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, and not unfairly discriminatory as the forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of in general, and Section 6(b)(4) and rebate is available to all Floor Brokers the most significant aspects of such 6(b)(5)of the Act,7 in particular, in that who submit such orders to the BOX statements. it provides for the equitable allocation Trading Floor. of reasonable dues, fees, and other A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s charges among BOX Participants and Statement on Burden on Competition Statement of the Purpose of, and other persons using its facilities and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule does not unfairly discriminate between The Exchange does not believe that Change customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. the proposed rule change will impose 1. Purpose The Exchange believes that including any burden on competition not dividend strategies in Section II.D of the necessary or appropriate in furtherance The Exchange proposes to amend the BOX Fee Schedule is reasonable, as of the purposes of the Act because the Fee Schedule for trading on BOX to another exchange offers fee caps for proposed change applies uniformly to amend Section II.D (Strategy QOO Order dividend strategies.8 On Phlx, all Participants that incur transaction Fee Cap and Rebate). Currently, the Specialist, Market Makers, fees for dividend strategies. Further, Exchange caps fees and offers rebates on Professionals, Firms and Broker-Dealers another options exchange today offers a all short stock interest, reversal, receive a fee cap of $1,500 for a [sic] cap on dividend strategies; therefore, conversion, jelly roll, and box spread dividend, merger and short stock the Exchange believes that the proposal strategies on the BOX Trading Floor. interest strategies executed on the same is consistent with robust competition The Exchange is now proposing to cap trading day in the same options class and does not provide any unnecessary fees and offer a Floor Broker rebate for when such members are trading in their burden on competition. Further, dividend strategy transactions. own proprietary account. The Exchange because Floor Participants pay Floor A dividend strategy is defined as a also notes that the Phlx fee cap is Brokers to execute trades on the transaction done to achieve a dividend broader in that it applies to dividend, Exchange Floor, the Exchange believes arbitrage involving the purchase, sale merger and short stock interest that offering fee caps on dividend and exercise of in-the-money options of strategies collectively. As discussed strategies to Participants executing floor the same class, executed the first herein, the Exchange proposes a transactions and not electronic business day prior to the date on which separate cap for dividend strategies. The executions does not create an the underlying stock goes ex-dividend. Exchange believes this difference is unnecessary burden on competition The Exchange proposes to include this appropriate as dividend strategies must because the fee cap defrays brokerage definition in a footnote in the BOX Fee execute in the same options class where costs associated with executing Schedule in Section II.D. dividend strategy transactions, similar The Exchange now proposes to offer 6 See Nasdaq Phlx LLC (‘‘Phlx’’) Fee Schedule. On to other strategies today. a strategy cap for dividend strategies. Phlx, Specialist, Market Makers, Professionals, The Exchange operates in a highly Today, Floor Participant transactions Firms and Broker-Dealers receive a fee cap of competitive market in which market are capped at $1,000 for all short stock $1,500 for a [sic] dividend, merger and short stock participants can easily and readily interest, reversal, conversion, jelly roll, interest strategies executed on the same trading day in the same options class when such members are direct order flow to competing venues if and box spread strategies executed on trading in their own proprietary account. they deem fee levels at a particular 5 the same trading day. The Exchange 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5). venue to be excessive or rebates to be 8 See supra note 6. The Exchange notes that it is inadequate. Accordingly, the fee cap 5 Short stock interest, reversal, conversion, jelly not including the Phlx requirement that the and Floor Broker rebate for dividend roll and box spread transactions are not included Participant be trading in their own proprietary in the monthly fee cap for Broker Dealers. The account as this is not the BOX strategy fee cap strategies proposed by the Exchange, as Exchange notes that dividend strategies will not be model and is not a requirement for the other described in the proposal, are included in the monthly fee cap for Broker Dealers. strategies on the BOX Fee Schedule. influenced by these robust market forces

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16913

and therefore must remain competitive post all comments on the Commission’s below, which Items have been prepared with fee caps at other venues and internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the therefore must continue to be reasonable rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the proposal as a ‘‘non-controversial’’ and equitably allocated to those submission, all subsequent proposed rule change pursuant to Participants that opt to direct orders to amendments, all written statements Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and the Exchange rather than competing with respect to the proposed rule Rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.4 The venues. change that are filed with the Commission is publishing this notice to Commission, and all written solicit comments on the proposed rule C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s communications relating to the change from interested persons. Statement on Comments on the proposed rule change between the Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission and any person, other than I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Members, Participants, or Others those that may be withheld from the Statement of the Terms of Substance of No written comments were either public in accordance with the the Proposed Rule Change solicited or received. provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be The Exchange proposes to extend the available for website viewing and pilot period for the Exchange’s III. Date of Effectiveness of the printing in the Commission’s Public nonstandard expirations pilot program, Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, currently set to expire on May 6, 2019. Commission Action Washington, DC 20549 on official The text of the proposed rule change The foregoing rule change has become business days between the hours of is available on the Exchange’s website at effective pursuant to Section 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such http://nasdaqphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act 9 and filing also will be available for at the principal office of the Exchange, Rule 19b–4(f)(2) thereunder,10 because inspection and copying at the principal and at the Commission’s Public it establishes or changes a due, or fee. office of the Exchange. All comments Reference Room. At any time within 60 days of the received will be posted without change. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s filing of the proposed rule change, the Persons submitting comments are Statement of the Purpose of, and Commission summarily may cautioned that we do not redact or edit Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule temporarily suspend the rule change if personal identifying information from Change it appears to the Commission that the comment submissions. You should action is necessary or appropriate in the submit only information that you wish In its filing with the Commission, the public interest, for the protection of to make available publicly. All Exchange included statements investors, or would otherwise further submissions should refer to File concerning the purpose of and basis for the purposes of the Act. If the Number SR–BOX–2019–11, and should the proposed rule change and discussed Commission takes such action, the be submitted on or before May 14, 2019. any comments it received on the Commission shall institute proceedings For the Commission, by the Division of proposed rule change. The text of these to determine whether the proposed rule Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated statements may be examined at the should be approved or disapproved. authority.11 places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set IV. Solicitation of Comments Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary. forth in sections A, B, and C below, of Interested persons are invited to the most significant aspects of such [FR Doc. 2019–08106 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] submit written data, views, and statements. arguments concerning the foregoing, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s including whether the proposed rule Statement of the Purpose of, and change is consistent with the Act. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Comments may be submitted by any of COMMISSION Change the following methods: [Release No. 34–85669; File No. SR–Phlx– 1. Purpose Electronic Comments 2019–13] On December 15, 2017, the • Use the Commission’s internet Commission approved a proposed rule comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and change for the listing and trading on the rules/sro.shtml); or Exchange, on a twelve month pilot • Send an email to rule-comments@ Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed basis, of p.m.-settled options on broad- sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Rule Change To Extend the Pilot based indexes with nonstandard BOX–2019–11 on the subject line. Period for the Exchange’s Nonstandard Expirations Pilot expirations dates.5 The pilot program Paper Comments Program permits both Weekly Expirations and • Send paper comments in triplicate End of Month (‘‘EOM’’) expirations April 17, 2019. similar to those of the a.m.-settled to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Commission, 100 F Street NE, broad-based index options, except that Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the the exercise settlement value of the Washington, DC 20549–1090. 1 2 ‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, options subject to the pilot are based on All submissions should refer to File notice is hereby given that on April 10, Number SR–BOX–2019–11. This file 2019, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (‘‘Phlx’’ or the 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). number should be included on the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). subject line if email is used. To help the and Exchange Commission (the 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82341 Commission process and review your ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule (December 15, 2017), 82 FR 60651 (December 21, comments more efficiently, please use change as described in Items I and II 2017) (approving SR–Phlx–2017–79) (Order only one method. The Commission will Approving a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 and Granting Accelerated 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Approval of Amendment No. 2, of a Proposed Rule 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Change To Establish a Nonstandard Expirations 10 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Pilot Program).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16914 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

the index value derived from the closing in particular, in that it is designed to Act 11 normally does not become prices of component stocks. The promote just and equitable principles of operative for 30 days after the date of its Exchange previously filed to extend the trade, to remove impediments to and filing. However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 12 pilot through May 6, 2019.6 perfect the mechanism of a free and permits the Commission to designate a Pursuant to Phlx Rule 1101A(b)(5)(A) open market and a national market shorter time if such action is consistent the Exchange may open for trading system, and, in general to protect with the protection of investors and the Weekly Expirations on any broad-based investors and the public interest. The public interest. The Exchange has asked index eligible for standard options Exchange believes the proposed rule the Commission to waive the 30-day trading to expire on any Monday, change will protect investors and the operative delay so that investors may Wednesday, or Friday (other than the public interest by providing the continue to trade nonstandard third Friday-of- the- month or days that Exchange, the Commission and expiration options listed by the coincide with an EOM expiration). investors the benefit of additional time Exchange as part of the pilot program on Weekly Expirations are be subject to all to analyze nonstandard expiration an uninterrupted basis. The provisions of Exchange Rule 1101A and options. By extending the pilot program, Commission believes that waiving the are treated the same as options on the investors may continue to benefit from 30-day operative delay is consistent same underlying index that expire on a wider array of investment with the protection of investors and the the third Friday of the expiration opportunities. Additionally, both the public interest as it will allow the pilot month. Unlike the standard monthly Exchange and the Commission may program to continue uninterrupted, options, however, Weekly Expirations continue to monitor the potential for thereby avoiding investor confusion that are p.m.-settled. adverse market effects of p.m.- could result from a temporary Similarly, pursuant Rule settlement on the market, including the interruption in the pilot program. 1101A(b)(5)(B) the Exchange may open underlying cash equities market, at the Accordingly, the Commission hereby for trading End of Month (‘‘EOM’’) on expiration of these options. waives the operative delay and any broad-based index eligible for designates the proposed rule change B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s standard options trading to expire on operative upon filing.13 the last trading day of the month. EOMs Statement on Burden on Competition At any time within 60 days of the are subject to all provisions of Rule The Exchange does not believe that filing of the proposed rule change, the 1101A and treated the same as options the proposed rule change will impose Commission summarily may on the same underlying index that any burden on competition not temporarily suspend such rule change if expire on the third Friday of the necessary or appropriate in furtherance it appears to the Commission that such expiration month. However, the EOMs of the purposes of the Act. Options with action is necessary or appropriate in the are p.m.-settled. nonstandard expirations would be public interest, for the protection of The Exchange now proposes to amend available for trading to all market investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Exchange Rule 1101A(b)(5)(C) so that participants. the purposes of the Act. If the the duration of the pilot program for Commission takes such action, the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s these nonstandard expirations will be Commission shall institute proceedings Statement on Comments on the through November 4, 2019. The to determine whether the proposed rule Proposed Rule Change Received From Exchange continues to have sufficient change should be approved or Members, Participants, or Others systems capacity to handle p.m.-settled disapproved. options on broad-based indexes with No written comments were either IV. Solicitation of Comments nonstandard expirations dates and has solicited or received. not encountered any issues or adverse Interested persons are invited to III. Date of Effectiveness of the market effects as a result of listing them. submit written data, views, and Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Additionally, there is continued arguments concerning the foregoing, Commission Action investor interest in these products. The including whether the proposed rule Exchange will make public on its Because the proposed rule change change is consistent with the Act. website any data and analysis it submits does not: (i) Significantly affect the Comments may be submitted by any of to the Commission under the pilot protection of investors or the public the following methods: program. interest; (ii) impose any significant Electronic Comments Finally, the Exchange proposes to burden on competition; and (iii) become • amend Phlx Rule 1101A(b)(3)(d). The operative for 30 days from the date on Use the Commission’s internet Exchange proposes to capitalize the ‘‘d’’ which it was filed, or such shorter time comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or so the cite becomes Phlx Rule as the Commission may designate, it has • 1101A(b)(3)(D). become effective pursuant to Section Send an email to rule-comments@ 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 2. Statutory Basis subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b–4 Phlx–2019–13 on the subject line. The Exchange believes that its thereunder.10 Paper Comments proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) A proposed rule change filed • Send paper comments in triplicate of the Act,7 in general, and furthers the pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,8 to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). Washington, DC 20549–1090. 6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84835 10 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule19b– (December 17, 2018), 83 FR 65773 (December 21, 4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-regulatory organization to 2018) (approving SR–Phlx–2018–80) (Notice of give the Commission written notice of its intent to 11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed file the proposed rule change, along with a brief 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). Rule Change To Amend the Pilot Period for the description and text of the proposed rule change, 13 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day Exchange’s Nonstandard Expirations Pilot at least five business days prior to the date of filing operative delay, the Commission also has Program). of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time considered the proposed rule’s impact on 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). as designated by the Commission. The Exchange efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). has satisfied this requirement. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16915

All submissions should refer to File Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Number SR–Phlx–2019–13. This file (‘‘Clearing Supervision Act’’) 1 and Rule Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the number should be included on the 19b–4(n)(1)(i) 2 under the Securities Advance Notice subject line if email is used. To help the Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’ In its filing with the Commission, Commission process and review your or ‘‘Act’’),3 notice is hereby given that OCC included statements concerning comments more efficiently, please use on March 18, 2019, the Options Clearing the purpose of and basis for the advance only one method. The Commission will Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) filed with the notice and discussed any comments it post all comments on the Commission’s Securities and Exchange Commission received on the advance notice. The text internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ (‘‘Commission’’) an advance notice of these statements may be examined at rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the (‘‘Advance Notice’’) as described in the places specified in Item IV below. submission, all subsequent Items I, II and III below, which Items OCC has prepared summaries, set forth amendments, all written statements have been prepared by OCC. The in sections A and B below, of the most with respect to the proposed rule Commission is publishing this notice to significant aspects of these statements. change that are filed with the solicit comments on the advance notice Commission, and all written (A) Clearing Agency’s Statement on communications relating to the from interested persons. Comments on the Advance Notice proposed rule change between the I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Received from Members, Participants or Commission and any person, other than Terms of Substance of the Advance Others those that may be withheld from the Notice Written comments were not and are public in accordance with the not intended to be solicited with respect provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be This advance notice is in connection to the proposed rule change and none available for website viewing and with proposed changes to OCC’s margin have been received. OCC will notify the printing in the Commission’s Public methodology for futures on indexes Commission of any written comments Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, designed to measure volatilities implied received by OCC. Washington, DC 20549 on official by prices of options on a particular business days between the hours of underlying interest (such indexes being (B) Advance Notices Filed Pursuant to 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the ‘‘Volatility Indexes,’’ and futures Section 806(e) of the Payment, Clearing, filing also will be available for contracts on such Volatility Indexes and Settlement Supervision Act inspection and copying at the principal being ‘‘Volatility Index Futures’’). The Description of the Proposed Change office of the Exchange. All comments proposed methodology enhancements The purpose of the proposed changes received will be posted without change. for Volatility Index Futures would Persons submitting comments are is to introduce enhancements to OCC’s include: (1) Introducing ‘‘synthetic’’ margin methodology for Volatility Index cautioned that we do not redact or edit futures (discussed below) into the daily personal identifying information from Futures so that OCC’s margin model re-estimation of prices and correlations comment submissions. You should reflects more current market for Volatility Index Futures; (2) an submit only information that you wish information for Volatility Index Futures to make available publicly. All enhanced statistical distribution for and allows for more appropriate submissions should refer to File modeling price returns of the modeling of the risk attributes of such Number SR–Phlx–2019–13 and should ‘‘synthetic’’ futures; and (3) a new anti- products. Specifically, the proposed be submitted on or before May 14, 2019. procyclical floor for variance estimates. methodology enhancements for The proposed changes are discussed in Volatility Index Futures would include: For the Commission, by the Division of detail in Section II below. (1) Introducing ‘‘synthetic’’ futures into Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.14 The proposed changes to OCC’s the process for daily re-estimation of prices and correlations for Volatility Jill M. Peterson, Margins Methodology document are Index Futures; (2) an enhanced contained in confidential Exhibit 5 of Assistant Secretary. statistical distribution for modeling the filing. Material proposed to be [FR Doc. 2019–08100 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] price returns for ‘‘synthetic’’ futures; added is marked by underlining and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P and (3) a new anti-procyclical floor for material proposed to be deleted is variance estimates. OCC’s current model marked by strikethrough text. OCC also for Volatility Index Futures and the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE has included backtesting and impact proposed changes thereto are described COMMISSION analysis of the proposed model changes in further detail below. in confidential Exhibit 3. [Release No. 34–85670; File No. SR–OCC– Background 2019–801] The advance notice is available on OCC’s website at https:// OCC’s margin methodology, the Self-Regulatory Organizations; The www.theocc.com/about/publications/ System for Theoretical Analysis and Options Clearing Corporation; Notice bylaws.jsp. All terms with initial Numerical Simulations (‘‘STANS’’),5 is of Filing of Advance Notice Related to capitalization that are not otherwise OCC’s proprietary risk management the Options Clearing Corporation’s defined herein have the same meaning system that calculates Clearing Member Margin Methodology for Volatility as set forth in the OCC By-Laws and margin requirements. STANS utilizes Index Futures Rules.4 large-scale Monte Carlo simulations to forecast price and volatility movements April 17, 2019. in determining a Clearing Member’s Pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title 1 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). margin requirement.6 The STANS VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4(n)(1)(i). Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 3 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53322 entitled Payment, Clearing and 4 OCC’s By-Laws and Rules can be found on (February 15, 2006), 71 FR 9403 (February 23, 2006) OCC’s public website: http://optionsclearing.com/ (SR–OCC–2004–20). 14 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). about/publications/bylaws.jsp. 6 See OCC Rule 601.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16916 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

margin requirement is calculated at the OCC currently clears futures contracts herein. Volatility Indexes, unlike futures portfolio level of Clearing Member on such Volatility Indexes. These contracts, are not investible (i.e., they accounts with positions in marginable Volatility Index Futures contracts can cannot be replicated by static portfolios securities. The STANS margin consequently be viewed as an indication of traded contracts). In addition, the requirement consists of an estimate of a of the market’s future expectations of futures market has a term structure that 99% expected shortfall 7 over a two-day the volatility of a given Volatility cannot be modeled using just the time horizon and an add-on margin Index’s underlying reference index (e.g., underlying index. Finally, futures on a charge for model risk (the in the case of the VIX, providing a Volatility Index are less volatile and less concentration/dependence stress test snapshot of the expected market fat-tailed 15 than the index itself, and charge).8 The STANS methodology is volatility of the underlying over the these features are term-dependent. The used to measure the exposure of term of the options making up the current model was developed before portfolios of options, futures and cash index). sufficient data on the futures was instruments, including the Volatility Current Model for Volatility Index available, so a model based on 9 16 Index Futures cleared by OCC. Futures ‘‘synthetic’’ futures, as proposed Volatility Indexes are indexes herein, was not an option at the time. designed to measure the volatility that Under OCC’s existing margin Also, the current model does not is implied by the prices of options on a methodology, OCC models the potential account for certain strategies Clearing particular reference index or asset. For final settlement prices of Volatility Members might employ involving example, the Cboe Volatility Index Index Futures using the underlying spreads between delivery dates, which 11 (‘‘VIX’’) is an index designed to measure index as the risk factor. Final may result in under-margining of those the 30-day expected volatility of the settlement prices are simulated under positions. Standard & Poor’s 500 index (‘‘SPX’’).10 the assumption that the logarithm of the In recent years, OCC has seen values of the risk factor (i.e., the significant growth in trading volume for 7 underlying spot Volatility Index) The expected shortfall component is established Volatility Index Futures. As a result, follows a mean-reverting 12 random as the estimated average of potential losses higher OCC is proposing a number of than the 99% value at risk threshold. The term walk 13 with normally-distributed enhancements to its margin ‘‘value at risk’’ or ‘‘VaR’’ refers to a statistical steps.14 The model is designed to technique that, generally speaking, is used in risk methodology designed to provide for calibrate the distribution that defines management to measure the potential risk of loss for more accurate and responsive margin this mean-reversion behavior so that the a given set of assets over a particular time horizon. requirements for Volatility Index 8 A detailed description of the STANS expected final settlement prices of the Futures. methodology is available at http:// futures match their currently-observed optionsclearing.com/risk-management/margins/. market prices to ensure that margin Proposed Changes 9 Pursuant to OCC Rule 601(e)(1), OCC also coverage is sufficient to limit credit calculates initial margin requirements for The purpose of the proposed changes exposures to OCC’s participants under segregated futures accounts on a gross basis using is to introduce enhancements to OCC’s the Standard Portfolio Analysis of Risk Margin normal market conditions. OCC Calculation System (‘‘SPAN’’). Commodity Futures recalculates the Monte Carlo scenarios margin methodology so that OCC’s Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) Rule 39.13(g)(8), of the returns of each futures series over margin models reflect more current requires, in relevant part, that derivatives clearing its remaining life so that the standard market information for Volatility Index organizations (‘‘DCOs’’) collect initial margin for Futures, introduce asymmetry into the customer segregated futures accounts on a gross deviation of the scenarios matches two basis. While OCC uses SPAN to calculate initial days’ worth of the implied volatility of statistical distribution used to model margin requirements for segregated futures accounts near-the-money and contemporaneously price returns of the ‘‘synthetic’’ futures, on a gross basis, OCC believes that margin 17 expiring options on the Volatility Index, and reduce procyclicality in the requirements calculated on a net basis (i.e., model. permitting offsets between different customers’ where available, in order to align with positions held by a Clearing Member in a segregated OCC’s two-day liquidation period The proposed changes would futures account using STANS) affords OCC assumption. Currently, the calibration specifically include: (1) The daily re- additional protections at the clearinghouse level estimation of prices and correlations against risks associated with liquidating a Clearing for the distribution is performed on a Member’s segregated futures account. As a result, daily basis. using ‘‘synthetic’’ futures; (2) an OCC calculates margin requirements for segregated OCC’s current model for Volatility enhanced statistical distribution for futures accounts using both SPAN on a gross basis Index Futures, which utilizes the modeling price returns for ‘‘synthetic’’ and STANS on a net basis, and if at any time OCC underlying Volatility Index as the sole futures; and (3) a new anti-procyclical staff observes a segregated futures account where initial margin calculated pursuant to STANS on a risk factor, is subject to certain net basis exceeds the initial margin calculated limitations, which would be addressed 15 A data set with a ‘‘fat tail’’ is one in which pursuant to SPAN on a gross basis, OCC by the proposed changes described extreme price returns have a higher probability of collateralizes this risk exposure by applying an occurrence than would be the case in a normal additional margin charge in the amount of such distribution. difference to the account. See Securities Exchange underlying and the exercise price of the option) of 16 As discussed in further detail below, a Act Release No. 72331 (June 5, 2014), 79 FR 33607 the option, discounted to reflect its time value. ‘‘synthetic’’ futures time series, for the intended (June 11, 2014) (SR–OCC–2014–13). 11 A ‘‘risk factor’’ within OCC’s margin system purposes of OCC, relates to a uniform substitute for 10 Generally speaking, the implied volatility of an may be defined as a product or attribute whose a time series of daily settlement prices for actual option is a measure of the expected future volatility historical data is used to estimate and simulate the futures contracts, which persists over many of the value of the option’s annualized standard risk for an associated product. expiration cycles and thus can be used as a basis deviation of the price of the underlying security, 12 In finance, the term ‘‘mean reversion’’ describes for econometric analysis. index, or future at exercise, which is reflected in the a financial time series in which returns can be very 17 A quality that is positively correlated with the current option premium in the market. Using the unstable in the short run but very stable in the long overall state of the market is deemed to be Black-Scholes options pricing model, the implied run. ‘‘procyclical.’’ For example, procyclicality may be volatility is the standard deviation of the 13 A random walk is a continuous process with evidenced by increasing margin or Clearing Fund underlying asset price necessary to arrive at the random increments drawn independently from a requirements in times of stressed market conditions market price of an option of a given strike, time to particular distribution. and low margin or Clearing Fund requirements maturity, underlying asset price and given the 14 This is known as a Gaussian Ornstein- when markets are calm. Hence, anti-procyclical current risk-free rate. In effect, the implied volatility Uhlenbeck process. See Uhlenbeck, G.E. and L.S. features in a model are measures intended to is responsible for that portion of the premium that Ornstein, ‘‘On the Theory of Brownian Motion,’’ prevent risk-based models from fluctuating too cannot be explained by the then-current intrinsic Physical Review, 36, 823–841 (1930) (explaining the drastically in response to changing market value (i.e., the difference between the price of the Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process). conditions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16917

floor for variance estimates.18 The main correlations between futures contracts of curve.21 As a result, OCC believes the feature of the proposed model, relative different tenors by creating more price proposed changes would result more to the current model, is the replacement data points and their margin offsets. accurate margin requirements for of the underlying Volatility Index itself Under the proposal, the historical Clearing Members under the current as a risk factor by risk factors that are ‘‘synthetic’’ time series for these market conditions. based on observed futures prices (i.e., Volatility Indexes would be updated 2. Enhancements to Statistical the ‘‘synthetic’’ futures contracts). The daily and mapped to their Distribution for Volatility Index Futures proposed change would introduce a corresponding futures contracts. By new set of risk factors and method for construction, the first ‘‘synthetic’’ time In addition to using a ‘‘synthetic’’ generating scenarios for those risk series would always contain returns of futures price return history in the factors, and hence Volatility Index the front contract (i.e., the contract process for daily re-estimation of model Futures settlement prices, to be closest to maturity, on any given day), parameters, OCC is proposing additional incorporated into the STANS margin the second, which would correspond to enhancements to its margin calculations. OCC believes its proposed the next month out, and the remaining methodology for Volatility Index methodology would provide for more series would follow the same pattern. Futures to introduce asymmetry into the accurate and responsive margin Following the expiration date of the statistical distribution used to model requirements and that the imposition of front contract, each contract within a price returns of the ‘‘synthetic’’ futures. a floor for variance estimates would time series would be replaced with a The econometric model currently used mitigate procyclicality in OCC’s margin contract maturing one month later. in STANS for all price risk factors is an methodology for Volatility Index While ‘‘synthetic’’ time series contain asymmetric GARCH(1,1) with Futures. The proposed changes are returns from different contracts, a return symmetric Standardized Normal described in further detail below. on any given date is constructed from Reciprocal Inverse Gaussian (or prices of the same contract (e.g., as the ‘‘NRIG’’)-distributed logarithmic 1. Daily Re-Estimations Using Synthetic returns.22 OCC proposes to move to an Futures front month futures contract ‘‘rolls’’ from the current month to the asymmetric NRIG distribution for As noted above, OCC currently subsequent month, returns on the roll purposes of modeling proportionate models the potential final settlement date would be constructed by using the returns of the ‘‘synthetic’’ futures. OCC prices of Volatility Index Futures based same contract and not by calculating believes the asymmetric NRIG on the underlying index itself. OCC distribution has a better ‘‘goodness of returns across months). The marginal 23 proposes to modify its modeling probability distribution parameters for fit’’ to the historical data and allows approach for Volatility Index Futures by the ‘‘synthetic’’ time series (i.e., for more appropriate modeling of modeling the price distributions of marginal probabilities of various values observed asymmetry of the distribution. ‘‘synthetic’’ futures on a daily basis of the variables in the distribution As a result, OCC believes that the based on the historical returns of futures without reference to the values of the proposed change would lead to more contracts with approximately the same other variables) would be estimated consistent treatment of returns both on tenor (as opposed to OCC’s current daily using recent historical the upside as well as downside of the distribution. Accordingly, OCC believes approach of calibrating the distribution observations.19 In cases in which the that the proposed changes would result based on the Volatility Index itself). A GARCH variance 20 forecast falls below in margin requirements for Volatility ‘‘synthetic’’ futures time series for the the sample variance, in addition to Index Futures that respond more intended purposes of OCC relates to a being floored by the sample variance, appropriately to changes in market uniform substitute for a time series of the ‘‘synthetic’’ time series would volatility and therefore are more daily settlement prices for actual futures additionally be ‘‘scaled up’’ through the accurate. contracts, which persists over many introduction of a new floor on variance expiration cycles and thus can be used estimates based on the corresponding 3. Introduction of Anti-Procyclical Floor as a basis for econometric analysis. One underlying index in order to reduce for Variance Estimates feature of futures contracts is that each procyclicality in the model (as OCC also proposes to introduce a new contract may have a different expiration discussed in further detail below). date, and at any one point in time there floor for variance estimates of the OCC believes that using synthetic Volatility Index Futures that would be may be a variety of futures contracts on futures in its daily re-estimation process the same underlying interest, all with would allow OCC’s econometric model 21 In 2018, the Commission approved, and issued varying dates of expiry, so that there is for Volatility Index Futures to reflect a Notice of No-Objection to, proposed changes to no one continuous time series for those more current market information and OCC’s margin methodology designed to enable OCC futures. ‘‘Synthetic’’ futures can be used achieve better coverage across the term to: (1) Obtain daily price data for equity products to generate a continuous time series of for use in the daily estimation of econometric model parameters; (2) enhance OCC’s econometric futures contract prices across multiple 19 However, for any tenor extension or new model for updating statistical parameters for all risk expirations. These ‘‘synthetic’’ futures contract that does not have enough historical data factors that reflect the most recent data obtained; (3) price return histories would be inputted for the associated ‘‘synthetic’’ security, the improve the sensitivity and stability of correlation into the existing Copula simulation scenarios for the longest tenor ‘‘synthetic’’ with estimates across risk factors by using de-volatized enough history would be used as a proxy for returns; and (4) improve OCC’s methodology related process in STANS alongside the generating futures theoretical price scenarios. In to the treatment of defaulting securities. See underlying interests of OCC’s other this case, the long run floor (discussed below) Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83326 (May cleared and cross-margin products and would be borrowed from the proxy ‘‘synthetic.’’ 24, 2018), 83 FR 25081 (May 31, 2018) (SR–OCC– collateral. The purpose of this use of 20 See generally Tim Bollerslev, ‘‘Generalized 2017–022) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83305 (May 23, 2018), 83 FR 24536 (May 29, 2018) ‘‘synthetic’’ futures is to allow the Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity,’’ Journal of Econometrics, 31(3), 307–327 (1986). The (SR–OCC–2017–811). Under the proposal, margin system to better approximate acronym ‘‘GARCH’’ refers to an econometric model correlation updates for ‘‘synthetic’’ futures would that can be used to estimate volatility based on be done daily with a one-day lag. 18 OCC would also make a number of conforming historical data. The general distinction between the 22 See id. changes throughout it Margins Methodology so that ‘‘GARCH variance’’ and the ‘‘sample variance’’ for 23 The goodness of fit of a statistical model the document arcuately reflects the adoption of the a given time series is that the GARCH variance uses describes the extent to which observed data match new model. the underlying time series data to forecast volatility. the values generated by the model.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16918 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

modeled under the newly proposed changes by an Information Memo posted promote robust risk management for approach to mitigate procyclicality in to its public website at least one week Volatility Index futures and promote OCC’s margin model. In order to prior to implementation. safety and soundness consistent with incorporate a variance level implied by the objectives and principles of Section Anticipated Effect on and Management a longer time series of data, OCC would 805(b) of the Clearing Supervision of Risk calculate a floor for variance estimates Act.27 based on the underlying index (e.g., OCC believes that the proposed For the foregoing reasons, OCC VIX) which is expected to have a longer changes would reduce the nature and believes that the proposed change history that is more reflective of the level of risk presented by OCC because would enhance OCC’s management of long-run variance level that cannot be it would introduce enhancements to risk and reduce the nature or level of otherwise captured using the OCC’s margin methodology so that risk presented to OCC. ‘‘synthetic’’ futures data. The floor OCC’s margin models reflect more would therefore reduce the impact of a current market information for Volatility Consistency With the Payment, Clearing sudden increase in margin requirements Index Futures; use a statistical and Settlement Supervision Act from a low level and therefore mitigate distribution for modeling proportionate The stated purpose of the Clearing procyclicality in the model. returns of the ‘‘synthetic’’ futures, Supervision Act is to mitigate systemic which OCC believes has a better risk in the financial system and promote Clearing Member Outreach ‘‘goodness of fit’’ to the historical data financial stability by, among other In order to inform Clearing Members and allows for more appropriate things, promoting uniform risk of the proposed change, OCC has modeling of observed asymmetry of the management standards for systemically provided updates to members at OCC distribution; and reduce procyclicality important financial market utilities and Roundtable 24 and Financial Risk in the model. strengthening the liquidity of Advisory Council (or ‘‘FRAC’’) 25 The main feature of the proposed systemically important financial market meetings and will provide additional model, relative to the current model, is utilities.28 Section 805(a)(2) of the reminders about the proposed changes the replacement of the underlying Clearing Supervision Act 29 also at its next FRAC meeting. In addition, Volatility Index itself as a risk factor by authorizes the Commission to prescribe OCC will publish an Information Memo risk factors that are based on observed risk management standards for the to all Clearing Members describing the futures prices (i.e., the ‘‘synthetic’’ payment, clearing and settlement proposed changes and will provide futures contracts). OCC believes that activities of designated clearing entities, additional periodic Information Memo using ‘‘synthetic’’ futures in its daily re- like OCC, for which the Commission is updates prior to the implementation estimation process would allow OCC’s the supervisory agency. Section 805(b) date. Additionally, OCC will perform econometric model for Volatility Index of the Clearing Supervision Act 30 states targeted and direct outreach with Futures to reflect more current market that the objectives and principles for Clearing Members that would be most information and achieve better coverage risk management standards prescribed impacted by the proposed change, and across the term curve. As a result, OCC under Section 805(a) shall be to: OCC would work closely with such believes the proposed changes would • Promote robust risk management; Clearing Members to coordinate the result more accurate margin • promote safety and soundness; implementation and to discuss the requirements for Clearing Members • reduce systemic risks; and impact and timing of any required under the current market conditions • support the stability of the broader collateral deposits that may result from that respond more appropriately to financial system. 26 the proposed change. changes in market volatility. In The Commission has adopted risk addition, OCC believes that the Implementation Timeframe management standards under Section proposed change to an asymmetrical 805(a)(2) of the Clearing Supervision OCC plans to implement the proposed NRIG statistical distribution would lead Act and the Act, which include changes on May 20, 2019, provided that to more consistent treatment of returns Commission Rules 17Ad–22(b)(1), (b)(2) all necessary regulatory approvals are both on the upside as well as downside and (e)(6).31 received by that date. If all regulatory of the distribution and therefore result Rule 17Ad–22(b)(1) 32 requires that a approvals are not received by May 20, in margin requirements for Volatility registered clearing agency that performs 2019, or if implementation on that date Index Futures that respond more central counterparty services establish, becomes otherwise impractical, OCC appropriately to changes in market implement, maintain and enforce will implement the proposed changes volatility and therefore are more written policies and procedures within thirty (30) days after the date that accurate. Finally, the proposed changes reasonably designed to measure its OCC receives all necessary regulatory would enhance OCC’s approach for credit exposures to its participants at approvals for the proposed changes. modeling Volatility Index Futures by least once a day and limit its exposures OCC will announce any alternative introducing a floor on variance implementation date of the proposed estimates in the model to mitigate 27 12 U.S.C. 5464(b). procyclicality. 28 24 12 U.S.C. 5461(b). The OCC Roundtable was established to bring The proposed model would be used 29 Clearing Members, exchanges and OCC together to 12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2). by OCC to calculate margin 30 discuss industry and operational issues. It is 12 U.S.C. 5464(b). comprised of representatives of senior OCC staff, requirements designed to limit its credit 31 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22. See Securities Exchange participant exchanges and Clearing Members, exposures to participants, and OCC uses Act Release Nos. 68080 (October 22, 2012), 77 FR representing the diversity of OCC’s membership in the margin it collects from a defaulting 66220 (November 2, 2012) (S7–08–11) (‘‘Clearing industry segments, OCC-cleared volume, business Agency Standards’’); 78961 (September 28, 2016, 81 type, operational structure and geography. Clearing Member to protect other FR 70786 (October 13, 2016) (S7–03–14) 25 The Financial Risk Advisory Council is a Clearing Members from losses as a result (‘‘Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies’’). The working group comprised of exchanges, Clearing of the default and ensure that OCC is Standards for Covered Clearing Agencies became Members and indirect participants of OCC. able to continue the prompt and effective on December 12, 2016. OCC is a ‘‘covered 26 clearing agency’’ as defined in Rule 17Ad–22(a)(5) Specifically, OCC will discuss with those accurate clearance and settlement of its Clearing Members how they plan to satisfy any and therefore OCC must comply with new section increase in their margin requirements associated cleared products. Accordingly, OCC (e) of Rule 17Ad–22. with the proposed change. believes the proposed changes would 32 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(1).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16919

to potential losses from defaults by its and responsive margin requirements for calculate margin sufficient to cover its participants under normal market OCC’s Clearing Members and would potential future exposure to participants conditions so that the operations of the introduce an asymmetric distribution in the interval between the last margin clearing agency would not be disrupted into its model that has a better collection and the close out of positions and non-defaulting participants would ‘‘goodness of fit’’ to the historical data following a participant default, and not be exposed to losses that they and allows for more appropriate apply an appropriate method for cannot anticipate or control. As modeling of observed asymmetry of the measuring credit exposure that accounts described above, the proposed changes distribution. The proposed floor on for risk factors and portfolio effects of would introduce new model variance estimates would also help to Volatility Index Futures in a manner enhancements for OCC’s cleared reduce procyclicality in margin consistent with Rules 17Ad–22(e)(6)(i), Volatility Index Futures. OCC would requirements for Volatility Index (iii), and (v).37 use the risk-based model enhancements Futures. The risk-based model would The changes are not inconsistent with described herein to measure its credit therefore be used to calculate margin exposures to its participants on a daily requirements designed to limit OCC’s the existing rules of OCC, including any basis and determine margin credit exposures to participants under other rules proposed to be amended. requirements based on such normal market conditions in a manner III. Date of Effectiveness of the Advance calculations. OCC believes that the consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(b)(2).35 Notice and Timing for Commission proposed enhancements would result in Rules 17Ad–22(e)(6)(i), (iii), and (v) 36 Action more accurate and responsive margin further require that a covered clearing requirements by ensuring that OCC’s agency establish, implement, maintain The proposed change may be margin models reflect more current and enforce written policies and implemented if the Commission does market information for Volatility Index procedures reasonably designed to cover not object to the proposed change Futures and using an asymmetric its credit exposures to its participants by within 60 days of the later of (i) the date distribution in its model that has a establishing a risk-based margin system the proposed change was filed with the better ‘‘goodness of fit’’ to the historical that, among other things: (1) Considers, Commission or (ii) the date any data and allows for more appropriate and produces margin levels additional information requested by the modeling of observed asymmetry of the commensurate with, the risks and Commission is received. OCC shall not distribution. The proposed changes particular attributes of each relevant implement the proposed change if the would also introduce a new floor on product, portfolio, and market; (2) Commission has any objection to the variance estimates in the model to calculates margin sufficient to cover its proposed change. mitigate procyclicality. OCC believes potential future exposure to participants The Commission may extend the the proposed changes are therefore in the interval between the last margin period for review by an additional 60 designed to ensure that OCC sets margin collection and the close out of positions days if the proposed change raises novel requirements that would serve to limit following a participant default; and (3) or complex issues, subject to the OCC’s exposures to potential losses uses an appropriate method for Commission providing the clearing from defaults by its participants under measuring credit exposure that accounts agency with prompt written notice of normal market conditions so that the for relevant product risk factors and the extension. A proposed change may operations of OCC would not be portfolio effects across products. be implemented in less than 60 days disrupted, and non-defaulting As described in detail above, OCC from the date the advance notice is participants would not be exposed to believes that the proposed model losses that they cannot anticipate or enhancements would result in more filed, or the date further information control. Accordingly, OCC believes the accurate, more responsive, and less requested by the Commission is proposed changes are consistent with procyclical margin requirements for received, if the Commission notifies the Rule 17Ad–22(b)(1).33 OCC’s Clearing Members clearing clearing agency in writing that it does Rule 17Ad–22(b)(2) 34 further Volatility Index Futures, with such not object to the proposed change and requires, in part, that a registered margin serving to protect other Clearing authorizes the clearing agency to clearing agency that performs central Members from losses arising as a result implement the proposed change on an counterparty services establish, of a Clearing Member default. The earlier date, subject to any conditions implement, maintain and enforce proposed changes are intended to imposed by the Commission. written policies and procedures ensure that OCC’s margin models reflect OCC shall post notice on its website reasonably designed use margin more current market information for of proposed changes that are requirements to limit its credit Volatility Index Futures and would implemented. exposures to participants under normal introduce an asymmetric distribution The proposal shall not take effect market conditions and use risk-based into its model that has a better until all regulatory actions required models and parameters to set margin ‘‘goodness of fit’’ to the historical data with respect to the proposal are requirements. As noted above, OCC and allows for more appropriate completed. would use the proposed model modeling of the observed asymmetry of enhancements to calculate margin the distribution. Additionally, OCC IV. Solicitation of Comments requirements for Volatility Index would introduce a floor on variance Futures in a manner designed to limit estimates in the model to limit Interested persons are invited to its credit exposures to participants procyclicality. OCC therefore believes submit written data, views and under normal market conditions. the proposed changes are reasonably arguments concerning the foregoing, Moreover, OCC believes that the designed to consider and produce including whether the advance notice is proposed risk-based model margin levels commensurate with the consistent with the Clearing enhancements for Volatility Index risks and particular attributes of OCC’s Supervision Act. Comments may be Futures would result in more accurate cleared Volatility Index Futures, submitted by any of the following methods: 33 Id. 35 Id. 34 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(b)(2). 36 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(6)(i), (iii), and (v). 37 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16920 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

Electronic Comments SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Filing Dates: The application was filed on November 6, 2018, and • COMMISSION Use the Commission’s internet amended on March 18, 2019. comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ [Investment Company Act Release No. Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An 33449; File No. 812–14970] rules/sro.shtml); or order granting the application will be • Send an email to rule-comments@ Putnam Managed Municipal Income issued unless the Commission orders a sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Trust, et al. hearing. Interested persons may request OCC–2019–801 on the subject line. a hearing by writing to the April 17, 2019. Commission’s Secretary and serving Paper Comments AGENCY: Securities and Exchange applicants with a copy of the request, Commission (‘‘Commission’’). • personally or by mail. Hearing requests Send paper comments in triplicate ACTION: Notice. should be received by the Commission to Secretary, Securities and Exchange by 5:30 p.m. on May 13, 2019, and Commission, 100 F Street NE, Notice of an application under section should be accompanied by proof of Washington, DC 20549. 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of service on applicants, in the form of an 1940 (‘‘Act’’) for an exemption from All submissions should refer to File affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of section 19(b) of the Act and rule 19b– service. Pursuant to Rule 0–5 under the Number SR–OCC–2019–801. This file 1 under the Act to permit registered number should be included on the Act, hearing requests should state the closed-end investment companies to nature of the writer’s interest, any facts subject line if email is used. To help the make periodic distributions of long-term Commission process and review your bearing upon the desirability of a capital gains more frequently than hearing on the matter, the reason for the comments more efficiently, please use permitted by section 19(b) or rule 19b– request, and the issues contested. only one method. The Commission will 1. Persons who wish to be notified of a post all comments on the Commission’s Applicants: Putnam Managed hearing may request notification by Municipal Income Trust (‘‘PMM’’), a internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ writing to the Commission’s Secretary. rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the diversified closed-end investment ADDRESSES: The Commission: Secretary, submission, all subsequent company registered under the Act and U.S. Securities and Exchange amendments, all written statements organized as a Massachusetts business trust; Putnam Master Intermediate Commission, 100 F Street NE, with respect to the advance notice that Washington, DC 20549–1090. are filed with the Commission, and all Income Trust (‘‘PIM’’), a diversified closed-end investment company Applicants: Bryan Chegwidden, Esq., written communications relating to the Ropes & Gray LLP, 1211 Avenue of the advance notice between the registered under the Act and organized as a Massachusetts business trust; Americas, New York, New York 10036 Commission and any person, other than Putnam Municipal Opportunities Trust and Robert T. Burns, Vice President, those that may be withheld from the (‘‘PMO’’), a non-diversified closed-end Putnam Investment Management, LLC, public in accordance with the investment company registered under 100 Federal Street, Boston, provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be the Act and organized as a Massachusetts 02110. available for website viewing and Massachusetts business trust; Putnam FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill printing in the Commission’s Public Premier Income Trust (‘‘PPT,’’ and Ehrlich, Senior Counsel at (202) 551– Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, together with PMM, PIM, and PMO, the 6819, or Andrea Ottomanelli Magovern, Washington, DC 20549 on official ‘‘Funds’’), a non-diversified closed-end Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6821 business days between the hours of investment company registered under (Division of Investment Management, 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the the Act and organized as a Chief Counsel’s Office). filing also will be available for Massachusetts business trust; Putnam SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The inspection and copying at the principal Investment Management, LLC (‘‘Putnam following is a summary of the office of the self-regulatory organization. Management’’), a limited liability application. The complete application All comments received will be posted company organized under the laws of may be obtained via the Commission’s without change. Persons submitting Massachusetts; and Putnam Investments website by searching for the file comments are cautioned that we do not Limited (‘‘Putnam Investments,’’ and number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http:// redact or edit personal identifying together with Putnam Management, the ‘‘Advisers’’), a private limited company www.sec.gov/search/search.htm, or by information from comment submissions. organized under the laws of the United calling (202) 551–8090. You should submit only information Kingdom, each of Putnam Management that you wish to make available Summary of the Application and Putnam Investments registered publicly. under the Investment Advisers Act of 1. Section 19(b) of the Act generally All submissions should refer to File 1940, and serving as investment adviser makes it unlawful for any registered Number SR–OCC–2019–801 and should and sub-adviser to the Funds, investment company to make long-term be submitted on or before May 7, 2019. respectively (the Advisers, together with capital gains distributions more than the Funds, the ‘‘Applicants’’).1 once every twelve months. Rule 19b–1 By the Commission. under the Act limits to one the number Jill M. Peterson, 1 Applicants request that the order also apply to of capital gain dividends, as defined in Assistant Secretary. each other registered closed-end investment section 852(b)(3)(C) of the Internal [FR Doc. 2019–08083 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] company advised or to be advised in the future by Revenue Code of 1986 (‘‘Code,’’ and Putnam Management, Putnam Investments, or by an BILLING CODE 8011–01–P entity controlling, controlled by, or under common such dividends, ‘‘distributions’’), that a control (within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act) with Putnam Management or Putnam the Funds, are collectively the ‘‘Funds’’ and, Investments (including any successor in interest) individually, a ‘‘Fund’’). A successor in interest is (each such entity, including the Advisers, also the limited to entities that result from a reorganization ‘‘Adviser’’) that in the future seeks to rely on the into another jurisdiction or a change in the type of order (such investment companies, together with business organization.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16921

registered investment company may and that the Board periodically review MBSD Methodology and Model make with respect to any one taxable the amount of the distributions in light Operations Document—MBSD year, plus a supplemental distribution of the investment experience of the Quantitative Risk Model 5 (‘‘MBSD QRM made pursuant to section 855 of the Fund, and (2) that the Fund’s Methodology Document,’’ and together Code not exceeding 10% of the total shareholders receive appropriate with the GSD QRM Methodology amount distributed for the year, plus disclosures concerning the Document, the ‘‘QRM Methodology one additional capital gain dividend distributions. Documents’’) to remove specific made in whole or in part to avoid the For the Commission, by the Division of references (and explanations relating excise tax under section 4982 of the Investment Management, under delegated thereto) to the look-back periods for (1) Code. authority. the alternative volatility calculation 2. Applicants believe that investors in Jill M. Peterson, (‘‘Margin Proxy’’) 6 of GSD and MBSD certain closed-end funds may prefer an Assistant Secretary. and (2) the two haircut rates that form investment vehicle that provides regular 7 [FR Doc. 2019–08067 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] the basis of the GSD haircut charge. current income through a fixed BILLING CODE 8011–01–P FICC would replace the specific distribution policy (‘‘Distribution references to the look-back periods with Policy’’). Applicants propose that a more general language that would (i) Fund be permitted to adopt a SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE refer to a monthly parameter report, (ii) Distribution Policy, pursuant to which COMMISSION specify the governance around changing the Fund would distribute periodically the look-back periods, and (iii) state that (as frequently as twelve times in a [Release No. 34–85676; File No. SR–FICC– the look-back period would not be less 2019–001] taxable year) to its common than one year. FICC is also proposing to stockholders a fixed percentage of the Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed make certain clarifications, corrections, market price of the Fund’s common Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of and technical changes to the GSD QRM stock at a particular point in time or a Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Methodology Document, and a fixed percentage of net asset value Amend the GSD and MBSD clarification and certain technical (‘‘NAV’’) at a particular time or a fixed Methodology Documents and the changes to the MBSD QRM amount per share of common stock, any MBSD Clearing Rules Methodology Document. of which may be adjusted from time to FICC is also proposing to make certain time. April 17, 2019. clarifications to the MBSD Rules. 3. Applicants request an order under Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Specifically, FICC would add a section 6(c) of the Act granting an Securities Exchange Act of 1934 definition of ‘‘Margin Proxy’’ and use exemption from section 19(b) of the Act (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 and rule 19b–1 to permit a Fund to notice is hereby given that on April 5, 5 The MBSD QRM Methodology Document was distribute periodic capital gain 2019, Fixed Income Clearing filed as a confidential exhibit in the rule filing and dividends (as defined in section Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) filed with the advance notice for MBSD sensitivity VaR. See 852(b)(3)(C) of the Code) as frequently Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79868 (January Securities and Exchange Commission 24, 2017) 82 FR 8780 (January 30, 2017) (SR–FICC– as twelve times in any one taxable year (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 2016–007) (‘‘MBSD Approval Order’’) and in respect of its common stock and as change as described in Items I, II and III Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79843 (January often as specified by, or determined in below, which Items have been prepared 19, 2017) 82 FR 8555 (January 26, 2017) (SR–FICC– 2016–801) (‘‘MBSD Advance Notice’’). accordance with the terms of, any by the clearing agency. The Commission preferred stock issued by the Fund. 6 FICC has adopted procedures that would govern is publishing this notice to solicit in the event that the vendor fails to provide risk Section 6(c) of the Act provides, in comments on the proposed rule change analytics data used by FICC to calculate the VaR relevant part, that the Commission may from interested persons. Charge (which is defined in GSD Rule 1 and MBSD exempt any person or transaction from Rule 1). Supra note 3. These procedures include the any provision of the Act to the extent I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the application of the Margin Proxy. Specifically, each Terms of Substance of the Proposed Division’s Margin Proxy would be applied as an that such exemption is necessary or alternative volatility calculation for the VaR Charge appropriate in the public interest and Rule Change (subject to the VaR Floor) if FICC determines that consistent with the protection of The proposed rule change 3 consists of the data disruption will extend beyond five (5) investors and the purposes fairly amendments to the GSD Methodology business days. See GSD Approval Order and MBSD intended by the policy and provisions of Approval Order, supra notes 4 and 5. Document—GSD Initial Market Risk 7 Occasionally, portfolios contain classes of the Act. Margin Model (‘‘GSD QRM securities that reflect market price changes that are 4. Applicants state that any order Methodology Document’’) 4 and the not consistently related to historical risk factors. granting the requested relief will be The value of these securities is often uncertain because the securities’ market volume varies subject to the terms and conditions 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). widely, thus the price histories are limited. Because stated in the application, which 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. the volume and price information for such generally are designed to address the 3 Capitalized terms used herein and not defined securities is not robust, a historical simulation concerns underlying section 19(b) and shall have the meaning assigned to such terms in approach would not generate VaR Charge amounts rule 19b–1, including concerns about the FICC Government Securities Division (‘‘GSD’’) that adequately reflect the risk profile of such Rulebook (‘‘GSD Rules’’) and the FICC Mortgage- securities. FICC utilizes a haircut method proper disclosures and shareholders’ Backed Securities Division (‘‘MBSD,’’ and together (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘GSD haircut charge’’) understanding of the source(s) of a with GSD, the ‘‘Divisions’’) Clearing Rules (‘‘MBSD based on the volatility of historic index returns for Fund’s distributions and concerns about Rules’’), as applicable, available at http:// any security that lacks sufficient historical data to improper sales practices. Among other www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.aspx. be incorporated into the sensitivity approach. See 4 The GSD QRM Methodology Document was GSD Approval Order and MBSD Approval Order, things, such terms and conditions filed as a confidential exhibit in the rule filing and supra notes 4 and 5. The GSD haircut charge require that (1) the board of directors or advance notice for GSD sensitivity VaR. See consists of two haircut rates: (i) The haircut rate for trustees of the Fund (the ‘‘Board’’) Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83362 (June 1, mortgage-backed securities (‘‘MBS’’) pools without review such information as is 2018) 83 FR 26514 (June 7, 2018) (SR–FICC–2018– sensitivity analytics data and (ii) the haircut rate for 001) (‘‘GSD Approval Order’’) and Securities Treasury and Agency bonds without sensitivity reasonably necessary to make an Exchange Act Release No. 83223 (May 11, 2018) 83 analytics data (hereinafter, the ‘‘GSD Haircut informed determination of whether to FR 23020 (May 17, 2018) (SR–FICC–2018–801) Rates’’). The proposal applies to the look-back adopt the proposed Distribution Policy (‘‘GSD Advance Notice’’). periods for the GSD Haircut Rates.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16922 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

such term in the definition of ‘‘VaR MBSD VaR Charges. The QRM Methodology Documents would also Charge,’’ as described below. In Methodology Documents specify model provide that these look-back periods addition, FICC would clarify the inputs, parameters and assumptions, shall not be less than one year. Finally, definition of ‘‘VaR Charge’’ in the MBSD among other information. With respect the QRM Methodology Documents Rules by adding the word ‘‘Clearing’’ to the Margin Proxy, each of the QRM would state that any changes to these before the word ‘‘Members.’’ Methodology Documents refers to the look-back periods would be subject to FICC is requesting confidential specific look-back periods that are in the governance process set forth in the treatment of the QRM Methodology use today. Similarly, the GSD QRM Clearing Agency Model Risk Documents and has filed them Methodology Document refers to the Management Framework (the separately with the Secretary of the specific look-back periods for the GSD ‘‘Framework).11 The Framework Commission.8 Haircut Rates. FICC is proposing to provides that the Model Validation and amend the QRM Methodology II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Control Group (‘‘MVC’’) prepares Model Documents to remove the specific Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the performance monitoring reports on both Proposed Rule Change references to the current look-back periods in use and replace them with a monthly and daily basis. On a In its filing with the Commission, the general language that would refer to a monthly basis, MVC (i) performs clearing agency included statements monthly parameter report (that would sensitivity analysis on each of FICC’s concerning the purpose of and basis for contain the specific look-back periods). Models,12 (ii) reviews key parameters the proposed rule change and discussed FICC has the discretion to change the and assumptions for backtesting, and any comments it received on the look-back periods that are the subject of (iii) considers modifications to ensure proposed rule change. The text of these this proposal. Specifically, with respect that the backtesting practices of FICC statements may be examined at the to the GSD haircut charge, the GSD are appropriate for determining the places specified in Item IV below. The QRM Methodology Document provides adequacy of its applicable margin clearing agency has prepared that certain key model parameters, resources.13 The Framework states that summaries, set forth in sections A, B, including the look-back periods for the MRGC will review the Model and C below, of the most significant GSD Haircut Rates, are subject to performance monitoring, which aspects of such statements. periodic review and recalibration.9 With includes review of risk-based Models (A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the respect to the Margin Proxy, the rule used to calculate margin requirements Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the filings for GSD sensitivity VaR and and relevant parameters/threshold Proposed Rule Change MBSD sensitivity VaR state that if FICC indicators, sensitivity analysis, and observes material differences between 1. Purpose Model backtesting results. Serious the Margin Proxy calculations and the performance concerns will be escalated The purpose of this rule filing is to aggregate Clearing Fund requirement to the MRC.14 amend the QRM Methodology calculated using the proposed VaR Documents to remove specific model (i.e., the sensitivity approach), or (B) Clarifications, Corrections, and references (and explanations relating if the Margin Proxy’s backtesting results Technical Changes to the GSD QRM thereto) to the look-back periods for the do not meet FICC’s 99 percent Methodology Document, and a (1) Margin Proxy of GSD and MBSD and confidence level, management may Clarification and Technical Changes to (2) GSD Haircut Rates. FICC would recommend remedial actions to the the MBSD QRM Methodology Document replace these specific references to the Model Risk Governance Committee look-back periods with more general (‘‘MRGC’’), and to the extent necessary FICC is proposing to make certain language as described below. FICC is the Management Risk Committee clarifications, corrections, and technical also proposing to make certain (‘‘MRC’’), such as increasing the look- changes to the GSD QRM Methodology clarifications, corrections and technical back period and/or applying an Document, and a clarification and changes to the GSD QRM Methodology appropriate historical stressed period to certain technical changes to the MBSD Document, and a clarification and the Margin Proxy calibration.10 By QRM Methodology Document, as certain technical changes to the MBSD replacing specific references to the look- described in detail below. QRM Methodology Document. back periods in the QRM Methodology FICC is also proposing to make certain Documents with general language, FICC 11 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81485 clarifications to the MBSD Rules. would be acting within its existing (August 25, 2017) 82 FR 41433 (August 31, 2017) Specifically, FICC would add a discretion and would no longer need to (SR–DTC–2017–008; SR–FICC–2017–014; SR– definition of ‘‘Margin Proxy’’ and use submit subsequent rule filings to change NSCC–2017–008) (‘‘Framework Approval Order’’). such term in the definition of ‘‘VaR these look-back periods unless such In general, the Framework describes the model risk Charge,’’ as described below. In management practices adopted by FICC, National changes require an advance notice. Securities Clearing Corporation and The Depository addition, FICC is proposing to clarify Under the proposal, the QRM the definition of ‘‘VaR Charge’’ in the Trust Company. The Framework is designed to help Methodology Documents would provide identify, measure, monitor, and manage the risks MBSD Rules by adding the word that the look-back periods for the associated with the design, development, ‘‘Clearing’’ before the word ‘‘Members.’’ Margin Proxy and the two GSD Haircut implementation, use, and validation of quantitative (A) Replacing Specific References to the Rates would be tracked in a monthly models. The Framework describes (i) governance of parameter report. The QRM the Framework; (ii) key terms; (iii) model inventory Look-Back Periods for the Margin Proxy procedures; (iv) model validation procedures; (v) of GSD and MBSD and the GSD Haircut model approval process; and (vi) model 9 Rates With More General Language in Supra note 4. performance procedures. Id. 10 the QRM Methodology Documents See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82588 12 The term ‘‘Model’’ refers to a quantitative (January 26, 2018) 83 FR 4687, 4692 (February 1, method, system, or approach that applies statistical, 2018) (SR–FICC–2018–001) (‘‘Notice of GSD Rule Each of the QRM Methodology economic, financial, or mathematical theories, Filing’’); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79491 Documents provides the methodology techniques, and assumptions to process input data (December 7, 2016) 81 FR 90001, 90005 (December by which FICC calculates the GSD and 13, 2016) (SR–FICC–2016–007) (‘‘Notice of MBSD into quantitative estimates. Id. Rule Filing’’); and MBSD Approval Order, supra 13 Id. at 41435. 8 See 17 CFR 240–24b–2. note 5, at 8782–8783. 14 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16923

(1) GSD QRM Methodology Document c. Technical Changes clearing agency be designed ‘‘to assure a. Clarifications Finally, FICC proposes to make the safeguarding of securities and funds certain technical changes (e.g., word which are in the custody or control of FICC would make certain usage, spacing corrections, grammar the clearing agency or for which it is clarifications to the GSD QRM 19 changes, and revising certain references responsible.’’ Methodology Document, as described FICC believes that amending the QRM from singular to plural) to the GSD QRM below. Methodology Documents to remove Methodology Document. For example, In the section of the GSD QRM specific references (and explanations for consistency, FICC proposes to revise relating thereto) to the look-back periods Methodology Document that describes a reference from ‘‘window’’ to ‘‘period’’ key parameters (where the look-back for the (1) Margin Proxy of GSD and in the description of key parameters and MBSD and (2) the GSD Haircut Rates periods are currently listed), FICC all references from ‘‘lookback’’ to ‘‘look- proposes to rearrange the list so that the and replace them with more general back’’ and from ‘‘TBA/pool’’ to ‘‘Pool- language as described above would look-back periods associated with TBA.’’ sensitivity VaR are grouped together and enhance clarity and consistency for the look-back periods for GSD Haircut (2) MBSD QRM Methodology Document FICC. Specifically, the proposed changes would ensure that the QRM Rates are grouped together. FICC also a. Clarification proposes to add sub-headings to Methodology Documents (which have enhance readability and clarity. FICC proposes to clarify the MBSD been filed confidentially) are in line Methodology Document by adding In addition, in the section of the GSD with the understanding of FICC’s risk language stating that management may QRM Methodology Document that management group (‘‘FICC Risk implement any approved changes. describes key parameters, FICC would Management’’) that, if FICC observes material differences between the Margin amend the language describing the GSD b. Technical Changes Haircut Rates to correspond to the Proxy calculations and the aggregate FICC proposes to make certain Clearing Fund requirement calculated language used in later sections for technical changes to the MBSD QRM using the VaR model, or if the Margin clarity and consistency. Methodology Document (e.g., grammar Proxy’s backtesting results do not meet Where the GSD QRM Methodology changes and revising certain references FICC’s 99 percent confidence level, Document references the governance from singular to plural). FICC would then, subject to its MRGC/MRC practice regarding the review and also revise a reference from ‘‘lookback’’ governance process described above, recalibration of the look-back periods, to ‘‘look-back’’ for consistency. In FICC may change the look-back periods FICC also proposes to specifically addition, FICC would remove the for the GSD and MBSD Margin Proxy as reference the Framework. FICC would revision history because it is solely long as the look-back periods are not provide additional clarity by adding administrative and would not affect the less than one year. Similarly, if FICC language describing types of data that calculation of margin or Clearing observes that the asset class backtesting would be used to determine key model Members’ substantive rights or performance associated with the GSD 15 parameters. FICC would also clarify obligations. Haircut Rates is not at the 99% the GSD QRM Methodology Document confidence level, then, subject to its (C) Clarifications to the MBSD Rules by adding language stating that MRGC/MRC governance process management may implement any FICC is also proposing to make certain described above, FICC may change the approved changes. clarifications to the MBSD Rules. look-back periods for the GSD Haircut With respect to the descriptions of Specifically, FICC would add a Rates as long as the look-back periods some of the GSD Haircut Rates, FICC definition of ‘‘Margin Proxy’’ and use are not less than one year. FICC believes would (i) add clarifying terminology such term in the definition of ‘‘VaR that enhancing clarity and consistency and (ii) delete duplicative explanations Charge.’’ In addition, FICC would clarify within FICC with respect to changes to and replace them with a cross-reference the definition of ‘‘VaR Charge’’ in the the aforementioned look-back periods to the appendix, which contains the MBSD Rules by adding the word would help to ensure that FICC same explanation. ‘‘Clearing’’ before the word ‘‘Members.’’ calculates and collects adequate margin b. Corrections from its Clearing Members and Netting 2. Statutory Basis Members and would thereby assure the FICC also proposes to make certain FICC believes that this proposal is safeguarding of securities and funds corrections to the GSD QRM consistent with the requirements of the which are in the custody or control of Methodology Document. FICC would Act and the rules and regulations FICC or for which it is responsible, correct a typographical error in the thereunder applicable to a registered consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) the description of key parameters by clearing agency. Specifically, FICC Act.20 revising a reference from MBSD to MBS. believes that the proposed changes to FICC believes that the proposed In addition, to correct an omission in the QRM Methodology Documents and changes, which constitute certain the GSD QRM Methodology Document, the MBSD Rules described above are clarifications, corrections, and technical FICC would add that if FICC observes consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of changes to the GSD QRM Methodology material differences between the Margin the Act, for the reasons described Document, and a clarification and Proxy calculations and the aggregate below.17 FICC also believes that the certain technical changes to the MBSD Clearing Fund requirement calculated proposed changes to the MBSD Rules QRM Methodology Document, would using the VaR model, management may are consistent with Rule 17Ad– also enhance the clarity of the QRM recommend remedial actions (as was 22(e)(23)(ii), as promulgated under the Methodology Documents for FICC. As stated in the GSD sensitivity VaR rule Act, for the reasons described below.18 the QRM Methodology Documents are filing).16 Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act used by FICC Risk Management requires, in part, that the rules of a personnel regarding the calculation of 15 Supra note 11. 16 See Notice of GSD Rule Filing, supra note 10, 17 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 19 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). at 4692. 18 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(23)(ii). 20 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16924 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

margin requirements, it is important for for the (1) Margin Proxy of GSD and Rates as long as the look-back periods the accurate and smooth functioning of MBSD and (2) GSD Haircut Rates and are not less than one year. FICC believes the margining process that FICC Risk replace them with more general that enhancing clarity and consistency Management understands when look- language (as described above) could within FICC with respect to changes to back periods can change and the have an impact on competition. the aforementioned look-back periods governance process associated with Specifically, FICC believes that the would help to ensure that FICC them. The changes referenced in this proposed change could burden calculates and collects adequate margin paragraph would promote such competition because changes to the from its Clearing Members and Netting understanding. This would, in turn, look-back periods could result in larger Members and would thereby assure the allow FICC Risk Management to charge Required Fund Deposits amounts for safeguarding of securities and funds an appropriate level of margin. As such, some Members than the amount which are in the custody or control of FICC believes that enhancing the clarity currently calculated. FICC or for which it is responsible, of the QRM Methodology Documents When the proposal results in a larger consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) the would assure the safeguarding of Required Fund Deposit for Members, Act.27 securities and funds which are in the the proposed changes could burden FICC also believes that the above- custody or control of FICC or for which competition for Members that have described burden on competition that it is responsible, consistent with Section lower operating margins or higher costs could be created by the proposed 17A(b)(3)(F) the Act.21 of capital compared to other Members. change to amend the QRM Methodology FICC believes the proposed Whether such burden on competition Documents to remove specific clarifications to Rule 1 of the MBSD would be significant would depend on references (and explanations relating Rules would help ensure that the each Member’s financial status and the thereto) to the look-back periods for the calculation of margin is clear and specific risks presented by each (1) Margin Proxy of GSD and MBSD and transparent to Clearing Members and Member’s portfolio. Regardless of (2) GSD Haircut Rates and replace them FICC, and thereby, help ensure that whether the burden on competition with more general language would be FICC calculates and collects adequate would be significant, FICC believes that appropriate in furtherance of the Act.28 margin from Clearing Members and that any burden on competition imposed by FICC believes these proposed changes Clearing Members understand the the proposed changes would be both would be appropriate in furtherance of relevant definition. As such, FICC necessary and appropriate in the Act because they have been believes that the proposed clarifications furtherance of FICC’s efforts to mitigate designed to assure the safeguarding of to Rule 1 of the MBSD Rules would also risks and meet the requirements of the securities and funds which are in the assure the safeguarding of securities and Act,25 as described in this filing and custody or control of FICC or for which funds which are in the custody and further below. it is responsible. The proposal achieves control of FICC or for which it is FICC believes the above-described this purpose by providing for FICC to responsible, consistent with Section burden on competition that may be act in circumstances where the 99% 17A(b)(3)(F) the Act.22 created by the proposed changes to confidence level is not being met. Rule 17Ad–22(e)(23)(ii) under the Act amend the QRM Methodology Specifically, FICC would only change requires FICC to establish, implement, Documents to remove specific the look-back periods in certain maintain and enforce written policies references (and explanations relating circumstances (i.e., where FICC and procedures reasonably designed to thereto) to the look-back periods for the observes material differences between provide sufficient information to enable (1) Margin Proxy of GSD and MBSD and the Margin Proxy calculations and the participants to identify and evaluate the (2) GSD Haircut Rates and replace them aggregate Clearing Fund requirement risks, fees, and other material costs they with more general language would be calculated using the sensitivity VaR 26 incur by participating in the covered necessary in furtherance of the Act. As model, or where the Margin Proxy’s clearing agency.23 FICC believes the stated above, with respect to the Margin backtesting results do not meet FICC’s proposed clarifications to Rule 1 of the Proxy, the proposed change would 99 percent confidence level), and/or MBSD Rules would help ensure that the address situations where FICC observes where FICC observes that the asset class calculation of margin is transparent and material differences between the Margin backtesting performance is not at the clear to Clearing Members, thereby Proxy calculations and the aggregate 99% confidence level. Furthermore, enabling Clearing Members to better Clearing Fund requirement calculated FICC believes these proposed changes understand the calculation of margin as using the VaR model, or where the are appropriate because they would be well as providing them with increased Margin Proxy’s backtesting results do consistent with the discretion (subject to predictability and certainty regarding not meet FICC’s 99 percent confidence FICC’s governance) that FICC has to their obligations. As such, FICC believes level. Similarly, with respect to the GSD make changes to the look-back periods that the proposed rule changes are Haircut Rates, the proposed changes consistent with the GSD and MBSD consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(23)(ii) would address situations where FICC sensitivity VaR filings and GSD QRM under the Act.24 observes that asset class backtesting Methodology Document.29 As such, performance is not at the 99% FICC believes these proposed changes (B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on confidence level. Specifically, the would help to ensure that FICC Burden on Competition proposed changes would help ensure calculates and collects adequate margin FICC believes that the proposed that the QRM Methodology Documents from its Clearing Members and Netting changes to amend the QRM (which have been filed confidentially) Members, and therefore, are designed to Methodology Documents to remove are in line with FICC Risk assure the safeguarding of securities and specific references (and explanations Management’s understanding that, in funds, consistent with Section relating thereto) to the look-back periods those circumstances, FICC may change 17A(b)(3)(F) the Act.30 the look-back periods for the GSD and 21 Id. MBSD Margin Proxy and GSD Haircut 27 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F). 22 Id. 28 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(I). 23 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(23)(ii). 25 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(I). 29 Supra notes 4, 5, and 10. 24 Id. 26 Id. 30 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16925

In addition, FICC does not believe the Paper Comments SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE proposed clarifications, corrections, and • COMMISSION technical changes to the GSD QRM Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange [Release No. 34–85681; File No. SR–BOX– Methodology Document and the 2019–10] proposed clarification and technical Commission, 100 F Street NE, changes to the MBSD QRM Washington, DC 20549. Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Methodology Document described All submissions should refer to File Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and above would have any impact on Number SR–FICC–2019–001. This file Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed competition because these proposed number should be included on the Rule Change To Adopt Rules changes would enhance the clarity and subject line if email is used. To help the Governing the Trading of Complex accuracy of the QRM Methodology Commission process and review your Customer Cross Orders Documents and would not affect the substantive rights of Netting Members comments more efficiently, please use April 17, 2019. and Clearing Members. only one method. The Commission will Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the post all comments on the Commission’s Securities Exchange Act of 1934 FICC also does not believe that the internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 proposed clarifications to the MBSD rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the notice is hereby given that on April 4, Rules would have any impact on 2019, BOX Exchange LLC (the competition because these proposed submission, all subsequent ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities changes would enhance the clarity and amendments, all written statements and Exchange Commission accuracy of the MBSD Rules and would with respect to the proposed rule (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule not affect the substantive rights of change that are filed with the change as described in Items I and II Clearing Members. Commission, and all written communications relating to the below, which Items have been prepared (C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on proposed rule change between the by the self-regulatory organization. The Comments on the Proposed Rule Commission and any person, other than Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule Change Received From Members, those that may be withheld from the change from interested persons. Participants, or Others public in accordance with the FICC has not received or solicited any provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s written comments relating to this available for website viewing and Statement of the Terms of the Substance proposal. FICC will notify the printing in the Commission’s Public of the Proposed Rule Change Commission of any written comments Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, The Exchange proposes to adopt rules received by FICC. Washington, DC 20549 on official governing the trading of Complex III. Date of Effectiveness of the business days between the hours of Customer Cross Orders. The text of the Proposed Rule Change, and Timing for 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the proposed rule change is available from Commission Action filing also will be available for the principal office of the Exchange, at inspection and copying at the principal the Commission’s Public Reference Within 45 days of the date of office of FICC and on DTCC’s website Room and also on the Exchange’s publication of this notice in the Federal (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule- internet website at http:// Register or within such longer period filings.aspx). All comments received boxoptions.com. up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may will be posted without change. Persons II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s designate if it finds such longer period submitting comments are cautioned that Statement of the Purpose of, and to be appropriate and publishes its we do not redact or edit personal Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which identifying information from comment Change the self-regulatory organization submissions. You should submit only consents, the Commission will: In its filing with the Commission, the information that you wish to make self-regulatory organization included (A) By order approve or disapprove available publicly. All submissions statements concerning the purpose of, such proposed rule change, or should refer to File Number SR–FICC– and basis for, the proposed rule change (B) institute proceedings to determine 2019–001 and should be submitted on and discussed any comments it received whether the proposed rule change or before May 14, 2019. on the proposed rule change. The text should be disapproved. For the Commission, by the Division of of these statements may be examined at IV. Solicitation of Comments Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated the places specified in Item IV below. authority.31 The self-regulatory organization has Interested persons are invited to prepared summaries, set forth in Jill M. Peterson, submit written data, views and Sections A, B, and C below, of the most arguments concerning the foregoing, Assistant Secretary. significant aspects of such statements. including whether the proposed rule [FR Doc. 2019–08099 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s change is consistent with the Act. BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Comments may be submitted by any of Statement of the Purpose of, and the following methods: Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change Electronic Comments 1. Purpose • Use the Commission’s internet The Exchange is proposing rules that comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ will make existing functionality rules/sro.shtml); or available to additional order types on • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). FICC–2019–001 on the subject line. 31 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16926 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

BOX. Specifically, the Exchange is of the requirement that the Complex and has no non-Public Customer Orders for proposing rules to codify Complex Customer Cross Order be executed at or the strategy. Customer Cross Orders on the between the cNBBO is to ensure that net The Exchange receives a Complex Exchange.3 The Exchange notes that the execution price is within the best net Customer Cross Order representing Public proposed changes are similar to the price available in the market and is in Customers on both sides for the simultaneous 4 purchase and sale of the strategy at a price rules of another exchange. In addition, line with the requirement that simple of 3.19. the Exchange is proposing to expand Customer Cross Orders must execute at The order price is at least $0.01 better than certain Complex Order protections to or within the NBBO. the Public Customer Complex Order on the the newly codified Complex Customer The system will reject a Complex Complex Order Book and at least $0.01 better Cross Orders. Customer Cross Order if, at the time of than the implied market price (the cBBO). receipt of the Complex Customer Cross Additionally, the order price is at or between Complex Customer Cross Orders Order, the strategy is subject to an the cNBBO and is at or better than any non- First, the Exchange is proposing to ongoing auction (including COPIP, Public Customer Orders on the Complex add text related to Complex Customer Facilitation, and Solicitation auctions) Order Book. Therefore, the Complex Cross Orders. Proposed Rule or there is an exposed order on the Customer Cross Order is automatically executed upon entry. 7240(b)(4)(iii) defines a Complex strategy pursuant to Rule 7240(b)(3)(B). Customer Cross Order as a type of The purpose of this provision is to The Exchange notes that the proposed Complex Order which is comprised of maintain an orderly market by avoiding rules for Complex Customer Cross one Public Customer Complex Order to the execution of Complex Customer Orders are based on the rules of another buy and one Public Customer Complex Cross Orders with components that are exchange with certain minor Order to sell (the same strategy) at the involved in other system functions that differences.13 First, the MIAX Rule same price and for the same quantity.5 could affect the execution price of the requires the execution price to be better The Exchange uses the same crossing Complex Customer Cross Order, and by than the best net price of a complex mechanism for the processing and avoiding concurrent processing on the order. The proposal requires the execution of Complex Customer Cross Exchange involving the same strategy. execution price to be better than any Orders that is used for Customer Cross Proposed Rule 7110(c)(7)(A) states Public Customer Complex Orders on the Orders in the regular market.6 Proposed that Complex Customer Cross Orders Complex Order Book and no worse than Rule 7110(c)(7) shall govern the trading will be automatically cancelled if they the price of any non-Public Customer of Complex Customer Cross Orders, as cannot be executed. Proposed Rule Complex Orders. The Exchange believes defined in Rule 7240(b)(4)(iii), on BOX. 7110(c)(7)(B) provides that Complex this difference is minor because the Proposed Rule 7110(c)(7) describes the Customer Cross Orders may only be execution price must respect the orders execution price requirements that are entered in the minimum trading on the Complex Order Book and not specific to Complex Customer Cross increments applicable to Complex trade ahead of Public Customer Orders Orders.7 Specifically, Complex Orders under Rule 7240(b)(1). on the Complex Order Book, which is in Customer Cross Orders are As a regulatory matter, proposed Rule line with regular Customer Cross automatically executed upon entry 7110(c)(7)(C) states that IM–7140–1 Orders. In addition, the Exchange notes provided that the execution (i) is at least applies to the entry and execution of that ISE allows Complex Customer $0.01 better than any Public Customer Complex Customer Cross Orders.11 Cross Orders to trade at the same price Complex Order on the Complex Order The following example illustrates the as non-Priority Complex Customer Cross Book; 8 (ii) is at least $0.01 better than execution of a Complex Customer Cross Orders on the same strategy.14 Pursuant the cBBO 9 (iii) is at or better than any Order: to Rule 7110(c)(5), a Customer Cross non-Public Customer Complex Order on Example 1—Execution of a Complex Order must execute at a price that is at the Complex Order Book; and (iv) is at Customer Cross Order or between the best bid and offer on or between the cNBBO.10 The purpose BOX Leg A Book: 6.00–6.50 BOX and is not at the same price as a of the requirement that the execution BOX Leg B Book: 3.00–3.30 Public Customer Order on the BOX must be at least $0.01 better than any Strategy: Buy A Call, Sell B Call Book. Additionally, the Exchange is Public Customer Complex Order on the The cNBBO is 2.70–3.20 proposing to have the execution price be Complex Order Book is to ensure that The cBBO 12 is 2.70–3.50 within the cNBBO, which MIAX does the Complex Customer Cross Order does The Complex Order Book contains a Public not provide. The Exchange believes this not trade in front of any resting Public Customer order to sell the strategy at 3.20 difference is minor because the Customer Complex Orders. The purpose Exchange is simply ensuring that the 11 Rule 7140(b) prevents an Options Participant execution price respect the best net 3 executing agency orders to increase its economic See https://boxoptions.com/assets/RC-2017-11- prices available in the market. CC_QCC_cNBBO-July-10-Implementation-1.pdf. gain from trading against the order without first 4 See MIAX Rules 518(b)(5) and 515(h)(3). giving other trading interest on BOX an opportunity Additionally, similar to the above, to trade with the agency order pursuant to Rule 5 Proposed Rule 7240(b)(4)(iii) is based on MIAX regular Customer Cross Orders may not 7150 (Price Improvement Period), Rule 7245 Rule 518(b)(5). trade through the NBBO. (Complex Order Price Improvement Period) or Rule 6 See BOX Rule 7110(c)(5). 7270 (Block Trades). However, the Exchange Next, MIAX’s Rule requires the 7 Proposed Rule 7110(c)(7) is based on MIAX Rule recognizes that it may be possible for an Options execution to be at least $0.01 better than 515(h)(3). Participant to establish a relationship with a best price order on the strategy book or 8 The term ‘‘Complex Order Book’’ means the Customer or other person (including affiliates) to the derived market price, whichever is electronic book of Complex Orders maintained by deny agency orders the opportunity to interact on the BOX Trading Host. See Rule 7240(a)(8). BOX and to realize similar economic benefits as it more aggressive. The Exchange also 9 The term ‘‘cBBO’’ means the best net bid and would achieve by executing agency orders as notes that MIAX includes non-displayed offer price for a Complex Order Strategy based on principal. It will be a violation of this Rule for an trading interest when determining the the BBO on the BOX Book for the individual Options Participant to circumvent this Rule by best price based on the regular books, options components of such Strategy. See Rule providing an opportunity for a Customer or other 7240(a)(1). person (including affiliates) to execute against which the Exchange is not proposing 10 The term ‘‘cNBBO’’ means the best net bid and agency orders handled by the Options Participant offer price for a Complex Order Strategy based on immediately upon their entry into the Trading Host. 13 See MIAX Rules 515(h)(3) and 518(b)(5). the NBBO for the individual options components of See IM–7140–1. 14 See Nasdaq ISE, LLC (‘‘Nasdaq ISE’’) Rule 722 such Strategy. See Rule 7240(a)(3). 12 See supra note 9. Supplementary Material .08(d) [sic].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16927

because the Exchange does not have entering orders at unintended prices Orders removes impediments to and non-displayed interest. and orders trading at prices that are perfects the mechanisms of a free and Further, MIAX rejects a Complex extreme and potentially erroneous, open market and a national market Customer Cross Order if, at the time of which may likely have resulted from system because Participants will be receipt, any component of the strategy is human or operational error. given additional ways in which they can subject to a PRIME Auction, a Route The Exchange will provide notice of execute Complex Orders. Timer, or liquidity refresh pause. The the exact implementation date of the The proposed rule change will protect Exchange is not proposing the same proposed protections, via Circular, at investors and the public interest by conditions.15 With respect to not least two weeks prior to implementing assuring the existing priority and rejecting when a component is subject the proposed change.19 allocation rules applicable to the to an auction, the Exchange notes that processing and execution of Customer 2. Statutory Basis this approach is in line with the Cross Orders and Complex Orders treatment of a COPIP when there is an The Exchange believes that the remains consistent with the processing ongoing PIP on a component of the proposal is consistent with the and execution of these order types, Complex Order. Specifically, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the unless otherwise specifically set forth in Exchange will accept Complex Orders Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the the rules. designated for the COPIP where there is ‘‘Act’’),20 in general, and Section 6(b)(5) The Exchange believes that the a PIP on an individual component.16 of the Act,21 in particular, in that it is proposal to reject a Complex Customer Further, in order to ensure orderly designed to prevent fraudulent and Cross Order at the time of receipt of the markets involving multiple Complex manipulative acts and practices, to order when the strategy is subject to an Orders with common components, the promote just and equitable principles of ongoing auction (including COPIP, Exchange is proposing additional trade, to foster cooperation and Facilitation and Solicitation auctions), circumstances in which a Complex coordination with persons engaged in or there is an exposed order on the Customer Cross Order will be rejected, facilitating transactions in securities, to strategy, removes impediments to and specifically, when there is an exposed remove impediments to and perfect the perfects the mechanism of a free and order on the strategy pursuant to rule mechanism of a free and open market open market by ensuring orderly 7240(b)(4)(iii), or there is an ongoing and a national market system, and, in markets involving multiple complex COPIP, Facilitation or Solicitation general to protect investors and the orders with common components. auction on the strategy. public interest. The proposed rule change to Lastly, the Exchange proposes to The proposal to amend Rules 7110 implement a debit/credit check for delete the reference to COPIP in BOX and 7240 to codify rules covering Customer Cross Orders is consistent Rule 7110(c)(5) to make clear that Complex Customer Cross is consistent with the Act. With the use of debit/ single-leg Customer Cross transactions with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act because credit checks, the Exchange can further may be executed when the series is this proposal promotes just and assist with the maintenance of a fair and orderly market by mitigating the involved in a COPIP. The Exchange equitable principles of trade and potential risks associated with Complex notes that this is similar to functionality protects investors and the public Customer Cross Orders trading at prices that exists on another exchange.17 interest by providing increased opportunities for the execution of that are inconsistent with their Complex Order Protections for Complex Complex Orders. The Exchange believes strategies (which may result in Customer Cross Orders that the proposed Complex Customer executions at prices that are extreme Lastly, the Exchange proposes to Cross rules will benefit Participants and and potentially erroneous), which expand certain Complex Order the marketplace as a whole by adopting ultimately protects investors. This protections to Complex Customer Cross rules that allow for the trading of these proposed implementation of the debit/ Orders. Specifically, the Exchange types of orders on the Exchange. The credit check promotes just and equitable proposes to amend Rule IM–7240– Exchange believes the proposed rules principles of trade, as it is based on the 1(a)(5) and IM–7240(b)(5) to apply these for Complex Customer Cross Orders same general option and volatility price protection checks to Complex remove impediments to and perfects the pricing principles which the Exchange Customer Cross Orders. The Exchange mechanism of a free and open market understands are used by market notes that another options exchange has and a national market system and will participants in their option pricing models. similar price checks for Complex result in more efficient trading and Additionally, the Exchange also Customer Cross Orders.18 The Exchange enhance the likelihood of the Complex believes that calculating a maximum Orders executing at the best prices by believes that these protections should be price for true butterfly spreads, vertical providing additional order types extended to Complex Customer Cross spreads, and box spreads will assist resulting in potentially greater liquidity Orders as it will mitigate potential risks with the maintenance of fair and orderly available for trading on the Exchange. associated with market participants markets by helping to mitigate the The proposed rule change will potential risks associated with Complex 15 BOX notes that it does not have either the provide rules that make existing Customer Cross Orders trading at Route Timer or liquidity refresh pause features on functionality available to additional extreme and potentially erroneous the Exchange. As such, BOX is not proposing to order types. Providing rules that make include these features under the Proposal. prices that are inconsistent with Customer Cross available for Complex 16 See IM–7245–2. particular Complex Order strategies. 17 See MIAX Rule 515(h). Under MIAX rule Further, the Exchange notes that the 515(h), single-leg Customer Cross Orders are 19 Due to technological delays, Complex Order rejected when the trading interest is subject to a price protections detailed in SR–BOX–2018–13 maximum price is designed to mitigate PRIME Auction or PRIME Solicitation Auction. have not yet been implemented. The Exchange will the potential risks of executions at MIAX Rule 515(h) does not indicate that a single- provide notice of the exact implementation date of prices that are not within an acceptable leg Customer Cross Order will be rejected, if the these protections, including the proposed price range, as a means to help mitigate series is subject to a cPRIME Auction. protections discussed herein, at least two weeks 18 See Chicago Board Options Exchange, prior to implementing the proposed change. the potential risks associated with Incorporated (‘‘Cboe’’) Interpretations and Polices 20 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). Complex Orders trading at prices that .08(c) and (g) to Rule 6.53C. 21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). are inconsistent with their strategies, in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16928 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

addition to the debit/credit check. As C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s number should be included on the such, the proposed rule change is Statement on Comments on the subject line if email is used. To help the designed to protect investors and the Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission process and review your public interest. Members, Participants, or Others comments more efficiently, please use The Exchange has neither solicited only one method. The Commission will B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s post all comments on the Commission’s Statement on Burden on Competition nor received comments on the proposed rule change. internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the The Exchange does not believe that III. Date of Effectiveness of the submission, all subsequent the proposed rule change to provide Proposed Rule Change and Timing for amendments, all written statements rules governing the trading of Complex Commission Action with respect to the proposed rule Customer Cross Orders will impose any change that are filed with the burden on competition not necessary or Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect the Commission, and all written appropriate in furtherance of the protection of investors or the public communications relating to the purposes of the Act. In this regard and interest; (ii) impose any significant proposed rule change between the as indicated above, the Exchange notes burden on competition; and (iii) become Commission and any person, other than that the rule is being proposed as a operative for 30 days from the date on those that may be withheld from the competitive response to the rules of which it was filed, or such shorter time public in accordance with the 22 another exchange. Additionally, the as the Commission may designate, it has provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be proposed rule change is intended to become effective pursuant to Section available for website viewing and promote competition by adding rules for 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 24 and Rule 19b– printing in the Commission’s Public new order types that enable Participants 4(f)(6) thereunder.25 Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, to execute Complex Orders on the At any time within 60 days of the Washington, DC 20549 on official Exchange. The Exchange believes that filing of the proposed rule change, the business days between the hours of this enhances inter-market competition Commission summarily may 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such by enabling the Exchange to compete for temporarily suspend such rule change if filing also will be available for this type of order flow with other it appears to the Commission that such inspection and copying at the principal exchanges that have similar rules and action is necessary or appropriate in the office of the Exchange. All comments functionalities in place. public interest, for the protection of received will be posted without change. investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Persons submitting comments are Further, the Exchange does not the purposes of the Act. If the cautioned that we do not redact or edit believe that the proposed Complex Commission takes such action, the personal identifying information from Order protections will impose any Commission shall institute proceedings comment submissions. You should burden on competition not necessary or to determine whether the proposed rule submit only information that you wish appropriate in furtherance of the should be approved or disapproved. to make available publicly. All purposes of the Act. In this regard and submissions should refer to File as indicated above, the Exchange notes IV. Solicitation of Comments Number SR–BOX–2019–10, and should that the rule change is being proposed Interested persons are invited to be submitted on or before May 14, 2019. as a competitive response to the rules of submit written data, views, and For the Commission, by the Division of 23 another exchange. Additionally, the arguments concerning the foregoing, Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Exchange believes the proposed rule including whether the proposed rule authority.26 change is beneficial to Participants as it change is consistent with the Act. Jill M. Peterson, will provide increased protections that Comments may be submitted by any of Assistant Secretary. the following methods: will prevent the execution of certain [FR Doc. 2019–08101 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Complex Orders that were entered in Electronic Comments BILLING CODE 8011–01–P error. The Exchange believes the • proposal is pro-competitive and should Use the Commission’s internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ serve to attract additional Complex rules/sro.shtml); or SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Orders to the Exchange. Further, the • Send an email to rule-comments@ Exchange does not believe the proposed [Disaster Declaration #15927 and #15928; sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Nebraska Disaster Number NE–00074] change will not impose a burden on BOX–2019–10 on the subject line. intramarket competition because it is Presidential Declaration Amendment of available to all Participants. Paper Comments a Major Disaster for Public Assistance For the reasons stated, the Exchange • Send paper comments in triplicate Only for the State of Nebraska does not believe that the proposed rule to Secretary, Securities and Exchange AGENCY: U.S. Small Business changes will impose any burden on Commission, 100 F Street NE, Administration. competition not necessary or Washington, DC 20549–1090. ACTION: appropriate in furtherance of the All submissions should refer to File Amendment 2. Number SR–BOX–2019–10. This file purposes of the Act, and the Exchange SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the believes the proposed change will, in Presidential declaration of a major fact, enhance competition. 24 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 25 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). As required under Rule disaster for Public Assistance Only for 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the the State of Nebraska (FEMA—4420— Commission with written notice of its intent to file DR), dated 04/05/2019. the proposed rule change, along with a brief Incident: Severe Winter Storm, description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date Straight-line Winds, and Flooding. 22 See MIAX Rules 515(h)(3) and 518(b)(5). of filing of the proposed rule change, or such 23 See supra, note 18. shorter time as designated by the Commission. 26 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16929

Incident Period: 03/09/2019 through Administration, Processing and ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 04/01/2019. Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport invited to submit written comments on DATES: Issued on 04/05/2019. Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. the proposed information collection to Physical Loan Application Deadline FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Office of Information and Regulatory Date: 06/04/2019. Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster Affairs, Office of Management and Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Assistance, U.S. Small Business Budget. Comments should be addressed Application Deadline Date: 01/06/2020. Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, to the attention of the Desk Officer, ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, Department of Transportation/FAA, and applications to: U.S. Small Business (202) 205–6734. sent via electronic mail to oira_ Administration, Processing and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice [email protected], or faxed to Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport of the President’s major disaster (202) 395–6974, or mailed to the Office Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. declaration for the State of Iowa, dated of Information and Regulatory Affairs, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 03/23/2019, is hereby amended to Office of Management and Budget, Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster include the following areas as adversely Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Assistance, U.S. Small Business affected by the disaster: Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Primary Counties (Physical Damage and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, Economic Injury Loans): Ashley Awwad by email at: (202) 205–6734. Pottawattamie, Shelby [email protected]; phone: 816– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury 786–5716. of the President’s major disaster Loans Only): SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: declaration for Private Non-Profit Iowa: Audubon, Carroll, Cass Public Comments Invited: You are organizations in the State of Nebraska, Nebraska: Douglas asked to comment on any aspect of this dated 04/05/2019, is hereby amended to All other information in the original information collection, including (a) include the following areas as adversely declaration remains unchanged. Whether the proposed collection of affected by the disaster. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance information is necessary for FAA’s Primary Counties: Banner, Brown, Number 59008) performance; (b) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to Cheyenne, Dawes, Deuel, Franklin, James Rivera, Garden, Harlan, Keya Paha, enhance the quality, utility and clarity Associate Administrator for Disaster of the information collection; and (d) Kimball, Lincoln, Merrick, Phelps, Assistance. Rock, Saunders, Sheridan, Sioux, ways that the burden could be [FR Doc. 2019–08119 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Stanton, Thurston, Webster. minimized without reducing the quality BILLING CODE 8025–01–P All other information in the original of the collected information. The agency declaration remains unchanged. will summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB’s (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION clearance of this information collection. Number 59008) OMB Control Number: 2120–0707. Federal Aviation Administration James Rivera, Title: Survey of Airman Satisfaction with Aeromedical Certification Services. Associate Administrator for Disaster Agency Information Collection Form Numbers: N/A. Assistance. Activities: Requests for Comments; Type of Review: Renewal of an [FR Doc. 2019–08090 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Clearance of a Renewed Approval of information collection. BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Information Collection: Survey of Background: The Federal Register Airman Satisfaction With Aeromedical Notice with a 60-day comment period Certification Services SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION soliciting comments on the following AGENCY: Federal Aviation collection of information was published [Disaster Declaration #15898 and #15899; Administration (FAA), DOT. on February 1, 2019 (84 FR 1265). The IOWA Disaster Number IA–00086] ACTION: Notice and request for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Presidential Declaration Amendment of comments. through the Office of Aerospace a Major Disaster for the State of IOWA Medicine (OAM), is responsible for the SUMMARY: In accordance with the medical certification of pilots and AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA certain other personnel under 14 CFR 67 Administration. invites public comments about our to ensure they are medically qualified to ACTION: Amendment 1. intention to request the Office of operate aircraft and perform their duties Management and Budget (OMB) safely. In the accomplishment of this SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the approval to renew an information responsibility, OAM provides a number Presidential declaration of a major collection. The Federal Register Notice of services to pilots, and has established disaster for the State of IOWA (FEMA– with a 60-day comment period soliciting goals for the performance of those 4421–DR), dated 03/23/2019. comments on the following collection of services. This is a biennial survey Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding. information was published on February designed to meet the requirement to Incident Period: 03/12/2019 and 1, 2019. The collection involves survey stakeholder satisfaction under continuing. soliciting feedback from airmen on Executive Order No. 12862, ‘‘Setting DATES: Issued on 03/23/2019. service quality of Aeromedical Customer Service Standards,’’ and the Physical Loan Application Deadline Certification Services. The information Government Performance and Results Date: 05/22/2019. to be collected will be used to inform Act of 1993 (GPRA). Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan improvements in Aeromedical The survey of airman satisfaction with Application Deadline Date: 12/23/2019. Certification Services. Aeromedical Certification Services ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan DATES: Written comments should be assesses airman opinion of key applications to: U.S. Small Business submitted by May 23, 2019. dimensions of service quality. These

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16930 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

dimensions, identified by the OMB Trucking Associations (ATA) to allow DATES: The closing date for comments Statistical Policy Office in the 1993 certain alternate methods for the on the petition is May 23, 2019. ‘‘Resource Manual for Customer securement of agricultural commodities ADDRESSES: Interested persons are Surveys,’’ are courtesy, competence, transported. The document contains an invited to submit written data, views, reliability, and communication. The incorrect uniform resource locator and arguments on this petition. survey also provides airmen with the (URL) where it is available on the Comments must refer to the docket opportunity to provide feedback on the FMCSA website. number cited in the title of this notice services and a medical certificate DATES: This exemption is effective April and may be submitted by any of the application tool they use. This 23, 2019 and ending April 23, 2024. following methods: information is used to inform FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. • Mail: Send comments by mail improvements in Aeromedical Luke W. Loy, Vehicle and Roadside addressed to the U.S. Department of Certification Services. The survey was Operations Division, Office of Carrier, Transportation, Docket Operations, M– initially deployed in 2004, and Driver, and Vehicle Safety, Department 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room deployed again in 2006, 2008, 2012, of Transportation, FMCSA, 1200 New W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 2014, and 2016 (OMB Control No. 2120– Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC Washington, DC 20590. 0707). Across collections, minor 20590. Telephone: (202) 366–0676. • Hand Delivery: Deliver comments revisions have been made to the survey Office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., by hand to the U.S. Department of items and response options to reflect Monday through Friday, except Federal Transportation, Docket Operations, M– changes in operational services and Holidays. 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room survey technology. In the current SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, collection, format changes have been notice from docket 2017- 0139, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket made to accommodate multiple appearing on page 84 FR 15282 in the Section is open on weekdays from 10 administration modes (i.e., paper, Federal Register of Monday, April 15, a.m. to 5 p.m. except for Federal desktop computer, and mobile device), 2015, the following correction is made: Holidays. reduce the burden on the individual on page 15282, column one, under the • Electronically: Submit comments respondent, and potentially improve the heading Terms and Conditions for the electronically by logging onto the response rate. Exemption, correct Federal Docket Management System Respondents: 2,323 Airmen. ‘‘www.fmcsa.dot.gov/ (FDMS) website at https:// Frequency: Biannually. www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online Estimated Average Burden per insert.specific.link.when. finalized.’’ to read ‘‘www.fmcsa.dot.gov/exemptions’’. instructions for submitting comments. Response: 10–15 minutes. • Comments may also be faxed to Estimated Total Annual Burden: 10– Issued on: April 17, 2019. (202) 493–2251. 15 minutes per respondent, 581 total Larry W. Minor, Comments must be written in the burden hours. Associate Administrator for Policy. English language, and be no greater than Issued in Washington, DC, on April 17, [FR Doc. 2019–08132 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 15 pages in length, although there is no 2019. BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P limit to the length of necessary Ashley Awwad, attachments to the comments. If Management and Program Analyst, Civil comments are submitted in hard copy Aerospace Medical Center, Flight Deck DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION form, please ensure that two copies are Human Factors Research Lab, AAM–510. provided. If you wish to receive [FR Doc. 2019–08110 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration confirmation that comments you have BILLING CODE 4910–13–P submitted by mail were received, please [Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0100; Notice 1] enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Daimler Trucks North America, Receipt all comments received will be posted of Petition for Decision of without change to https:// Federal Motor Carrier Safety Inconsequential Noncompliance Administration www.regulations.gov, including any AGENCY: National Highway Traffic personal information provided. [Docket No. FMCSA–2017–0319] Safety Administration (NHTSA), All comments and supporting materials received before the close of Parts and Accessories Necessary for Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Receipt of petition. business on the closing date indicated Safe Operation; Agricultural and Food above will be filed in the docket and Transporters Conference of American SUMMARY: Daimler Trucks North considered. All comments and Trucking Associations Application for America (DTNA) has determined that supporting materials received after the Exemption certain model year (MY) 2010–2018 closing date will also be filed and AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety DTNA motor vehicles do not fully considered to the fullest extent possible. Administration (FMCSA), DOT. comply with Federal Motor Vehicle When the petition is granted or ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, denied, notice of the decision will also of application for exemption; correction. Lamps, Reflective Devices, and be published in the Federal Register Associated Equipment. DTNA filed a pursuant to the authority indicated at SUMMARY: FMCSA corrects a notice that noncompliance report dated September the end of this notice. appeared in the Federal Register on 19, 2018. DTNA subsequently All comments, background April 15, 2019. The Federal Motor petitioned NHTSA on October 11, 2018, documentation, and supporting Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) for a decision that the subject materials submitted to the docket may announced its decision to grant a noncompliance is inconsequential as it be viewed by anyone at the address and limited 5-year exemption to the relates to motor vehicle safety. This times given above. The documents may Agricultural and Food Transporters document announces receipt of DTNA’s also be viewed on the internet at https:// Conference (AFTC) of American petition. www.regulations.gov by following the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16931

online instructions for accessing the reflective device, or other motor vehicle freezing conditions and crosses a patch dockets. The docket ID number for this equipment is permitted to be installed of ice. This causes a wheel to lose petition is shown in the heading of this that impairs the effectiveness of lighting traction and the ATC applies brake force notice. equipment required by’’ Standard No. to that wheel end. The torque is DOT’s complete Privacy Act 108. DTNA cited an interpretation transferred to other wheel ends causing Statement is available for review in a response to GM dated May 20, 2000, a momentary brake light illumination. If Federal Register notice published on where NHTSA stated that brake lights it is a small ice patch, the event may be April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477–78). should not be illuminated for ATC and over and the vehicle may continue on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: concluded that installation of traction its way. If the ice patch is large, it is I. Overview: DTNA has determined control systems, or any other imperative that the vehicle slows down that certain MY 2011–2019 DTNA motor equipment, that activates the stop lamps to a safe speed under slick conditions vehicles do not fully comply with for purposes other than to indicate that and warns others of the impending paragraph S6.2 of FMVSS No. 108, the vehicle is stopping or slowing is slowdown. As soon as slick road Lamps, Reflective Devices, and prohibited by S5.1.3 and would create a conditions are noticed and wheels begin Associated Equipment. (49 CFR noncompliance with Standard No. 108. to slip, the driver would let up on the 571.108). DTNA filed a noncompliance 2. ATC events occur during low throttle. report dated September 19, 2018, traction conditions such as snow, ice Brakes are commonly applied causing the brake lights to illuminate when a pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and and mud. The duration of the event can driver sees or senses a change in road Noncompliance Responsibility and be very short and may not even be conditions such and an icy patch. Reports. DTNA subsequently petitioned noticed by the following driver. If brake Reducing vehicle speed in adverse NHTSA on October 11, 2018, for an light illumination for an ATC event is conditions increases safety, so signaling exemption from the notification and noticed, it would help to provide early changing road conditions to following remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. warning of an adverse road condition drivers would improve safety and give Chapter 301 on the basis that this ahead and encourage the following them the opportunity to increase the noncompliance is inconsequential as it driver to slow down. following distance. Department of relates to motor vehicle safety pursuant 3. Below are several examples of ATC Transportation guidance supports this to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and events: goal: 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for a. Taking Off From a Stop Æ NHTSA’s Winter Driving Tips says: Inconsequential Defect or ATC can be very helpful to a driver ‘‘Drive slowly. It’s harder to control or Noncompliance. when taking off from a stop in low stop your vehicle on a slick or snow- This notice of receipt of DTNA traction conditions. From time to time a covered road. Increase your following petition is published under 49 U.S.C. vehicle will park with one drive axle distance enough so that you’ll have 30118 and 30120, and does not wheel end right over a patch of ice, and plenty of time to stop for vehicles ahead represent any agency decision or other without ATC, it can be difficult to take of you.’’ exercises of judgment concerning the off. This happens after the vehicle has Æ FMCSA released CMV Driving merits of the petition. been stopped and is trying to move. It Tips; Tip#1 is: Reduce Your Driving II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately seems unlikely that the activation of the Speed in Adverse Road and/or Weather 14,340 MY 2011–2019 Western Star brake lights during this ATC event Conditions. ‘‘You should reduce your 4700 and 4900, Freightliner Business 1 1 would cause a safety concern to speed by ⁄3 on wet roads and by ⁄2 or Class M2, 114SD, 108SD, 122SD, and following drivers since the vehicle is more on snow packed roads (i.e., if you Coronado motor vehicles, manufactured stationary. would normally be traveling at a speed between May 4, 2010, and August 23, of 60 mph on dry pavement, then on a 2018, are potentially involved. b. Low Speed wet road you should reduce your speed III. Noncompliance: DTNA stated that At low speed, hazard warning lights to 40 mph, and on a snow-packed road the noncompliance is that the brake are commonly used to warn other you should reduce your speed to 30 lights, in the subject vehicles, illuminate drivers of adverse road conditions such mph). When you come upon slick, icy with Automatic Traction Control (ATC) as those that are in effect when an ATC roads you should drive slowly and activation and, therefore, do not meet event may occur. Since the hazard lights cautiously and pull off the road if you the requirements specified in S6.2.1 of may already be applied in this case, the can no longer safely control the FMVSS No. 108. addition of momentary brake light vehicle.’’ IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph activation is unlikely to cause In addition to the lack of safety S6.2.1 of FMVSS No. 108, includes the confusion. impact from brake illumination under requirements relevant to this petition: NHTSA has stated in Docket No. the various ATC activation conditions • No additional lamp, reflective NHTSA–2000–7312 (referenced below) taking off from stop; low speed; or high device, or other motor vehicles that the momentary activation of the speed DTNA is not aware of any equipment is permitted to be installed Center High Mounted Stop Lamp accidents, injuries, owner complaints or that impairs the effectiveness of lighting (CHMSL) and hazard warning lamps can field reports for brake light illumination equipment required by this FMVSS No. augment the message that extra for ATC events concerning the subject 108. attention should be given to the leading vehicles. V. Summary of DTNA Petition: DTNA vehicle. This is precisely the situation 4. DTNA notes that NHTSA has described the subject noncompliance with low speed ATC events. previously granted petitions for and stated its belief that the decisions of inconsequential noncompliance is inconsequential as it c. High Speed noncompliance for lighting relates to motor vehicle safety. For an ATC event to occur at high requirements where a technical In support of its petition, DTNA speed, it would signify that road noncompliance exists, but does not submitted the following reasoning: conditions have changed rapidly. One create a negative impact on safety. 1. FMVSS No.108 paragraph S6.2.1 way it could happen is if the vehicle has 5. In Docket No. NHTSA–2000–7312 states that ‘‘No additional lamp, been climbing a hill on dry roads in sub- (published on June 18, 2001) a Petition

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16932 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

for inconsequentiality by GM was to locate the docket number listed in the Order is effective immediately and shall granted by NHTSA. In this instance, title of this notice. remain in effect for 30 days from the certain models could have unintended NHTSA notes that the statutory date of issuance. CHMSL illumination briefly if the provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: hazard warning lamp switch is 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to Adam Horsley, Deputy Assistant Chief depressed to its limit of travel. NHTSA file petitions for a determination of Counsel for Hazardous Materials Safety, stated: ‘‘The intended use of a hazard inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety warning lamp and the momentary exempt manufacturers only from the Administration, telephone: (202) 366– activation of a CHMSL do not provide duties found in sections 30118 and 4400. a conflicting message. The illumination 30120, respectively, to notify owners, of the CHMSL is intended to signify that purchasers, and dealers of a defect or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the vehicles brakes are being applied noncompliance and to remedy the accordance with the provisions of 49 and that the vehicle might be defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any U.S.C. 5103(c), the Administrator for the decelerating. Hazard warning lamps are decision on this petition only applies to Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety intended as a more general message to the subject vehicles that DTNA no Administration (PHMSA), hereby nearby drivers that extra attention longer controlled at the time it declares that an emergency exists that should be given to the vehicle. A brief determined that the noncompliance warrants issuance of a Waiver of 49 CFR illumination of the CHMSL while existed. However, any decision on this 174.14 for operations within the activating the hazard warning lamps petition does not relieve vehicle Nebraska Severe Winter Storm, Straight- would not confuse the intended general distributors and dealers of the line Winds, And Flooding disaster area. message, nor would the brief prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, The Waiver is granted to railroad illumination in the absence of the other or introduction or delivery for carriers when conducting operations brake lamps cause confusion that the introduction into interstate commerce of within the Nebraska Severe Winter brakes were unintentionally applied.’’ the noncompliant vehicles under their Storm, Straight-line Winds, And 6. DTNA believes that the same control after DTNA notified them that Flooding disaster area. situation exists in the present case, with the subject noncompliance existed. temporary illumination of the brake On March 21, 2019, the President lamps during ATC activation. The Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: issued an Emergency Declaration for temporary brake light illumination delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and Nebraska Severe Winter Storm, Straight- 501.8. serves to emphasize the message to line Winds, And Flooding (DR–4420). following drivers that adverse or Otto G. Matheke III, This Waiver Order covers all areas unusual road conditions may exist and Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. identified in the declaration, as they should pay close attention. [FR Doc. 2019–08124 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] amended. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5103(c), 7. In Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0125 BILLING CODE 4910–59–P PHMSA has authority delegated by the (published on Feb 02, 2018) a Petition Secretary (49 CFR 1.97(b)(3)) to waive for inconsequentiality by GM was compliance with any part of the HMR granted by NHTSA. In this instance, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION provided that the grant of the waiver is: under certain conditions the parking (1) In the public interest; (2) not lamps on the subject vehicles fail to Pipeline and Hazardous Materials inconsistent with the safety of meet the requirement that parking Safety Administration transporting hazardous materials; and lamps must be activated when [Docket No. PHMSA–2018–0100; Notice No. (3) necessary to facilitate the safe headlamps are activated in a steady 2019–02] movement of hazardous materials into, burning state. NHTSA stated: ‘‘. . . The from, and within an area of a major Agency agrees with GM that in this case Hazardous Materials: Emergency disaster or emergency that has been this situation would have a low Waiver No. 12 declared under the Robert T. Stafford probability of occurrence and, if it Disaster Relief and Emergency should occur, it would neither be long AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.). lasting nor likely to occur during a Materials Safety Administration Given the continuing impacts caused period when parking lamps are (PHMSA), DOT. by the Nebraska Severe Winter Storm, generally in use. Importantly, when the ACTION: Notice of emergency waiver Straight-line Winds, And Flooding noncompliance does occur, other lamps order. disaster, PHMSA’s Administrator has remain functional. The combination of determined that regulatory relief is in all of the factors, specific to this case, SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an the public interest and necessary to abate the risk to safety.’’ emergency waiver order to railroad DTNA concluded by expressing the carriers waiving certain expedited ensure the safe transportation in belief that the subject noncompliance is movement requirements when commerce of hazardous materials while inconsequential as it relates to motor conducting operations within the railroad carriers conduct operations vehicle safety, and that its petition to be Nebraska Severe Winter Storm, Straight- within the Nebraska Severe Winter exempted from providing notification of line Winds, And Flooding disaster area. Storm, Straight-line Winds, And the noncompliance, as required by 49 Given the continuing impacts caused by Flooding disaster area. By execution of U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the the Nebraska Severe Winter Storm, this Waiver Order, railroad carriers are noncompliance, as required by 49 Straight-line Winds, And Flooding excepted from the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. disaster, PHMSA’s Administrator has CFR 174.14 when conducting operations DTNA’s complete petition and all determined that regulatory relief is in within the Nebraska Severe Winter supporting documents are available by the public interest and necessary to Storm, Straight-line Winds, And logging onto the Federal Docket ensure the safe transportation in Flooding disaster area. Management System (FDMS) website at: commerce of hazardous materials while This Waiver Order is effective https://www.regulations.gov and railroad carriers conduct operations immediately and shall remain in effect following the online search instructions within the disaster area. This Waiver for 30 days from the date of issuance.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16933

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 22, this notice contains information and independence to help deliver significant 2019. instructions relevant to the application local or regional economic benefit. Drue Pearce, process for these BUILD Transportation B. Federal Award Information Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and grants, and all applicants should read Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. this notice in its entirety so that they 1. Amount Available [FR Doc. 2019–08117 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] have the information they need to The FY 2019 Appropriations Act BILLING CODE 4910–60–P submit eligible and competitive appropriated $900 million to be applications. For this round of BUILD awarded by DOT for the BUILD Transportation grants, the maximum DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Transportation grants program. The FY grant award is $25 million, and no more 2019 BUILD Transportation grants are than $90 million can be awarded to a for capital investments in surface Office of the Secretary of single State, as specified in the FY 2019 Transportation transportation infrastructure and are to Appropriations Act. Per statute, the FY be awarded on a competitive basis for Notice of Funding Opportunity for the 2019 selection criteria are the same as projects that will have a significant local Department of Transportation’s under the FY 2017 TIGER program, or regional impact. Additionally, the National Infrastructure Investments although the description for each Act allows for up to $15 million (of the Under the Consolidated criterion has been updated. For FY 2019 $900 million) to be awarded for the Appropriations Act, 2019 BUILD Transportation grants, the planning, preparation or design of definitions of urban and rural areas eligible projects. DOT is referring to any AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of differ from previous rounds. such awards as BUILD Transportation Transportation, DOT. Additionally, not more than 50 percent planning grants. The FY 2019 ACTION: Notice of funding opportunity. of funds will be awarded to projects Appropriations Act also allows DOT to located in urban and rural areas, retain up to $27 million of the $900 SUMMARY: The Consolidated respectively. Appropriations Act, 2019 (‘‘FY 2019 million for award, oversight and Appropriations Act’’) appropriated $900 Table of Contents administration of grants and credit assistance made under the program. If million to be awarded by the A. Program Description Department of Transportation (‘‘DOT’’) B. Federal Award Information this solicitation does not result in the for National Infrastructure Investments. C. Eligibility Information award and obligation of all available This appropriation stems from the D. Application and Submission Information funds, DOT may publish additional program funded and implemented E. Application Review Information solicitations. pursuant to the American Recovery and F. Federal Award Administration The FY 2019 Appropriations Act Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Information allows up to 20 percent of available G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts funds (or $180 million) to be used by ‘‘Recovery Act’’) and is known as the H. Other Information Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage the Department to pay the subsidy and Development, or ‘‘BUILD Transportation A. Program Description administrative costs of a project receiving credit assistance under the grants,’’ program. Funds for the FY 2019 The Consolidated Appropriations Act, BUILD Transportation grants program Transportation Infrastructure Finance 2019 (Pub. L. 116–6, February 15, 2019) and Innovation Act of 1998 (‘‘TIFIA’’) or are to be awarded on a competitive basis (‘‘FY 2019 Appropriations Act’’) for surface transportation infrastructure Railroad Rehabilitation and appropriated $900 million to be Improvement Financing (RRIF) projects that will have a significant local awarded by the Department of or regional impact. The purpose of this programs, if that use of the FY 2019 Transportation (‘‘DOT’’) for National BUILD funds would further the notice is to solicit applications for Infrastructure Investments. Since this BUILD Transportation grants. purposes of the BUILD Transportation program was created, $7.1 billion has grants program. DATES: Applications must be submitted been awarded for capital investments in by 8:00 p.m. E.D.T. on July 15, 2019. surface transportation infrastructure 2. Award Size ADDRESSES: Applications must be over ten rounds of competitive grants. The FY 2019 Appropriations Act submitted through Grants.gov. Throughout the program, these specifies that BUILD Transportation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For discretionary grant awards have grants may not be less than $5 million further information concerning this supported projects that have a and not greater than $25 million, except notice, please contact the BUILD significant local or regional impact. that for projects located in rural areas Transportation grants program staff via Like the FY 2017 TIGER program, the (as defined in Section C.3.ii.) the award email at [email protected], or call FY 2019 BUILD program will also give size is $1 million. There is no minimum Howard Hill at 202–366–0301. A TDD is special consideration to projects which award size, regardless of location, for available for individuals who are deaf or emphasize improved access to reliable, BUILD Transportation planning grants. hard of hearing at 202–366–3993. In safe, and affordable transportation for addition, DOT will regularly post communities in rural areas, such as 3. Restrictions on Funding answers to questions and requests for projects that improve infrastructure Pursuant to the FY 2019 clarifications as well as information condition, address public health and Appropriations Act, no more than 10 about webinars for further guidance on safety, promote regional connectivity or percent of the funds made available for DOT’s website at facilitate economic growth or BUILD Transportation grants (or $90 www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants. competitiveness. Such projects may million) may be awarded to projects in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FY concurrently invest in broadband to a single State. The Act also directs that 2019 BUILD Transportation grant better facilitate productivity, including not more than 50 percent of the funds program will make awards to surface through the U.S. Department of provided for BUILD Transportation transportation infrastructure projects Agriculture’s ReConnect Loan and Grant grants (or $450 million) shall be used for that will have a significant impact program, and help rural citizens access projects located in rural areas with throughout the country. Each section of opportunities, or promote energy population equal to or less than

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16934 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

200,000, and directs that not more than extent to which the previously funded Section F.2. as awarded funds. If repaid 50 percent of the funds provided for project phase has met estimated project from non-Federal sources, Federal credit BUILD Transportation grants (or $450 schedules and budget, as well as the assistance is considered non-Federal million) shall be used for projects ability to realize the benefits expected share. located in urbanized areas with a for the project. 3. Other population of more than 200,000. C. Eligibility Information Further, DOT must take measures to i. Eligible Projects ensure an equitable geographic To be selected for a BUILD distribution of grant funds, an Transportation grant, an applicant must Eligible projects for BUILD appropriate balance in addressing the be an Eligible Applicant and the project Transportation grants are surface needs of urban and rural areas, and must be an Eligible Project. transportation capital projects that include, but are not limited to: (1) investment in a variety of transportation 1. Eligible Applicants modes. Highway, bridge, or other road projects Eligible Applicants for BUILD eligible under title 23, United States 4. Availability of Funds Transportation grants are State, local, Code; (2) public transportation projects The FY 2019 Appropriations Act and tribal governments, including U.S. eligible under chapter 53 of title 49, requires that FY 2019 BUILD territories, transit agencies, port United States Code; (3) passenger and Transportation grants funds are authorities, metropolitan planning freight rail transportation projects; (4) available for obligation only through organizations (MPOs), and other port infrastructure investments September 30, 2021. Obligation occurs political subdivisions of State or local (including inland port infrastructure when a selected applicant and DOT governments. and land ports of entry); and (5) 3 enter into a written grant agreement Multiple States or jurisdictions may intermodal projects. after the applicant has satisfied submit a joint application and must Improvements to Federally owned applicable administrative requirements, identify a lead applicant as the primary facilities are ineligible under the FY including transportation planning and point of contact and also identify the 2019 BUILD program. Research, environmental review requirements. primary recipient of the award. Each demonstration, or pilot projects are Unless authorized by the Department in applicant in a joint application must be eligible only if they will result in long- writing after the Department’s an Eligible Applicant. Joint applications term, permanent surface transportation announcement of FY 2019 BUILD must include a description of the roles infrastructure that has independent awards, any costs incurred prior to the and responsibilities of each applicant utility as defined in Section C.3.iii. Department’s obligation of funds for a and must be signed by each applicant. The FY 2019 Appropriations Act project are ineligible for 2. Cost Sharing or Matching allows up to $15 million for the reimbursement.1 All FY 2019 BUILD planning, preparation or design of funds must be expended (the grant Per the FY 2019 Appropriations Act, eligible projects. Activities eligible for obligation must be liquidated or actually the Federal share of project costs for funding under BUILD Transportation paid out to the grantee) by September which an expenditure is made under the planning grants are related to the 30, 2026. After this date, unliquidated BUILD Transportation grant program planning, preparation, or design— funds are no longer available to the may not exceed 80 percent for a project including environmental analysis, 2 project. As part of the review and located in an urban area. The Secretary feasibility studies, and other pre- selection process described in Section may increase the Federal share of costs construction activities—of surface E.2., DOT will consider a project’s above 80 percent for a project located in transportation capital projects. a rural area. Urban area and rural area likelihood of being ready to proceed Applicants are strongly encouraged to are defined in Section C.3.ii of this with an obligation of BUILD submit applications only for eligible notice. Transportation grant funds and award amounts. complete liquidation of these Non-Federal sources include State obligations, within the statutory funds originating from programs funded ii. Rural/Urban Definition by State revenue, local funds originating timelines. No waiver is possible for For purposes of this notice, a project these deadlines. from State or local revenue-funded programs, or private funds. Toll credits is designated as urban if it is located 5. Previous BUILD/TIGER Awards under 23 U.S.C. 120(i) are considered a within (or on the boundary of) a Census- designated urbanized area 4 that had a Recipients of BUILD/TIGER grants Federal source under the BUILD population greater than 200,000 in the may apply for funding to support program and, therefore, cannot be used 2010 Census. 5 If a project is located additional phases of a project previously to satisfy the statutory cost sharing outside a Census-designated urbanized awarded funds in the BUILD/TIGER requirement of a BUILD award. Unless area with a population greater than program. However, to be competitive, otherwise authorized by statute, non- 200,000, it is designated as a rural the applicant should demonstrate the Federal cost-share may not be counted as the non-Federal share for both the project. 1 Pre-award costs are only costs incurred directly BUILD Transportation grant and another pursuant to the negotiation and anticipation of the Federal grant program. The Department 3 Please note that the Department may use a BUILD award where such costs are necessary for BUILD Transportation grant to pay for the surface efficient and timely performance of the scope of will not consider previously incurred transportation components of a broader project that work, as determined by DOT. Costs incurred under costs or previously expended or has non-surface transportation components, and an advance construction (23 U.S.C. 115) encumbered funds towards the applicants are encouraged to apply for BUILD authorization before the DOT announces that a matching requirement for any project. Transportation grants to pay for the surface project is selected for a FY 2019 BUILD award transportation components of these projects. cannot be charged to FY 2019 BUILD funds. Matching funds are subject to the same 4 Updated lists of UAs as defined by the Census Likewise, costs incurred under an FTA Letter of Federal requirements described in Bureau are available on the Census Bureau website No Prejudice under Chapter 53 of title 49 U.S.C. at http://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/dc10map/ before the DOT announces that a project is selected 2 To meet match requirements, the minimum total UAUC_RefMap/ua/. for a FY 2019 BUILD award cannot be charged to project cost for a project located in an urban area 5 See www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants for a FY 2019 BUILD funds. must be $6.25 million. list of UAs.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16935

Rural and urban definitions differ in Transportation grant funding for those is directly verifiable by the Department. some other DOT programs, including components. If the application identifies The Department may ask any applicant TIFIA. one or more independent project to supplement data in its application A project located in both an urban components, the application should but expects applications to be complete and a rural area will be designated as clearly identify how each independent upon submission. urban if the majority of the project’s component addresses selection criteria In addition to a detailed statement of costs will be spent in urban areas. and produces benefits on its own, in work, detailed project schedule, and Conversely, a project located in both an addition to describing how the full detailed project budget, the project urban area and a rural area will be proposal of which the independent narrative should include a table of designated as rural if the majority of the component is a part addresses selection contents, maps and graphics, as project’s costs will be spent in rural criteria. appropriate, to make the information areas. easier to review. The Department This definition affects four aspects of iv. Application Limit recommends that the project narrative the program: (1) Not more than $450 Each lead applicant may submit no be prepared with standard formatting million of the funds provided for BUILD more than three applications. Unrelated preferences (a single-spaced document, Transportation grants are to be used for project components should not be using a standard 12-point font such as projects in rural areas; (2) not more than bundled in a single application for the Times New Roman, with 1-inch $450 million of the funds provided for purpose of adhering to the limit. If a margins). The project narrative may not BUILD Transportation grants are to be lead applicant submits more than three exceed 30 pages in length, excluding used for projects in urban areas; (3) for applications as the lead applicant, only cover pages and table of contents. The a project in a rural area the minimum the first three received will be only substantive portions that may award is $1 million; and (4) the considered. exceed the 30-page limit are documents Secretary may increase the Federal supporting assertions or conclusions share above 80 percent to pay for the D. Application and Submission made in the 30-page project narrative. If costs of a project in a rural area. Information possible, website links to supporting iii. Project Components 1. Address documentation should be provided rather than copies of these supporting Applications must be submitted to An application may describe a project materials. If supporting documents are Grants.gov. Instructions for submitting that contains more than one component, submitted, applicants should clearly applications can be found at and may describe components that may identify within the project narrative the www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants be carried out by parties other than the relevant portion of the project narrative applicant. DOT may award funds for a along with specific instructions for the that each supporting document component, instead of the larger project, forms and attachments required for supports. The Department recommends if that component (1) independently submission. using appropriately descriptive file meets minimum award amounts 2. Content and Form of Application names (e.g., ‘‘Project Narrative,’’ described in Section B and all eligibility Submission ‘‘Maps,’’ ‘‘Memoranda of Understanding requirements described in Section C; (2) The application must include the and Letters of Support,’’ etc.) for all independently aligns well with the attachments. DOT recommends selection criteria specified in Section E; Standard Form 424 (Application for Federal Assistance), cover page, and the applications include the following and (3) meets National Environmental sections: Policy Act (NEPA) requirements with Project Narrative. More detailed respect to independent utility. information about the Project Narrative i. Project Description Independent utility means that the follows. Applicants should also The first section of the application component will represent a complete and attach to their application should provide a concise description of transportation improvement that is the ‘‘BUILD 2019 Project Information’’ the project, the transportation usable and represents a reasonable form available at challenges that it is intended to address, expenditure of DOT funds even if no www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants. and how it will address those other improvements are made in the The Department recommends that the challenges. This section should discuss area, and will be ready for intended use project narrative follow the basic outline the project’s history, including a upon completion of that component’s below to address the program description of any previously completed construction. All project components requirements and assist evaluators in components. The applicant may use this that are presented together in a single locating relevant information. section to place the project into a application must demonstrate a I. Project Description ...... See D.2.i. broader context of other transportation relationship or connection between II. Project Location ...... See D.2.ii. infrastructure investments being them. (See Section D.2.iv. for Required III. Grant Funds, Sources See D.2.iii. pursued by the project sponsor, and, if Approvals). and Uses of all Project applicable, how it will benefit Applicants should be aware that, Funding. IV. Selection Criteria ...... See D.2.iv. and E.1.i. communities in rural areas. depending upon the relationship V. Project Readiness ...... See D.2.v. and E.1.ii. ii. Project Location between project components and VI. Benefit Cost Analysis See D.2.vi. and E.1.iii. applicable Federal law, DOT funding of This section of the application should only some project components may The project narrative should include describe the project location, including make other project components subject the information necessary for the a detailed geographical description of to Federal requirements as described in Department to determine that the the proposed project, a map of the Section F.2. project satisfies project requirements project’s location and connections to DOT strongly encourages applicants described in Sections B and C and to existing transportation infrastructure, to identify in their applications the assess the selection criteria specified in and geospatial data describing the project components that have Section E.1. To the extent practicable, project location. If the project is located independent utility and separately applicants should provide supporting within the boundary of a Census- detail costs and requested BUILD data and documentation in a form that designated urbanized area, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16936 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

application should identify that project does not address the criterion. the project on the movement of goods urbanized area. Applicants are not required to follow a and people, including how the project specific format, but the outline increases the efficiency of movement iii. Grant Funds, Sources and Uses of suggested below, which addresses each Project Funds and thereby reduces costs of doing criterion separately, promotes a clear business, improves local and regional This section of the application should discussion that assists project freight connectivity to the national and describe the project’s budget. This evaluators. To minimize redundant global economy, reduces burdens of budget should not include any information in the application, the commuting, and improves overall well- previously incurred expenses. At a Department encourages applicants to being. The applicant should describe minimum, it should include: cross-reference from this section of their the extent to which the project (A) Project costs; application to relevant substantive contributes to the functioning and (B) For all funds to be used for eligible information in other sections of the growth of the economy, including the project costs, the source and amount of application. The guidance in this those funds; extent to which the project addresses section is about how the applicant congestion or freight connectivity, (C) For non-Federal funds to be used should organize their application. for eligible project costs, documentation bridges service gaps in rural areas, or Guidance describing how the promotes the expansion of private of funding commitments should be Department will evaluate projects economic development including in referenced here and included as an against the Selection Criteria is in Opportunity Zones. appendix to the application; Section E.1 of this notice. Applicants (D) For Federal funds to be used for also should review that section before (d) Environmental Sustainability eligible project costs, the amount, considering how to organize their nature, and source of any required non- application. This section of the application should Federal match for those funds; and describe how the project addresses the (E) A budget showing how each (1) Primary Selection Criteria environmental sustainability criterion source of funds will be spent. The (a) Safety (described in Section E.1.i.(d) of this budget should show how each funding This section of the application should notice). Applicants are encouraged to source will share in each major describe the anticipated outcomes of the provide quantitative information, construction activity, and present that project that support the Safety criterion including baseline information that data in dollars and percentages. (described in Section E.1.i.(a) of this demonstrates how the project will Funding sources should be grouped into notice). The applicant should include reduce energy consumption, reduce three categories: Non-Federal; BUILD; information on, and to the extent stormwater runoff, or achieve other and other Federal. If the project contains possible, quantify, how the project benefits for the environment such as individual components, the budget would improve safety outcomes within brownfield redevelopment. should separate the costs of each project the project area or wider transportation (e) Quality of Life component. If the project will be network, to include how the project will completed in phases, the budget should reduce the number, rate, and separate the costs of each phase. The This section should describe how the consequences of transportation-related project increases transportation choices budget detail should sufficiently accidents, serious injuries, and demonstrate that the project satisfies the for individuals, expands access to fatalities. If applicable, the applicant essential services for people in statutory cost-sharing requirements should also include information on how described in Section C.2. communities across the United States, the project will eliminate unsafe grade improves connectivity for citizens to In addition to the information crossings or contribute to preventing enumerated above, this section should jobs, health care, and other critical unintended releases of hazardous destinations, particularly for rural provide complete information on how materials. all project funds may be used. For communities, or otherwise addresses example, if a particular source of funds (b) State of Good Repair the quality of life criterion (described in is available only after a condition is This section of the application should Section E.1.i.(e) of this notice). If satisfied, the application should identify describe how the project will contribute construction of the transportation that condition and describe the to a state of good repair by improving project will allow concurrent applicant’s control over whether it is the condition or resilience of existing installation of fiber or other broadband satisfied. Similarly, if a particular transportation facilities and systems deployment as an essential service, the source of funds is available for (described in Section E.1.i.(b) of this applicant should describe those expenditure only during a fixed time notice), including the project’s current activities and how they support quality period, the application should describe condition and how the proposed project of life. Unless the concurrent activities that restriction. Complete information will improve it, and any estimates of support transportation, they will not be about project funds will ensure that the impacts on long-term cost structures or eligible for reimbursement. Department’s expectations for award overall life-cycle costs. If the project (2) Secondary Selection Criteria execution align with any funding will contribute to a state of good repair restrictions unrelated to the Department, of transportation infrastructure that (a) Innovation even if an award differs from the supports border security, the applicant applicant’s request. should describe how. This section of the application should describe innovative strategies used and iv. Selection Criteria (c) Economic Competitiveness the anticipated benefits of using those This section of the application should This section of the application should strategies, including those demonstrate how the project aligns with describe how the project will support corresponding to three categories the Criteria described in Section E.1 of the Economic Competitiveness criterion (described in Section E.1.i.(f) of this this notice. The Department encourages (described in Section E.1.i.(c) of this notice): (i) Innovative Technologies, (ii) applicants to either address each notice). The applicant should include Innovative Project Delivery, or (iii) criterion or expressly state that the information about expected impacts of Innovative Financing.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16937

(i) Innovative Technologies applicant should describe that proposal. relevant aspect of project readiness, If an applicant is proposing to adopt The applicant should also provide promotes a clear discussion that assists innovative safety approaches or sufficient information for evaluators to project evaluators. To minimize technology, the application should confirm that the applicant’s proposal redundant information in the demonstrate the applicant’s capacity to would meet the requirements of the application, the Department encourages specific experimental authority applicants to cross-reference from this implement those innovations, the 6 applicant’s understanding of applicable program. section of their application to relevant substantive information in other Federal requirements and whether the (iii) Innovative Financing sections of the application. innovations may require extraordinary If an applicant plans to incorporate The guidance here is about what permitting, approvals, exemptions, innovative funding or financing, the information applicants should provide waivers, or other procedural actions, applicant should describe the funding and how the applicant should organize and the effects of those innovations on or financing approach, including a their application. Guidance describing the project delivery timeline. description of all activities undertaken how the Department will evaluate a If an applicant is proposing to deploy to pursue private funding or financing project’s readiness is described in innovative traveler information systems for the project and the outcomes of Section E.1.ii of this notice. Applicants or technologies as part of the surface those activities. should review that section when transportation capital project, including (b) Partnership considering how to organize their work zone data exchanges or related application. data exchanges, the application should This section of the application should demonstrate the applicant’s capacity to include information to assess the (a) Technical Feasibility implement these innovations, the partnership criterion (described in The applicant should demonstrate the applicant’s understanding of applicable Section E.1.i.(g) of this notice) including technical feasibility of the project with data standards, and whether the a list of all project parties and details engineering and design studies and proposed innovations will advance about the proposed grant recipient and activities; the development of design safety or other benefits during and after other public and private parties who are criteria and/or a basis of design; the project completion. involved in delivering the project. This basis for the cost estimate presented in If an applicant is proposing to deploy section should also describe efforts to the BUILD application, including the autonomous vehicles or other collaborate among stakeholders, identification of contingency levels innovative motor vehicle technology, including with the private sector. appropriate to its level of design; and the application should demonstrate that Applications for projects involving any scope, schedule, and budget risk- all vehicles will comply with applicable other Federal agencies, or requiring mitigation measures. Applicants should safety requirements, including those action from other Federal agencies, include a detailed statement of work administered by the National Highway should demonstrate commitment and that focuses on the technical and Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) involvement of those agencies. For engineering aspects of the project and and Federal Motor Carrier Safety example, projects involving border describes in detail the project to be Administration (FMCSA). Specifically, infrastructure should demonstrate constructed. the application should show that evidence of concurrent investment from vehicles acquired for the proposed U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, U.S. (b) Project Schedule project will comply with applicable Department of State, and other relevant The applicant should include a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Federal agencies; relevant port projects detailed project schedule that identifies (FMVSS) and Federal Motor Carrier should demonstrate alignment with U.S. all major project milestones. Examples Safety Regulations (FMCSR). If the Army Corps of Engineers investment of such milestones include State and vehicles may not comply, the strategies. local planning approvals (e.g., application should either (1) show that v. Project Readiness programming on the Statewide the vehicles and their proposed Transportation Improvement Program); operations are within the scope of an This section of the application should start and completion of NEPA and other exemption or wavier that has already include information that, when Federal environmental reviews and been granted by NHTSA, FMCSA, or considered with the project budget approvals including permitting; design both agencies or (2) directly address information presented elsewhere in the completion; right of way acquisition; whether the project will require application, is sufficient for the approval of plans, specifications and exemptions or waivers from the FMVSS, Department to evaluate whether the estimates; procurement; State and local FMCSR, or any other regulation and, if project is reasonably expected to begin approvals; project partnership and the project will require exemptions or construction in a timely manner. To implementation agreements, including waivers, present a plan for obtaining assist the Department’s project readiness agreements with railroads; and them. assessment, the applicant should construction. The project schedule provide the information requested on should be sufficiently detailed to (ii) Innovative Project Delivery technical feasibility, project schedule, demonstrate that: If an applicant plans to use innovative project approvals, and project risks, (1) All necessary activities will be approaches to project delivery or is each of which is described in greater complete to allow BUILD located in a State with NEPA delegation detail in the following sections. Transportation grant funds to be authority, applicants should describe Applicants are not required to follow obligated sufficiently in advance of the those project delivery methods and how the specific format described here, but statutory deadline (September 30, 2021 they are expected to improve the this organization, which addresses each for FY 2019 funds), and that any efficiency of the project development or unexpected delays will not put the expedite project delivery. 6 SEP–14 information is available at https:// funds at risk of expiring before they are www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/contracts/ If an applicant is proposing to use sep_a.cfm. SEP–15 information is available at obligated; SEP–14 or SEP–15 (as described in https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/p3/toolkit/usdot/ (2) the project can begin construction section E.1.i.(f) of this notice) the sep15/implementation_procedure/. quickly upon obligation of grant funds

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16938 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

and that those funds will be spent reference to copies of any reviews, airport facilities.9 Applicants should expeditiously once construction starts, approvals, and permits prepared. demonstrate that a project that is with all funds expended by September (c) Environmental studies or other required to be included in the relevant 30, 2026; and documents, preferably through a State, metropolitan, and local planning (3) all real property and right-of-way website link, that describe in detail documents has been or will be included acquisition will be completed in a known project impacts, and possible in such documents. If the project is not timely manner in accordance with 49 mitigation for those impacts. included in a relevant planning CFR part 24, 23 CFR part 710, and other (d) A description of discussions with document at the time the application is applicable legal requirements or a the appropriate DOT operating submitted, the applicant should submit statement that no acquisition is administration field or headquarters a statement from the appropriate necessary. office regarding the project’s compliance planning agency that actions are with NEPA and other applicable Federal underway to include the project in the (c) Required Approvals environmental reviews and approvals. relevant planning document. (1) Environmental Permits and (e) A description of public To the extent possible, freight projects Reviews. The application should engagement about the project that has should be included in a State Freight demonstrate receipt (or reasonably occurred, including details on the Plan and supported by a State Freight anticipated receipt) of all environmental degree to which public comments and Advisory Committee (49 U.S.C. 70201, approvals and permits necessary for the commitments have been integrated into 70202), if these exist. Applicants should project to proceed to construction on the project development and design. provide links or other documentation (2) State and Local Approvals. The timeline specified in the project supporting this consideration. applicant should demonstrate receipt of schedule and necessary to meet the Because projects have different State and local approvals on which the statutory obligation deadline, including schedules, the construction start date for project depends, such as State and local satisfaction of all Federal, State and each BUILD Transportation grant must environmental and planning approvals local requirements and completion of be specified in the project-specific and Statewide Transportation the NEPA process. Specifically, the agreements signed by relevant operating Improvement Program (STIP) or application should include: administration and the grant recipients, (Transportation Improvement Program) (a) Information about the NEPA status based on critical path items that TIP funding. Additional support from of the project. If the NEPA process is relevant State and local officials is not applicants identify in the application complete, an applicant should indicate required; however, an applicant should and will be consistent with relevant the date of completion, and provide a demonstrate that the project has broad State and local plans. website link or other reference to the public support. final Categorical Exclusion, Finding of (d) Assessment of Project Risks and (3) Federal Transportation Mitigation Strategies No Significant Impact, Record of Requirements Affecting State and Local Decision, and any other NEPA Planning. The planning requirements Project risks, such as procurement documents prepared. If the NEPA applicable to the relevant operating delays, environmental uncertainties, process is underway, but not complete, administration apply to all BUILD increases in real estate acquisition costs, the application should detail the type of Transportation grant projects,8 uncommitted local match, NEPA review underway, where the including intermodal projects located at unavailability of vehicles that either project is in the process, and indicate comply with Federal Motor Vehicle the anticipated date of completion of all 8 Under 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135, all projects Safety Standards or are exempt from milestones and of the final NEPA requiring an action by FHWA must be in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards determination. If the last agency action applicable plan and programming documents (e.g., in a manner that allows for their legal with respect to NEPA documents metropolitan transportation plan, transportation acquisition and deployment, improvement program (TIP) and statewide occurred more than three years before transportation improvement program (STIP)). unavailability of domestically the application date, the applicant Further, in air quality non-attainment and manufactured equipment, or lack of should describe why the project has maintenance areas, all regionally significant legislative approval, affect the been delayed and include a proposed projects, regardless of the funding source, must be likelihood of successful project start and included in the conforming metropolitan approach for verifying and, if necessary, transportation plan and TIP. Inclusion in the STIP completion. The applicant should updating this material in accordance is required under certain circumstances. To the identify all material risks to the project with applicable NEPA requirements. extent a project is required to be on a metropolitan and the strategies that the lead applicant (b) Information on reviews, approvals, transportation plan, TIP, and/or STIP, it will not and any project partners have receive a BUILD Transportation grant until it is and permits by other agencies. An included in such plans. Plans that do not currently undertaken or will undertake in order to application should indicate whether the include the awarded BUILD project can be amended mitigate those risks. The applicant proposed project requires reviews or by the State and MPO. Projects that are not required should assess the greatest risks to the approval actions by other agencies,7 to be in long range transportation plans, STIPs, and project and identify how the project TIPs will not need to be included in such plans in indicate the status of such actions, and order to receive a BUILD Transportation grant. Port, parties will mitigate those risks. provide detailed information about the freight rail, and intermodal projects are not required status of those reviews or approvals and to be on the State Rail Plans called for in the 9 Projects at grant obligated airports must be should demonstrate compliance with Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of compatible with the FAA-approved Airport Layout 2008, or in a State Freight Plan as described in the Plan, as well as aeronautical surfaces associated any other applicable Federal, State or FAST Act. However, applicants seeking funding for with the landing and takeoff of aircraft at the local requirements, and when such freight projects are encouraged to demonstrate that airport. Additionally, projects at an airport: Must approvals are expected. Applicants they have done sufficient planning to ensure that comply with established Sponsor Grant Assurances, should provide a website link or other projects fit into a prioritized list of capital needs including (but not limited to) requirements for non- and are consistent with long-range goals. Means of exclusive use facilities, consultation with users, demonstrating this consistency would include consistency with local plans including 7 Projects that may impact protected resources whether the project is in a TIP or a State Freight development of the area surrounding the airport, such as wetlands, species habitat, cultural or Plan that conforms to the requirements 49 U.S.C. and consideration of the interest of nearby historic resources require review and approval by 70202 prior to the start of construction. Port communities, among others; and must not adversely Federal and State agencies with jurisdiction over planning guidelines are available at affect the continued and unhindered access of those resources. StrongPorts.gov. passengers to the terminal.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16939

If an applicant anticipates pursuing a magnitude and timing of each of these that determination as a basis for making waiver for relevant domestic preference additional impacts wherever possible. a BUILD Transportation grant to another laws, the applicant should describe Any benefits claimed for the project, applicant. steps that have been or will be taken to both quantified and unquantified, 4. Submission Dates and Times maximize the use of domestic goods, should be clearly tied to the expected products, and materials in constructing outcomes of the project. i. Deadline their project. The BCA should include the full costs Applications must be submitted by To the extent the applicant is of developing, constructing, operating, 8:00 p.m. E.D.T. on July 15, 2019. unfamiliar with the Federal program, and maintaining the proposed project, the applicant should contact the as well as the expected timing or To submit an application through appropriate DOT operating schedule for costs in each of these Grants.gov, applicants must: administration field or headquarters categories. The BCA may also consider (1) Obtain a Data Universal offices, as found in contact information the present discounted value of any Numbering System (DUNS) number; at www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants, remaining service life of the asset at the (2) Register with the System for for information on the pre-requisite end of the analysis period. The costs Award Management (SAM) at steps to obligate Federal funds in order and benefits that are compared in the www.SAM.gov; to ensure that their project schedule is BCA should also cover the same project (3) Create a Grants.gov username and reasonable and that there are no risks of scope. password; and delays in satisfying Federal The BCA should carefully document (4) The E-Business Point of Contact requirements. the assumptions and methodology used (POC) at the applicant’s organization BUILD Transportation planning grant to produce the analysis, including a must respond to the registration email applicants should describe their description of the baseline, the sources from Grants.gov and login at Grants.gov capacity to successfully implement the of data used to project the outcomes of to authorize the applicant as the proposed activities in a timely manner. the project, and the values of key input Authorized Organization Representative parameters. Applicants should provide (AOR). Please note that there can be vi. Benefit Cost Analysis all relevant files used for their BCA, more than one AOR for an organization. This section describes the including any spreadsheet files and Please note that the Grants.gov recommended approach for the technical memos describing the analysis registration process usually takes 2–4 completion and submission of a benefit- (whether created in-house or by a weeks to complete and that the cost analysis (BCA) as an appendix to contractor). The spreadsheets and Department will not consider late the Project Narrative. The results of the technical memos should present the applications that are the result of failure analysis should be summarized in the calculations in sufficient detail and to register or comply with Grants.gov Project Narrative directly, as described transparency to allow the analysis to be applicant requirements in a timely in Section D.2. reproduced by DOT evaluators. Detailed manner. For information and instruction The appendix should provide present guidance for estimating some types of on each of these processes, please see value estimates of a project’s benefits quantitative benefits and costs, together instructions at http://www.grants.gov/ and costs relative to a no-build baseline. with recommended economic values for web/grants/applicants/applicant- To calculate present values, applicants converting them to dollar terms and faqs.html. If applicants experience should apply a real discount rate (i.e., discounting to their present values, are difficulties at any point during the the discount rate net of the inflation available in the Department’s guidance registration or application process, rate) of 7 percent per year to the for conducting BCAs for projects please call the Grants.gov Customer project’s streams of benefits and costs. seeking funding under the BUILD Service Support Hotline at 1(800) 518– The purpose of the BCA is to enable the Transportation grant program (see 4726, Monday-Friday from 7:00 a.m. to Department to evaluate the project’s www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants/ 9:00 p.m. EST. cost-effectiveness by estimating a additional-guidance). benefit-cost ratio and calculating the ii. Consideration of Applications: magnitude of net benefits for the project. 3. Unique Entity Identifier and System Only applicants who comply with all The primary economic benefits from for Award Management (SAM) submission deadlines described in this projects eligible for BUILD Each applicant must: (1) Be registered notice and electronically submit valid Transportation grants are likely to in SAM before submitting its applications through Grants.gov will be include savings in travel time costs, application; (2) provide a valid unique eligible for award. Applicants are vehicle or terminal operating costs, and entity identifier in its application; and strongly encouraged to make safety costs for both existing users of the (3) continue to maintain an active SAM submissions in advance of the deadline. improved facility and new users who registration with current information at may be attracted to it as a result of the all times during which it has an active iii. Late Applications project. Reduced damages from vehicle Federal award or an application or plan Applicants experiencing technical emissions and savings in maintenance under consideration by a Federal issues with Grants.gov that are beyond costs to public agencies may also be awarding agency. The Department may the applicant’s control must contact quantified. Applicants may describe not make a BUILD Transportation grant [email protected] prior to the other categories of benefits in the BCA to an applicant until the applicant has application deadline with the user name that are more difficult to quantify and complied with all applicable unique of the registrant and details of the value in economic terms, such as entity identifier and SAM requirements technical issue experienced. The improving the reliability of travel times and, if an applicant has not fully applicant must provide: or improvements to the existing human complied with the requirements by the (1) Details of the technical issue and natural environments (such as time the Department is ready to make a experienced; increased connectivity, improved public BUILD Transportation grant, the (2) Screen capture(s) of the technical health, storm water runoff mitigation, Department may determine that the issues experienced along with and noise reduction), while also applicant is not qualified to receive a corresponding Grants.gov ‘‘Grant providing numerical estimates of the BUILD Transportation grant and use tracking number;’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16940 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

(3) The ‘‘Legal Business Name’’ for the (a) Safety facilitating efficient and reliable freight applicant that was provided in the SF– The Department will assess the movement. 424; project’s ability to foster a safe Projects that address congestion in (4) The AOR name submitted in the transportation system for the movement major urban areas, particularly those SF–424; of goods and people. The Department that do so through the use of congestion (5) The DUNS number associated with will consider the projected impacts on pricing or the deployment of advanced the application; and the number, rate, and consequences of technology, projects that bridge gaps in (6) The Grants.gov Help Desk Tracking crashes, fatalities and injuries among service in rural areas, and projects that Number transportation users; the project’s attract private economic development, contribution to the elimination of all support local or regional economic To ensure a fair competition of competitiveness. limited discretionary funds, the highway/rail grade crossings, or the following conditions are not valid project’s contribution to preventing (d) Environmental Sustainability reasons to permit late submissions: (1) unintended releases of hazardous The Department will consider the Failure to complete the registration materials. extent to which the project improves process before the deadline; (2) failure (b) State of Good Repair energy efficiency, reduces dependence to follow Grants.gov instructions on The Department will assess whether on oil, reduces congestion-related how to register and apply as posted on and to what extent: (1) The project is emissions, improves water quality, its website; (3) failure to follow all consistent with relevant plans to avoids and mitigates environmental instructions in this notice of funding maintain transportation facilities or impacts and otherwise benefits the opportunity; and (4) technical issues systems in a state of good repair and environment, including through experienced with the applicant’s address current and projected alternative right of way uses computer or information technology vulnerabilities; (2) if left unimproved, demonstrating innovative ways to environment. After the Department the poor condition of the asset will improve or streamline environmental reviews all information submitted and threaten future transportation network reviews while maintaining the same contact the Grants.gov Help Desk to efficiency, mobility of goods or outcomes. The Department will assess validate reported technical issues, DOT accessibility and mobility of people, or the project’s ability to: (i) reduce energy staff will contact late applicants to economic growth; (3) the project is use and air or water pollution through approve or deny a request to submit a appropriately capitalized up front and congestion mitigation strategies; (ii) late application through Grants.gov. If uses asset management approaches that avoid adverse environmental impacts to the reported technical issues cannot be optimize its long-term cost structure; (4) air or water quality, wetlands, and validated, late applications will be a sustainable source of revenue is endangered species; or (iii) provide rejected as untimely. available for operations and environmental benefits, such as E. Application Review Information maintenance of the project and the brownfield redevelopment, ground project will reduce overall life-cycle water recharge in areas of water scarcity, 1. Criteria costs; (5) the project will maintain or wetlands creation or improved habitat This section specifies the criteria that improve transportation infrastructure connectivity, and stormwater mitigation. DOT will use to evaluate and award that supports border security functions; applications for BUILD Transportation and (6) the project includes a plan to (e) Quality of Life grants. The criteria incorporate the maintain the transportation statutory eligibility requirements for this The Department will consider the infrastructure in a state of good repair. extent to which the project: (i) Increases program, which are specified in this The Department will prioritize projects notice as relevant. Projects will also be transportation choices for individuals to that ensure the good condition of provide more freedom on transportation evaluated for demonstrated project transportation infrastructure, including readiness and benefits and costs. decisions; (ii) expands access to rural transportation infrastructure, that essential services for communities i. Primary Selection Criteria support commerce and economic across the United States, particularly for growth. Applications that do not demonstrate rural communities; or (iii) improves a potential for moderate long-term (c) Economic Competitiveness connectivity for citizens to jobs, health benefits based on these criteria will not care, and other critical destinations, The Department will assess whether particularly for rural communities. proceed in the evaluation process. DOT the project will (1) decrease does not consider any selection criterion Americans living in rural areas and on transportation costs and improve access, Tribal lands continue to more important than the others. BUILD especially for rural communities or Transportation planning grant 10 disproportionately lack access and communities in Opportunity Zones, connectivity, and the Department will applications will be evaluated against through reliable and timely access to the same criteria as capital grant consider whether and the extent to employment centers and job which the construction of the applications. While the FY 2019 opportunities; (2) improve long-term Appropriations Act allows funding transportation project will allow efficiency, reliability or costs in the concurrent installation of fiber or other solely for pre-construction activities, the movement of workers or goods; (3) Department will prioritize FY 2019 broadband deployment as an essential increase the economic productivity of service. BUILD Transportation grant program land, capital, or labor, including assets funding for projects that propose to in Opportunity Zones; (4) result in long- ii. Secondary Selection Criteria move into the construction phase within term job creation and other economic (a) Innovation the period of obligation. Accordingly, opportunities; or (5) help the United The Department will assess the extent applications for BUILD Transportation States compete in a global economy by planning grants will be less competitive to which the applicant uses innovative than capital grants. 10 See https://www.cdfifund.gov/Pages/ strategies, including: (i) Innovative The selection criteria, which will Opportunity-Zones.aspx for more information on technologies, (ii) innovative project receive equal consideration, are: Opportunity Zones. delivery, or (iii) innovative financing.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16941

(i) Innovative Technologies asset management, or long-term processes. Selection for a BUILD DOT will assess innovative operations and maintenance. Transportation grant award does not The Department also seeks projects approaches to transportation safety, mean a project’s SEP–14 or SEP–15 that employ innovative approaches to particularly in relation to automated proposal has been approved. The improve the efficiency and effectiveness vehicles and the detection, mitigation, Department will make a separate of the environmental permitting and and documentation of safety risks. determination in accordance with those review to accelerate project delivery and programs’ processes on the When making BUILD Transportation achieve improved outcomes for appropriateness of a waiver. grant award decisions, the Department communities and the environment. The will consider any innovative safety Department’s objective is to achieve (iii) Innovative Financing approaches proposed by the applicant, timely and consistent environmental DOT will assess the extent to which particularly projects which incorporate review and permit decisions. the project incorporates innovations in innovative design solutions, enhance Accordingly, projects from States with transportation funding and finance the environment for automated vehicles, NEPA assignment authority under 23 through both traditional and innovative or use technology to improve the U.S.C. 327 are considered to use an means, including by using private sector detection, mitigation, and innovative approach to project delivery. funding or financing and recycled documentation of safety risks. Participation in innovative project revenue from the competitive sale or Innovative safety approaches may delivery approaches will not remove lease of publicly owned or operated include, but are not limited to: any statutory requirements affecting assets. • Conflict detection and mitigation project delivery. (b) Partnership technologies (e.g., intersection alerts While BUILD Transportation grant and signal prioritization); award recipients are not required to The Department will consider the • Dynamic signaling, smart traffic employ innovative approaches, the extent to which projects demonstrate signals, or pricing systems to reduce Department encourages BUILD strong collaboration among a broad congestion; Transportation grant applicants to range of stakeholders. Projects with • Traveler information systems, to describe innovative project delivery strong partnership typically involve include work zone data exchanges; methods for proposed projects. multiple partners in project • Signage and design features that Additionally, DOT is interested in development and funding, such as State facilitate autonomous or semi- projects that apply innovative strategies and local governments, other public autonomous vehicle technologies; to improve the efficiency of project entities, and private or nonprofit • Applications to automatically development or expedite project entities. DOT will consider applicants capture and report safety-related issues delivery by using FHWA’s Special that partner with State, local, or private (e.g., identifying and documenting near- Experimental Project No. 14 (SEP–14) entities for the completion and miss incidents); and and Special Experimental Project No. 15 operation of transportation • Cybersecurity elements to protect (SEP–15). Under SEP–14 and SEP–15, infrastructure to have strong safety-critical systems. FHWA may waive statutory and partnership. DOT will also assess the For innovative safety proposals, the regulatory requirements under title 23 extent to which the project application Department will evaluate safety benefits on a project-by-project basis to explore demonstrates collaboration among that those approaches could produce innovative processes that could be neighboring or regional jurisdictions to and the broader applicability of the adopted through legislation. This achieve local or regional benefits. In the potential results. DOT will also assess experimental authority is available to context of public-private partnerships, the extent to which the project uses test changes that would improve the DOT will assess the extent to which innovative technology that supports efficiency of project delivery in a partners are encouraged to ensure long- surface transportation to significantly manner that is consistent with the term asset performance, such as through enhance the operational performance of purposes underlying existing pay-for-success approaches. the transportation system. requirements; it is not available to DOT will also consider the extent to Innovative technologies include: frustrate the purposes of existing which projects include partnerships that Broadband deployment and the requirements. bring together diverse transportation installation of high-speed networks When making BUILD Transportation agencies or are supported, financially or concurrent with the project grant award decisions, the Department otherwise, by other stakeholders that are construction; connecting Intelligent will consider the applicant’s proposals pursuing similar objectives. For Transportation System (ITS) to use SEP–14 or SEP–15, whether the example, DOT will consider the extent infrastructure; and providing direct fiber proposals are consistent with the to which transportation projects are connections that support surface objectives and requirements of those coordinated with economic transportation to public and private programs, the potential benefits that development, housing, water and waste entities, which can provide a platform experimental authorities or waivers infrastructure, power and electric and catalyst for growth of rural might provide to the project, and the infrastructure, broadband and land use communities. The Department will broader applicability of potential plans and policies or other public consider whether and the extent to results. The Department is not replacing service efforts. which the construction of the the application processes for SEP–14 or transportation project will allow SEP–15 with this notice or the BUILD ii. Demonstrated Project Readiness concurrent broadband deployment and Transportation grant program During application evaluation, the the installation of high-speed networks. application. Instead, it seeks detailed Department may consider project expressions of interest in those readiness to assess the likelihood of a (ii) Innovative Project Delivery programs. If selected for an BUILD successful project. In that analysis, the DOT will consider the extent to which Transportation grant award, the Department will consider significant the project utilizes innovative practices applicant would need to satisfy the risks to successful completion of a in contracting (such as public-private relevant programs’ requirements and project, including risks associated with partnerships), congestion management, complete the appropriate application environmental review, permitting,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16942 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

technical feasibility, funding, and the information about itself. The funds and disallow previously incurred applicant’s capacity to manage project Department will consider comments by costs, requiring the recipient to delivery. Risks do not disqualify the applicant, in addition to the other reimburse any expended award funds. projects from award, but competitive information in FAPIIS, in making a Additionally, applicable Federal laws, applications clearly and directly judgment about the applicant’s integrity, rules and regulations of the relevant describe achievable risk mitigation business ethics, and record of operating administration administering strategies. A project with mitigated risks performance under Federal awards the project will apply to the projects or with a risk mitigation plan is more when completing the review of risk that receive BUILD Transportation grant competitive than a comparable project posed by applicants. awards, including planning with unaddressed risks. requirements, Service Outcome F. Federal Award Administration Agreements, Stakeholder Agreements, iii. Project Costs and Benefits Information Buy America compliance, and other The Department may consider the 1. Federal Award Notice requirements under DOT’s other costs and benefits of projects seeking highway, transit, rail, and port grant BUILD Transportation grant funding. To Following the evaluation outlined in programs. In particular, Executive Order the extent possible, the Department will Section E, the Secretary will announce 13858 directs the Executive Branch rely on quantitative, data-supported awarded projects by posting a list of Departments and agencies to maximize analysis to assess how well a project selected projects at the use of goods, products, and addresses this criterion, including an www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants. materials produced in the United States assessment of the project’s estimated Notice of selection is not authorization through the terms and conditions of benefit-cost ratio and net quantifiable to begin performance. Following that Federal financial assistance awards. If benefits based on the applicant-supplied announcement, the relevant operating selected for an award, grantees must be BCA described in Section D.2.vi. administration will contact the point of prepared to demonstrate how they will contact listed in the SF 424 to initiate maximize the use of domestic goods, iv. Additional Considerations negotiation of the grant agreement for products, and materials in constructing The FY 2019 Appropriations Act authorization. their project BUILD Transportation requires the Department to consider 2. Administrative and National Policy grant projects involving vehicle contributions to geographic diversity Requirements acquisition must involve only vehicles among recipients, including the need for that comply with applicable Federal a balance between the needs of rural All awards will be administered Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and and urban communities when selecting pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Federal Motor Vehicle Safety BUILD Transportation grant awards. Requirements, Cost Principles and Regulations, or vehicles that are exempt Audit Requirements for Federal Awards from Federal Motor Carrier Safety 2. Review and Selection Process found in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted by Standards or Federal Motor Carrier DOT reviews all eligible applications DOT at 2 CFR part 1201. Federal wage Safety Regulations in a manner that received by the deadline. The BUILD rate requirements included in allows for the legal acquisition and Transportation grants review and subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, deployment of the vehicle or vehicles. selection process consists of at least U.S.C., apply to all projects receiving For projects administered by FHWA, Technical Review and Senior Review. In funds under this program, and apply to applicable Federal laws, rules, and the Technical Review, teams comprising all parts of the project, whether funded regulations set forth in Title 23 U.S.C. staff from the Office of the Secretary with BUILD Transportation Grant funds, and Title 23 CFR apply, including the (OST) and operating administrations other Federal funds, or non-Federal 23 U.S.C. 129 restrictions on the use of review all eligible applications and rate funds. toll revenues, and Section 4(f) projects based on how well the projects In connection with any program or preservation of parklands and historic align with the selection criteria. The activity conducted with or benefiting properties requirements under 23 U.S.C. Senior Review Team, which includes from funds awarded under this notice, 138. .For an illustrative list of the other senior leadership from OST and the recipients of funds must comply with applicable laws, rules, regulations, operating administrations, determines all applicable requirements of Federal executive orders, polices, guidelines, which projects to advance to the law, including, without limitation, the and requirements as they relate to a Secretary as Highly Rated. The FY 2019 Constitution of the United States; the BUILD Transportation grant project Appropriations Act mandated BUILD conditions of performance, non- administered by the FHWA, please see Transportation grant awards by discrimination requirements, and other https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Freight/ November 12, 2019. The Secretary assurances made applicable to the infrastructure/tiger/fy2016_gr_exhbt/ selects from the Highly Rated projects award of funds in accordance with index.htm. for final awards. regulations of the Department of For BUILD Transportation projects Transportation; and applicable Federal administered by the Federal Transit 3. Additional Information financial assistance and contracting Administration and partially funded Prior to award, each selected principles promulgated by the Office of with Federal transit assistance, all applicant will be subject to a risk Management and Budget. In complying relevant requirements under chapter 53 assessment as required by 2 CFR with these requirements, recipients, in of title 49 U.S.C. apply. For transit 200.205. The Department must review particular, must ensure that no projects funded exclusively with BUILD and consider any information about the concession agreements are denied or Transportation grant funds, some applicant that is in the designated other contracting decisions made on the requirements of chapter 53 of title 49 integrity and performance system basis of speech or other activities U.S.C. and chapter VI of title 49 CFR accessible through SAM (currently the protected by the First Amendment. If apply. Federal Awardee Performance and the Department determines that a For projects administered by the Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). recipient has failed to comply with Federal Railroad Administration, FRA An applicant may review information in applicable Federal requirements, the requirements described in 49 U.S.C. FAPIIS and comment on any Department may terminate the award of Subtitle V, Part C apply.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16943

For each project that receives a BUILD made available in the designated competitive harm. DOT will protect Transportation grant award, the terms of integrity and performance system confidential information complying the award will require the recipient to (currently FAPIIS) about civil, criminal, with these requirements to the extent complete the project using at least the or administrative proceedings described required under applicable law. If DOT level of non-Federal funding that was in paragraph 2 of this award term and receives a Freedom of Information Act specified in the application. If the actual condition. This is a statutory (FOIA) request for the information that costs of the project are greater than the requirement under section 872 of Public the applicant has marked in accordance costs estimated in the application, the Law 110–417, as amended (41 U.S.C. with this section, DOT will follow the recipient will be responsible for 2313). As required by section 3010 of procedures described in its FOIA increasing the non-Federal contribution. Public Law 111–212, all information regulations at 49 CFR 7.29. Only If the actual costs of the project are less posted in the designated integrity and information that is in the separate than the costs estimated in the performance system on or after April 15, document, marked in accordance with application, DOT will generally reduce 2011, except past performance reviews this section, and ultimately determined the Federal contribution. required for Federal procurement to be confidential under § 7.29 will be contracts, will be publicly available. 3. Reporting exempt from disclosure under FOIA. G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts i. Progress Reporting on Grant Activities 2. Publication/Sharing of Application For further information concerning Information Each applicant selected for BUILD this notice please contact the BUILD Transportation grant funding must Transportation grant program staff via Following the completion of the submit quarterly progress reports and email at [email protected], or call selection process and announcement of Federal Financial Reports (SF–425) to Howard Hill at 202–366–0301. A TDD is awards, the Department intends to monitor project progress and ensure available for individuals who are deaf or accountability and financial publish a list of all applications hard of hearing at 202–366–3993. In received along with the names of the transparency in the BUILD addition, DOT will post answers to Transportation grant program. applicant organizations and funding questions and requests for clarifications amounts requested. Except for the ii. System Performance Reporting on DOT’s website at information properly marked as www.transportation.gov/BUILDgrants. Each applicant selected for BUILD described in Section H.1., the To ensure applicants receive accurate Transportation grant funding must Department may make application information about eligibility or the collect and report to the DOT narratives publicly available or share program, the applicant is encouraged to information on the project’s application information within the contact DOT directly, rather than performance. The specific performance Department or with other Federal through intermediaries or third parties, information and reporting time period with questions. DOT staff may also agencies if the Department determines will be determined on a project-by- conduct briefings on the BUILD that sharing is relevant to the respective project basis. Performance indicators Transportation grant selection and program’s objectives. will not include formal goals or targets, award process upon request. but will include observed measures 3. Department Feedback on under baseline (pre-project) as well as H. Other information Applications post-implementation outcomes, and will 1. Protection of Confidential Business The Department strives to provide as be used to evaluate and compare Information projects and monitor the results that much information as possible to assist grant funds achieve to the intended All information submitted as part of applicants with the application process. long-term outcomes of the BUILD or in support of any application shall The Department will not review Transportation grant program are use publicly available data or data that applications in advance, but Department achieved. To the extent possible, can be made public and methodologies staff are available for technical performance indicators used in the that are accepted by industry practice questions and assistance. To efficiently reporting should align with the and standards, to the extent possible. If use Department resources, the measures included in the application the applicant submits information that Department will prioritize interactions and should relate to at least one of the the applicant considers to be a trade with applicants who have not already selection criteria defined in Section E. secret or confidential commercial or received a debrief on their FY 2018 Performance reporting continues for financial information, the applicant BUILD Transportation grant application. several years after project construction must provide that information in a Program staff will address questions to is completed, and DOT does not provide separate document, which the applicant [email protected] throughout the BUILD Transportation grant funding may cross-reference from the application period. Department staff specifically for performance reporting. application narrative or other portions will make reasonable efforts to schedule of the application. For the separate meetings on projects through May 31, iii. Reporting of Matters Related to document containing confidential Recipient Integrity and Performance 2019. After that date, Department staff information, the applicant must do the will schedule meetings only to the If the total value of a selected following: (1) State on the cover of that extent possible and consistent with applicant’s currently active grants, document that it ‘‘Contains Confidential timely completion of other activities. cooperative agreements, and Business Information (CBI)’’; (2) mark procurement contracts from all Federal each page that contains confidential Issued On: April 16, 2019. awarding agencies exceeds $10,000,000 information with ‘‘CBI’’; (3) highlight or Elaine L. Chao, for any period of time during the period otherwise denote the confidential Secretary. of performance of this Federal award, content on each page; and (4) at the end [FR Doc. 2019–08137 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] then the applicant during that period of of the document, explain how BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P time must maintain the currency of disclosure of the confidential information reported to the SAM that is information would cause substantial

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 16944 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY improving customer service at the p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited Internal Revenue Service. to make oral comments or submit Internal Revenue Service DATES: The meeting will be held written statements for consideration. Thursday, May 9, 2019. Due to limited time and structure of Open Meeting of the Taxpayer FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: meeting, notification of intent to Advocacy Panel’s Special Projects participate must be made with Robert Committee Matthew O’Sullivan at 1–888–912–1227 or (510) 907–5274. Rosalia. For more information please contact Robert Rosalia at 1–888–912– AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Treasury. hereby given pursuant to Section 1227 or (718) 834–2203, or write TAP Office, 2 Metrotech Center, 100 Myrtle ACTION: Notice of meeting. 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11201 or contact Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) us at the website: http:// SUMMARY: An open meeting of the that an open meeting of the Taxpayer www.improveirs.org. The agenda will Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Special Advocacy Panel’s Taxpayer Assistance include various IRS issues. Projects Committee will be conducted. Center Project Committee will be held The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is Thursday, May 9, 2019, at 3:00 p.m. Dated: April 17, 2019. soliciting public comments, ideas, and Eastern time. The public is invited to Kevin Brown, suggestions on improving customer make oral comments or submit written Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. service at the Internal Revenue Service. statements for consideration. Due to [FR Doc. 2019–08086 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] DATES: The meeting will be held limited time and structure of meeting, BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Thursday, May 9, 2019. notification of intent to participate must FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred be made with Matthew O’Sullivan. For Smith at 1–888–912–1227 or (202) 317– more information please contact DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 3087. Matthew O’Sullivan at 1–888–912–1227 Internal Revenue Service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is or (510) 907–5274, or write TAP Office, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612– hereby given pursuant to Section Open Meeting of the Taxpayer 5217 or contact us at the website: http:// 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) www.improveirs.org. The agenda will Communications Project Committee that an open meeting of the Taxpayer include various IRS issues. Advocacy Panel’s Special Projects Dated: April 17, 2019. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Committee will be held Thursday, May Kevin Brown, Treasury. ACTION: 9, 2019, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. Notice of meeting. public is invited to make oral comments [FR Doc. 2019–08084 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: An open meeting of the or submit written statements for BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Taxpayer consideration. Due to limited time and Communications Project Committee will structure of meeting, notification of be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy intent to participate must be made with DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Panel is soliciting public comments, Fred Smith. For more information ideas, and suggestions on improving please contact Fred Smith at 1–888– Internal Revenue Service customer service at the Internal Revenue 912–1227 or (202) 317–3087, or write Service. TAP Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Open Meeting of the Taxpayer DATES: The meeting will be held Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or Advocacy Panel’s Tax Forms and Tuesday, May 14, 2019. contact us at the website: http:// Publications Project Committee www.improveirs.org. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Conchata Holloway at 1–888–912–1227 Dated: April 17, 2019. Treasury. or (336) 690–6217. Kevin Brown, ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. hereby given pursuant to Section SUMMARY: An open meeting of the [FR Doc. 2019–08088 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Tax Forms BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) and Publications Project Committee will that a meeting of the Taxpayer be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Panel is soliciting public comments, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Communications Notices and ideas, and suggestions on improving Correspondence Project Committee will customer service at the Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service be held Tuesday, May 14, 2019, at 3:00 Service. Open Meeting of the Taxpayer p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited DATES: The meeting will be held to make oral comments or submit Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Wednesday, May 8, 2019. written statements for consideration. Center Project Committee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Due to limited time and structure of AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Robert Rosalia at 1–888–912–1227 or meeting, notification of intent to Treasury. (718) 834–2203. participate must be made with Conchata ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Holloway. For more information please hereby given pursuant to Section contact Conchata Holloway at 1–888– SUMMARY: An open meeting of the 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 912–1227 or (336) 690–6217, or write Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Taxpayer Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) TAP Office, 4905 Koger Blvd., Assistance Center Project Committee that a meeting of the Taxpayer Greensboro, NC 27407 or contact us at will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Tax Forms and the website: http://www.improveirs.org. Advocacy Panel is soliciting public Publications Project Committee will be The agenda will include various IRS comments, ideas, and suggestions on held Wednesday, May 8, 2019, at 2:00 issues.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Notices 16945

Dated: April 17, 2019. Project Committee will be held be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Kevin Brown, Wednesday, May 8, 2019, 12:00 p.m. Panel is soliciting public comments, Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. Eastern Time. The public is invited to ideas, and suggestions on improving [FR Doc. 2019–08087 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] make oral comments or submit written customer service at the Internal Revenue BILLING CODE 4830–01–P statements for consideration. Due to Service. limited time and structure of meeting, DATES: The meeting will be held notification of intent to participate must Wednesday, May 8, 2019. be made with Rosalind Matherne. For DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: more information please contact Internal Revenue Service Antoinette Ross at 1–888–912–1227 or Rosalind Matherne at 1–888–912–1227 202–317–4110. or 202–317–4115, or write TAP Office, Open Meeting of the Taxpayer 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Advocacy Panel’s Toll-Free Phone Line Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at hereby given pursuant to Section Project Committee the website: http://www.improveirs.org. 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), The agenda will include various IRS issues. that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Treasury. Advocacy Panel’s Notices and ACTION: Notice of meeting. Dated: April 17, 2019. Correspondence Project Committee will Kevin Brown, SUMMARY: An open meeting of the be held Wednesday, May 8, 2019, at Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Toll-Free 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The public is Phone Line Project Committee will be [FR Doc. 2019–08085 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] invited to make oral comments or conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy BILLING CODE 4830–01–P submit written statements for Panel is soliciting public comments, consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of ideas, and suggestions on improving DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY customer service at the Internal Revenue intent to participate must be made with Service. Antoinette Ross. For more information Internal Revenue Service please contact Antoinette Ross at 1– DATES: The meeting will be held 888–912–1227 or 202–317–4110, or Wednesday, May 8, 2019. Open Meeting of the Taxpayer write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Advocacy Panel’s Notices and Correspondence Project Committee Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC Rosalind Matherne at 1–888–912–1227 20224 or contact us at the website: or 202–317–4115. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), http://www.improveirs.org. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Treasury. Dated: April 17, 2019. hereby given pursuant to Section ACTION: Notice of meeting. 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Kevin Brown, Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Taxpayer Advocacy Panel’s Notices and [FR Doc. 2019–08089 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Correspondence Project Committee will BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM 23APN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Vol. 84 Tuesday, No. 78 April 23, 2019

Part II

Department of Health and Human Services

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Part 412 Medicare Program; FY 2020 Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Payment System and Quality Reporting Updates for Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2019 (FY 2020); Proposed Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16948 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND CMS–1712–P, P.O. Box 8010, Baltimore, https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/ HUMAN SERVICES MD 21244–8010. Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/ Please allow sufficient time for mailed InpatientPsychFacilPPS/tools.html. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid comments to be received before the Tables setting forth the FY 2020 Wage Services close of the comment period. Index for Urban Areas Based on Core- 3. By express or overnight mail. You Based Statistical Area (CBSA) Labor 42 CFR Part 412 may send written comments to the Market Areas and the FY 2020 Wage following address ONLY: Centers for Index Based on CBSA Labor Market [CMS–1712–P] Medicare & Medicaid Services, Areas for Rural Areas are available Department of Health and Human exclusively through the internet, on the RIN 0938–AT69 Services, Attention: CMS–1712–P, Mail CMS website at https://www.cms.gov/ Medicare Program; FY 2020 Inpatient Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. Payment/IPFPPS/WageIndex.html. In Payment System and Quality For information on viewing public addition, Addendum C to this proposed Reporting Updates for Fiscal Year comments, see the beginning of the rule is a provider-level file of the effects Beginning October 1, 2019 (FY 2020) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. of the proposed change to the wage FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The index methodology, and is available at AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & IPF Payment Policy mailbox at the same CMS website address. Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. [email protected] for I. Executive Summary ACTION: Proposed rule. general information. Mollie Knight, (410) 786–7948 or A. Purpose SUMMARY: This proposed rule would Hudson Osgood, (410) 786–7897, for This proposed rule would update the update the prospective payment rates, information regarding the market basket prospective payment rates, the outlier the outlier threshold, and the wage rebasing, update, or the labor related threshold, and the wage index for index for Medicare inpatient hospital share. Medicare inpatient hospital services services provided by Inpatient Theresa Bean, (410) 786–2287 or provided by Inpatient Psychiatric Psychiatric Facilities (IPFs), which James Hardesty, (410) 786–2629, for Facilities (IPFs) for discharges occurring include psychiatric hospitals and information regarding the regulatory during the Fiscal Year (FY) beginning excluded psychiatric units of an impact analysis. October 1, 2019 through September 30, inpatient prospective payment system James Poyer, (410) 786–2261 or Jeffrey 2020. Additionally, this proposed rule hospital or critical access hospital. Buck, (410) 786–0407, for information would revise and rebase the IPF market Additionally, this proposed rule would regarding the inpatient psychiatric basket to reflect a 2016 base year and revise and rebase the IPF market basket facility quality reporting program. use the concurrent hospital wage data as to reflect a 2016 base year and remove SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the basis of the IPF wage index rather the IPF Prospective Payment System Inspection of Public Comments: All than using the prior year’s Inpatient (PPS) 1-year lag of the wage index data. comments received before the close of Prospective Payment System (IPPS) This proposed rule also solicits the comment period are available for hospital wage data. This proposed rule comments on the IPF wage index. viewing by the public, including any also solicits comments on the IPF wage Finally, this rule proposes updates to personally identifiable or confidential index. Finally, this proposed rule the Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities business information that is included in proposes updates to the Inpatient Quality Reporting Program. These a comment. We post all comments Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting changes would be effective for IPF received before the close of the (IPFQR) Program. discharges occurring during the fiscal comment period on the following year (FY) beginning October 1, 2019 B. Summary of the Major Provisions website as soon as possible after they through September 30, 2020 (FY 2020). have been received: http:// 1. Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities DATES: To be assured consideration, www.regulations.gov. Follow the search Prospective Payment System (IPF PPS) comments must be received at one of instructions on that website to view For the IPF PPS, we propose to: the addresses provided in the public comments. • Revise and rebase the IPF market ADDRESSES section no later than 5 p.m. basket to reflect a 2016 base year: Since Availability of Certain Tables on June 17, 2019. the IPF PPS inception, the market basket Exclusively Through the Internet on the ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer used to update IPF PPS payments has CMS Website to file code CMS–1712–P. Because of been rebased and revised to reflect more staff and resource limitations, we cannot Addendum A to this proposed rule recent data on IPF cost structures. We accept comments by facsimile (FAX) summarizes the FY 2020 IPF PPS last rebased and revised the market transmission. payment rates, outlier threshold, Cost of basket applicable to IPFs in the FY 2016 Comments, including mass comment Living Adjustment factors, national and IPF PPS rule (80 FR 46656 through submissions, must be submitted in one upper limit cost-to-charge ratio, and 46679), when we adopted a 2012-based of the following three ways (please adjustment factors. In addition, the B IPF-specific market-basket. choose only one of the ways listed): Addenda to this proposed rule show the • Adjust the 2016-based IPF market 1. Electronically. You may submit complete listing of ICD–10 Clinical basket update: We would adjust the electronic comments on this regulation Modification (CM) and Procedure 2016-based IPF market basket update to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow Coding System codes underlying the (currently estimated to be 3.1 percent) the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions. Code First table (Addendum B–1), the by a reduction for economy-wide 2. By regular mail. You may mail FY 2020 IPF PPS comorbidity productivity (currently estimated to be written comments to the following adjustment (Addenda B–2 and B–3), and 0.5 percentage point) as required by address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Social Medicaid Services, Department of procedure codes (Addendum B–4). The Security Act (the Act). We would Health and Human Services, Attention: A and B addenda are available online at: further reduce the 2016-based IPF

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16949

market basket update by 0.75 percentage ++ The ECT payment per treatment 2 percent of total estimated aggregate point as required by section for providers who failed to report IPF PPS payments. 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, resulting in quality data to $339.12. • Eliminate the 1-year lag in the wage a proposed estimated IPF payment rate ++ The labor-related share from 74.8 index data: We would align IPF wage update of 1.85 percent for FY 2020. percent to 76.8 percent (based on the index data with the concurrent IPPS • Make technical rate setting changes: proposed 2016-based IPF market wage index data by removing the 1-year The IPF PPS payment rates are adjusted basket). lag of the pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS annually for inflation, as well as ++ The core-based statistical area hospital wage index upon which the IPF statutory and other policy factors. We (CBSA) rural and urban wage indices for wage index is based. are proposing to update: FY 2020, using the FY 2020 pre-floor, We are also soliciting comments on ++ The IPF PPS federal per diem base pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage the IPF wage index. rate from $782.78 to $803.48. index data and OMB designations from 2. Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities ++ The IPF PPS federal per diem base OMB Bulletin 17–01. Quality Reporting (IPFQR) Program rate for providers who failed to report ++ The wage index budget-neutrality quality data to $787.70. adjustment from 1.0013 to 1.0078. We are proposing to update the IPFQR Program by proposing a new measure ++ The Electroconvulsive therapy ++ The fixed dollar loss threshold for the program. (ECT) payment per treatment from amount from $12,865 to $14,590 to $337.00 to $345.91. maintain estimated outlier payments at C. Summary of Impacts

Provision description Total transfers & cost reductions

FY 2020 IPF PPS payment update ...... The overall economic impact of this proposed rule is an estimated $75 million in increased payments to IPFs during FY 2020. Updated quality reporting program (IPFQR) Pro- $0. gram requirements.

II. Background (Pub. L. 111–152) (hereafter referred to data with respect to such a RY shall jointly as ‘‘the Affordable Care Act’’) have their annual update to a standard A. Overview of the Legislative added subsection (s) to section 1886 of federal rate for discharges reduced by Requirements of the IPF PPS the Social Security Act (the Act). 2.0 percentage points. This may result Section 124 of the Medicare, Section 1886(s)(1) of the Act titled in an annual update being less than 0.0 Medicaid, and State Children’s Health ‘‘Reference to Establishment and for a RY, and may result in payment Insurance Program Balanced Budget Implementation of System,’’ refers to rates for the upcoming rate year being Refinement Act of 1999 (BBRA) (Pub. L. section 124 of the BBRA, which relates less than such payment rates for the 106–113) required the establishment to the establishment of the IPF PPS. preceding rate year. Any reduction for and implementation of an IPF PPS. Section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act failure to report required quality data Specifically, section 124 of the BBRA requires the application of the shall apply only to the RY involved, and mandated that the Secretary of the productivity adjustment described in the Secretary shall not take into account Department of Health and Human section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act to such reduction in computing the Services (the Secretary) develop a per the IPF PPS for the rate year (RY) payment amount for a subsequent RY. diem PPS for inpatient hospital services beginning in 2012 (that is, a RY that (See section II.C of this proposed rule furnished in psychiatric hospitals and coincides with a fiscal year (FY)) and for an explanation of the IPF PPS RY.) excluded psychiatric units including an each subsequent RY. As noted in our FY More information about the specifics of adequate patient classification system 2019 IPF PPS final rule with comment the current IPFQR Program is available that reflects the differences in patient period, published in the Federal in the FY 2019 IFP PPS and Quality resource use and costs among Register on August 6, 2018 (83 FR Reporting Updates for Fiscal Year psychiatric hospitals and excluded 38576 through 38620), for the RY Beginning October 1, 2018 final rule (83 psychiatric units. ‘‘Excluded psychiatric beginning in 2018, the productivity FR 38589 through 38608). unit’’ means a psychiatric unit in an adjustment currently in place is equal to To implement and periodically Inpatient Prospective Payment System 0.8 percentage point. update these provisions, we have (IPPS) hospital that is excluded from the Section 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act published various proposed and final IPPS, or a psychiatric unit in a Critical requires the application of an ‘‘other rules and notices in the Federal Access Hospital (CAH) that is excluded adjustment’’ that reduces any update to Register. For more information from the CAH payment system. These an IPF PPS base rate by a percentage regarding these documents, see the excluded psychiatric units would be point amount specified in section Center for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) paid under the IPF PPS. 1886(s)(3) of the Act for the RY website at https://www.cms.gov/ Section 405(g)(2) of the Medicare beginning in 2010 through the RY Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- Prescription Drug, Improvement, and beginning in 2019. As noted in the FY Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. 2019 IPF PPS final rule, for the RY index.html?redirect=/ L. 108–173) extended the IPF PPS to beginning in 2018, section 1886(s)(3)(E) InpatientPsychFacilPPS/. psychiatric distinct part units of CAHs. of the Act requires that the other B. Overview of the IPF PPS Sections 3401(f) and 10322 of the adjustment reduction currently in place Patient Protection and Affordable Care be equal to 0.75 percentage point. The November 2004 IPF PPS final Act (Pub. L. 111–148) as amended by Sections 1886(s)(4)(A) and rule (69 FR 66922) established the IPF section 10319(e) of that Act and by 1886(s)(4)(B) of the Act require that for PPS, as required by section 124 of the section 1105(d) of the Health Care and RY 2014 and each subsequent rate year, BBRA and codified at 42 CFR part 412, Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 IPFs that fail to report required quality subpart N. The November 2004 IPF PPS

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16950 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

final rule set forth the federal per diem for the IPF PPS and was broadly written intention to publish a notice in the base rate for the implementation year to give the Secretary discretion in Federal Register each spring to update (the 18-month period from January 1, establishing an update methodology. the IPF PPS (69 FR 66966). 2005 through June 30, 2006), and Therefore, in the November 2004 IPF On May 6, 2011, we published a final provided payment for the inpatient PPS final rule, we implemented the IPF rule in the Federal Register titled, operating and capital costs to IPFs for PPS using the following update strategy: ‘‘Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities covered psychiatric services they • Calculate the final federal per diem Prospective Payment System—Update furnish (that is, routine, ancillary, and base rate to be budget-neutral for the 18- for Rate Year Beginning July 1, 2011 (RY capital costs, but not costs of approved month period of January 1, 2005 2012)’’ (76 FR 26432), which changed educational activities, bad debts, and through June 30, 2006. the payment rate update period to a RY other services or items that are outside • Use a July 1 through June 30 annual that coincides with a FY update. the scope of the IPF PPS). Covered update cycle. Therefore, final rules are now published psychiatric services include services for • Allow the IPF PPS first update to be in the Federal Register in the summer which benefits are provided under the effective for discharges on or after July to be effective on October 1. When fee-for-service Part A (Hospital 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007. proposing changes in IPF payment Insurance Program) of the Medicare In RY 2012, we proposed and policy, a proposed rule would be issued program. finalized switching the IPF PPS in the spring and the final rule in the The IPF PPS established the federal payment rate update from a RY that summer to be effective on October 1. For per diem base rate for each patient day begins on July 1 and ends on June 30, a detailed list of updates to the IPF PPS, in an IPF derived from the national to one that coincides with the federal we refer readers to our regulations at 42 average daily routine operating, FY that begins October 1 and ends on CFR 412.428. ancillary, and capital costs in IPFs in FY September 30. In order to transition Our most recent IPF PPS annual 2002. The average per diem cost was from one timeframe to another, the RY update was published in a final rule on updated to the midpoint of the first year 2012 IPF PPS covered a 15-month August 6, 2018 in the Federal Register under the IPF PPS, standardized to period from July 1, 2011 through titled, ‘‘Medicare Program; FY 2019 account for the overall positive effects of September 30, 2012. Therefore, the IPF Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities the IPF PPS payment adjustments, and RY has been equivalent to the October Prospective Payment System and adjusted for budget-neutrality. 1 through September 30 federal FY Quality Reporting Updates’’ (83 FR The federal per diem payment under since RY 2013. For further discussion of 38576), which updated the IPF PPS the IPF PPS is comprised of the federal the 15-month market basket update for payment rates for FY 2019. That final per diem base rate described previously RY 2012 and changing the payment rate rule updated the IPF PPS federal per and certain patient- and facility-level update period to coincide with a FY diem base rates that were published in payment adjustments that were found in period, we refer readers to the RY 2012 the FY 2018 IPF PPS Rate Update final the regression analysis to be associated IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR 4998) and rule (82 FR 36771) in accordance with with statistically significant per diem the RY 2012 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR our established policies. cost differences. 26432). In November 2004, we implemented III. Provisions of the FY 2020 IPF PPS The patient-level adjustments include Proposed Rule age, Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) the IPF PPS in a final rule that assignment, and comorbidities; published on November 15, 2004 in the A. Proposed Rebasing and Revising of additionally, there are variable per diem Federal Register (69 FR 66922). In the Market Basket for the IPF PPS developing the IPF PPS, and to ensure adjustments to reflect higher per diem 1. Background costs at the beginning of a patient’s IPF that the IPF PPS is able to account stay. Facility-level adjustments include adequately for each IPF’s case-mix, we Originally, the input price index used adjustments for the IPF’s wage index, performed an extensive regression to develop the IPF PPS was the rural location, teaching status, a cost-of- analysis of the relationship between the Excluded Hospital with Capital market living adjustment for IPFs located in per diem costs and certain patient and basket. This market basket was based on Alaska and Hawaii, and an adjustment facility characteristics to determine 1997 Medicare cost reports for for the presence of a qualifying those characteristics associated with Medicare-participating inpatient emergency department (ED). statistically significant cost differences rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), IPFs, The IPF PPS provides additional on a per diem basis. For characteristics long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), payment policies for outlier cases, with statistically significant cost cancer hospitals, and children’s interrupted stays, and a per treatment differences, we used the regression hospitals. Although ‘‘market basket’’ payment for patients who undergo coefficients of those variables to technically describes the mix of goods electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). During determine the size of the corresponding and services used in providing health the IPF PPS mandatory 3-year transition payment adjustments. care at a given point in time, this term period, stop-loss payments were also In that final rule, we explained the is also commonly used to denote the provided; however, since the transition reasons for delaying an update to the input price index (that is, cost category ended as of January 1, 2008, these adjustment factors, derived from the weights and price proxies) derived from payments are no longer available. regression analysis, including waiting that market basket. Accordingly, the A complete discussion of the until we have IPF PPS data that yields term ‘‘market basket,’’ as used in this regression analysis that established the as much information as possible document, refers to an input price IPF PPS adjustment factors can be found regarding the patient-level index. in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule characteristics of the population that Since the IPF PPS inception, the (69 FR 66933 through 66936). each IPF serves. We indicated that we market basket used to update IPF PPS did not intend to update the regression payments has been rebased and revised C. Requirements for Updating the IPF analysis and the patient-level and to reflect more recent data on IPF cost PPS facility-level adjustments until we structures. We last rebased and revised Section 124 of the BBRA did not complete that analysis. Until that the market basket applicable to the IPF specify an annual rate update strategy analysis is complete, we stated our PPS in the FY 2016 IPF PPS final rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16951

(80 FR 46656 through 46679), where we hiring more nurses after the base period based IPFs. CMS Form 2552–10 was adopted a 2012-based IPF market basket. to accommodate the needs of patients also used to derive the major cost The 2012-based IPF market basket used will increase the volume of goods and categories in the 2012-based IPF market Medicare cost report data for both services purchased by the IPF, but basket. The seven cost categories are Medicare-participating freestanding would not be factored into the price Wages and Salaries, Employee Benefits, psychiatric hospitals and hospital-based change measured by a fixed-weight IPF Contract Labor, Pharmaceuticals, psychiatric units. References to the market basket. Only when the index is Professional Liability Insurance (PLI), historical market baskets used to update rebased will changes in the quantity and Home Office Contract Labor, and IPF PPS payments are listed in the FY intensity be captured, with those Capital. The 2012-based IPF market 2016 IPF PPS final rule (80 FR 46656). changes being reflected in the cost basket did not have a Home Office For the FY 2020 IPF PPS proposed rule, weights. Therefore, we rebase the Contract Labor cost category. The we are proposing to rebase and revise market basket periodically so that the residual ‘‘All Other’’ category reflects all the IPF market basket to reflect a 2016 cost weights reflect recent changes in remaining costs not captured in the base year. the mix of goods and services that IPFs seven cost categories. The 2016 cost reports include providers whose cost 2. Overview of the Proposed 2016-Based purchase to furnish inpatient care reporting period beginning date is on or IPF Market Basket between base periods. between October 1, 2015 and September The proposed 2016-based IPF market 3. Creating an IPF-Specific Market 30, 2016. We are proposing to select basket is a fixed-weight, Laspeyres-type Basket 2016 as the base year because we price index. A Laspeyres price index As discussed in the FY 2016 final rule believe that the Medicare cost reports measures the change in price, over time, (80 FR 46656 through 46679), the 2012- for this year represent the most recent, of the same mix of goods and services based IPF market basket reflects the complete set of Medicare cost report purchased in the base period. Any Medicare cost reports for both data available at the time of this changes in the quantity or mix of goods freestanding and hospital-based rulemaking. and services (that is, intensity) facilities. Previous market baskets, such Similar to the Medicare cost report purchased over time relative to a base as the 2008-based rehabilitation, data used to develop the 2012-based IPF period are not measured. psychiatric, and long-term care (RPL) market basket, the Medicare cost report The index itself is constructed in market basket, were calculated using data for 2016 show large differences three steps. First, a base period is Medicare cost report data for between some providers’ Medicare selected (in this proposed rule, the base freestanding facilities only. We used length of stay (LOS) and total facility period is 2016) and total base period only freestanding facilities due to LOS. Our goal has always been to expenditures are estimated for a set of concerns regarding our ability to measure cost weights that are reflective mutually exclusive and exhaustive incorporate Medicare cost report data of case mix and practice patterns spending categories. Each category is for hospital-based providers. After associated with providing services to calculated as a proportion of total costs. research on the available Medicare cost Medicare beneficiaries. Therefore, we These proportions are called cost or report data, we concluded that Medicare are again proposing to limit our expenditure weights. Second, each cost report data for both freestanding selection of Medicare cost reports used expenditure category is matched to an IPFs and hospital-based IPFs can be in the 2016-based IPF market basket to appropriate price or wage variable, used to calculate the major market those facilities that had a Medicare LOS referred to as a price proxy. In nearly basket cost weights for a stand-alone IPF within a comparable range of their total every instance, these price proxies are market basket. In the FY 2016 IPF PPS facility average LOS. The Medicare derived from publicly available final rule (80 FR 46656 through 46679), average LOS for freestanding IPFs is statistical series that are published on a calculated from data reported on line 14 consistent schedule (preferably at least we finalized a detailed methodology to derive market basket cost weights using of Worksheet S–3, part I. The Medicare on a quarterly basis). Finally, the average LOS for hospital-based IPFs is expenditure weight for each cost Medicare cost report data for both freestanding IPFs and hospital-based calculated from data reported on line 16 category is multiplied by the level of its of Worksheet S–3, part I. To derive the respective price proxy. The sum of these IPFs. For this FY 2020 proposed rule, we proposed 2016-based IPF market basket, products (that is, the expenditure for those IPFs with an average facility are proposing to rebase and revise the weights multiplied by their price levels) LOS of greater than or equal to 15 days, 2012-based IPF market basket to a 2016 for all cost categories yields the we are proposing to include IPFs where base year reflecting both freestanding composite index level of the market the Medicare LOS is within 50 percent IPFs and hospital-based IPFs. In section basket in a given period. Repeating this (higher or lower) of the average facility III.A.3.a., ‘‘Development of Cost step for other periods produces a series LOS. For those IPFs whose average Categories and Weights,’’ we provide a of market basket levels over time. facility LOS is less than 15 days, we are detailed description of our proposed Dividing an index level for a given proposing to include IPFs where the methodology used to develop the 2016- period by an index level for an earlier Medicare LOS is within 95 percent based IPF market basket. period produces a rate of growth in the (higher or lower) of the facility LOS. We input price index over that timeframe. a. Development of Cost Categories and are proposing to apply this LOS edit to As noted, the market basket is Weights the data for IPFs to exclude providers described as a fixed-weight index that serve a population whose LOS i. Medicare Cost Reports because it represents the change in price would indicate that the patients served over time of a constant mix (quantity We are proposing a 2016-based IPF are not consistent with a LOS of a and intensity) of goods and services market basket that consists of seven typical Medicare patient. This is the needed to furnish IPF services. The major cost categories and a residual same LOS edit applied to the 2012- effects on total expenditures resulting derived from the 2016 Medicare cost based IPF market basket. from changes in the mix of goods and reports (CMS Form 2552–10 effective for Applying these trims to the services purchased after the base period cost reports beginning on or after May approximate 1,600 total cost reports are not measured. For example, an IPF 1, 2010) for freestanding and hospital- (freestanding and hospital-based)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16952 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

resulted in roughly 1,500 IPF Medicare System (IPPS), Skilled Nursing Facility overhead salaries (as reported on cost reports with an average Medicare (SNF), IRF, and IPF). This is the same Worksheet A, column 1, lines 4 through LOS of 12 days, average facility LOS of methodology used for the 2012-based 18) to total facility noncapital overhead 9 days, and Medicare utilization (as IPF market basket. costs (as reported on Worksheet A, measured by Medicare inpatient IPF We are providing a description of the column 1 and 2, lines 4 through 18). days as a percentage of total facility proposed methodologies used to derive We are proposing to calculate the days) of 26 percent. Providers excluded costs for the seven major cost categories. hospital-based portion of overhead salaries attributable to each ancillary from the proposed 2016-based IPF Wages and Salaries Costs market basket (about 130 Medicare cost department by first calculating total reports) had an average Medicare LOS of For freestanding IPFs, we are noncapital overhead costs attributable to 25 days, average facility LOS of 55 days, proposing that Wages and Salaries costs each specific ancillary department and a Medicare utilization of 4 percent. be derived as the sum of routine (Worksheet B, part I, columns 4 through Of those excluded, about 70 percent of inpatient salaries, ancillary salaries, and 18 less Worksheet B, part II, columns 4 these were freestanding providers; on a proportion of overhead (or general through 18). We then identify the the other hand, freestanding providers service cost centers in the Medicare Cost portion of these noncapital overhead represent about 30 percent of all IPFs. Report (MCR)) salaries as reported on costs attributable to Wages and Salaries We note that seventy percent of those Worksheet A, column 1. Since overhead by multiplying these costs by the ratio excluded from the 2012-based IPF salary costs are attributable to the entire of total facility overhead salaries (as market basket using this LOS edit were IPF, we only include the proportion reported on Worksheet A, column 1, also freestanding providers. attributable to the Medicare allowable lines 4 through 18) to total overhead Using the post-LOS set of 2016 cost centers. We are proposing to costs (as reported on Worksheet A, Medicare cost reports, we calculated estimate the proportion of overhead column 1 and 2, lines 4 through 18). costs for the seven major cost categories salaries that are attributed to Medicare Finally, we identified the portion of (Wages and Salaries, Employee Benefits, allowable costs centers by multiplying these overhead salaries for each Contract Labor, Professional Liability the ratio of Medicare allowable salaries ancillary department that is attributable Insurance, Pharmaceuticals, Home (Worksheet A, column 1, lines 50 to the hospital-based IPF by multiplying Office Contract Labor, and Capital). For through 76 (excluding 52 and 75), 90 by the ratio of IPF Medicare ancillary comparison, the 2012-based IPF market through 91, and 93) to total salaries costs for the cost center (as reported on basket utilized the Bureau of Economic (Worksheet A, column 1, line 200) times Worksheet D–3, column 3 for hospital- Analysis Benchmark Input-Output data total overhead salaries (Worksheet A, based IPFs) to total Medicare ancillary to derive the Home Office Contract column 1, lines 4 through 18). This is costs for the cost center (equal to the Labor cost weight rather than the the same methodology used in the 2012- sum of Worksheet D–3, column 3 for all Medicare cost report data. A more based IPF market basket. IPPS, SNF, IRF, and IPF). detailed discussion of this We are proposing that Wages and This is the same Wages and Salaries methodological change is provided. Salaries costs for hospital-based IPFs are Costs methodology used to derive the Similar to the 2012-based IPF market derived by summing inpatient routine 2012-based IPF market basket. basket major cost weights, the proposed salary costs, ancillary salaries, overhead Employee Benefits Costs 2016-based IPF market basket cost salary costs attributable to the IPF weights reflect Medicare allowable costs inpatient unit, and a portion of Effective with the implementation of (routine, ancillary, and capital costs) overhead salary costs attributable to the CMS Form 2552–10, we began that are eligible for inclusion under the ancillary departments. collecting Employee Benefits and IPF PPS payments. We propose to We are proposing to calculate Contract Labor data on Worksheet S–3, define Medicare allowable costs for hospital-based inpatient routine salary part V. freestanding IPFs as Worksheet B, part costs using Worksheet A, column 1, line For 2016 Medicare cost report data, I, column 26, lines 30 through 35, 50 40. the majority of providers did not report through 76 (excluding 52 and 75), 90 We are proposing to calculate data on Worksheet S–3, part V. One (1) through 91, and 93. For hospital-based hospital-based ancillary salary costs for percent of freestanding IPFs and roughly IPFs, we propose that total Medicare a specific cost center (Worksheet A, 40 percent of hospital-based IPFs allowable costs be equal to total costs column 1, lines 50 through 76 reported data on Worksheet S–3, part V. for the IPF inpatient unit after the (excluding 52 and 75), 90 through 91, Again, we continue to encourage all allocation of overhead costs (Worksheet and 93) using salary costs from providers to report these data on the B, part I, column 26, line 40) and a Worksheet A, column 1 multiplied by Medicare cost report. portion of total ancillary costs the ratio of IPF Medicare ancillary costs For freestanding IPFs, we are (Worksheet B, part I, column 26, lines for the cost center (as reported on proposing Employee Benefits costs are 50 through 76 (excluding 52 and 75), 90 Worksheet D–3, column 3 for IPF equal to the data reported on Worksheet through 91, and 93). We propose to subproviders) to total Medicare S–3, part V, column 2, line 2. We note calculate the portion of ancillary costs ancillary costs for the cost center (equal that while not required to do so, attributable to the hospital-based IPF for to the sum of Worksheet D–3, column 3 freestanding IPFs also may report a given ancillary cost center by for IPPS, SNF, IRF, and IPF). Employee Benefits data on Worksheet multiplying total facility ancillary costs We are proposing to calculate the S–3, part II, which is applicable to only for the specific cost center (as reported hospital-based overhead salaries IPPS providers. For those freestanding on Worksheet B, part I, column 26) by attributable to the IPF inpatient unit by IPFs that report Worksheet S–3, part II the ratio of IPF Medicare ancillary costs first calculating total noncapital data, but not Worksheet S–3, part V, we for the cost center (as reported on overhead costs (Worksheet B, part I, are proposing to use the sum of Worksheet D–3, column 3 for IPF columns 4 through 18, line 40 less Worksheet S–3, part II lines 17, 18, 20, subproviders) to total Medicare Worksheet B, part II, columns 4 through and 22 to derive Employee Benefits ancillary costs for the cost center (equal 18) for each ancillary department. We costs. This proposed method allows us to the sum of Worksheet D–3, column 3 then multiply total noncapital overhead to obtain data from more than 20 for all Inpatient Prospective Payment costs by the ratio of total facility freestanding IPFs (roughly 5 percent of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16953

all freestanding IPFs) than if we were to equal to Worksheet S–3, part V, column facility PLI (as reported on Worksheet only use Worksheet S–3, part V data as 1, line 3. Reporting of this data S–2, columns 1 through 3, line 118) was done for the 2012-based IPF market continues to be somewhat limited; divided by total facility costs (as basket. therefore, we continue to encourage all reported on Worksheet A, columns 1 For hospital-based IPFs, we are providers to report these data on the and 2, line 200) times hospital-based proposing to calculate total benefit costs Medicare cost report. IPF Medicare allowable total costs. Our as the sum of inpatient unit benefit assumption is that the same proportion Pharmaceuticals Costs costs, a portion of ancillary benefits, and of expenses are used among each unit of a portion of overhead benefits For freestanding IPFs, we are the hospital. attributable to the routine inpatient unit proposing to calculate pharmaceuticals This is the same methodology used to and a portion of overhead benefits costs using non-salary costs reported on derive the 2012-based IPF market attributable to the ancillary Worksheet A, column 7 less Worksheet basket. departments. A, column 1 for the pharmacy cost We are proposing hospital-based center (line 15) and drugs charged to Home Office/Related Organization inpatient unit benefit costs be equal to patients cost center (line 73). Contract Labor Costs Worksheet S–3 part V, column 2, line 3. For hospital-based IPFs, we are For the 2016-based IPF market basket, We are proposing the hospital-based proposing to calculate pharmaceuticals we are proposing to determine the home portion of ancillary benefit costs be costs as the sum of a portion of the non- office/related organization contract equal to hospital-based ancillary salaries salary pharmacy costs and a portion of labor costs using Medicare cost report times the ratio of total facility benefits the non-salary drugs charged to patient data. This is a different methodology to total facility salaries. costs reported for the total facility. compared to the 2012-based IPF market We are proposing that the hospital- We propose that hospital-based non- basket. We believe this proposed based portion of overhead benefits salary pharmacy costs attributable to the methodology is an improvement as it is attributable to the routine inpatient unit hospital-based IPF are calculated by and ancillary departments be calculated based on the data directly submitted by multiplying total pharmacy costs providers on the Medicare cost report. It by multiplying ancillary salaries for the attributable to the hospital-based IPF (as hospital-based IPF and overhead is also consistent with the methodology reported on Worksheet B, part I, column we adopted when we rebased and salaries attributable to the hospital- 15, line 40) by the ratio of total non- based IPF (determined in the derivation revised the 2014-based IPPS market salary pharmacy costs (Worksheet A, basket (82 FR 38159). of hospital-based IPF Wages and column 2, line 15) to total pharmacy For hospital-based IPFs, we are Salaries costs as described) by the ratio costs (sum of Worksheet A, column 1 proposing to calculate the home office of total facility benefits to total facility and 2 for line 15) for the total facility. salaries. Total facility benefits is equal We propose that hospital-based non- contract labor cost weight using data to the sum of Worksheet S–3, part II, salary drugs charged to patient costs reported on Worksheet S–3, part II, column 4, lines 17–25 and total facility attributable to the hospital-based IPF are column 4, lines 14, 1401, 1402, 2550, salaries is equal to Worksheet S–3, part calculated by multiplying total non- and 2551 and total facility costs II, column 4, line 1. salary drugs charged to patient costs (Worksheet B, part 1, column 26, line 202). We are proposing to use total Contract Labor Costs (Worksheet B, part I, column 0, line 73 plus Worksheet B, part I, column 15, facility costs as the denominator for Contract Labor costs are primarily line 73 less Worksheet A, column 1, line calculating the home office contract associated with direct patient care 73) for the total facility by the ratio of labor cost weight as these expenses services. Contract Labor costs are Medicare drugs charged to patient reported on Worksheet S–3, part II exclusive of Home Office Contract Labor ancillary costs for the IPF unit (as reflect the entire hospital facility. Our costs. Contract labor costs for other reported on Worksheet D–3 for IPF assumption is that the same proportion services such as accounting, billing, and subproviders, column 3, line 73) to total of expenses is used among each unit of legal are calculated separately using Medicare drugs charged to patients the hospital. Similar to the other market other government data sources as ancillary costs for the total facility basket costs weights, we are proposing described in section III.A.3.a.iii of this (equal to the sum of Worksheet D–3, to trim the Home Office Contract Labor proposed rule. To derive contract labor column 3, line 73, for all IPPS, SNF, cost weight to remove outliers. Since costs using Worksheet S–3, part V data, IRF, and IPF). not all hospital-based IPFs will have for freestanding IPFs, we are proposing This is the same Pharmaceuticals home office contract labor costs, we are Contract Labor costs be equal to Costs methodology used to derive the proposing to trim the top one percent of Worksheet S–3, part V, column 1, line 2012-based IPF market basket. the Home Office Contract Labor cost 2. As we noted for Employee Benefits, weight. This is the same trimming freestanding IPFs also may report Professional Liability Insurance (PLI) methodology used to calculate the Contract Labor data on Worksheet S–3, Costs Home Office Contract Labor cost weight part II, which is applicable to only IPPS For freestanding IPFs, we are in the 2016-based IPPS market basket. providers. For those freestanding IPFs proposing that PLI costs (often referred Using this proposed methodology, we that report Worksheet S–3, part II data, to as malpractice costs) are equal to calculate a Home Office Contract Labor but not Worksheet S–3, part V, we are premiums, paid losses and self- cost weight for hospital-based IPFs of proposing to use the sum of Worksheet insurance costs reported on Worksheet 3.7 percent. We discuss the trimming S–3, part II lines 11 and 13 to derive S–2, columns 1 through 3, line 118. methodology for the other major cost Contract Labor costs. For the 2012-based For hospital-based IPFs, we are categories in the ‘‘Final Major Cost IPF market basket, we only used data proposing to assume that the PLI weight Category Computation’’ section. from Worksheet S–3, part V, column 1, for the total facility is similar to the Freestanding IPFs are not required to line 2 to derive the Contract Labor costs hospital-based IPF unit since the only complete Worksheet S–3, part II. for freestanding IPFs. data reported on this worksheet is for Therefore, to estimate the Home Office For hospital-based IPFs, we are the entire facility. Therefore, hospital- Contract Labor cost weight, we are proposing that Contract Labor costs be based IPF PLI costs are equal to total proposing the following methodology:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16954 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Step 1: Using hospital-based IPFs Labor cost weight using the Bureau of ii. Final Major Cost Category with a home office and also passing the Economic Analysis Input-Output Computation one percent trim as described, we expense data for North American calculate the ratio of the Home Office Industry Classification System (NAICS) After we derive costs for the seven Contract Labor cost weight to the code 55, Management of Companies and major cost categories for each provider Medicare allowable nonsalary, Enterprises using the methodology using the Medicare cost report data as noncapital cost weight (Medicare described in section III.A.3.a.iii described, we are proposing to trim the allowable nonsalary, noncapital costs as (Derivation of the Detailed Operating data for outliers. The proposed a percent of total Medicare allowable Cost Weights). trimming methodology for the Home costs). Capital Costs Office Contract Labor cost weight is Step 2: We identify freestanding IPFs slightly different than the proposed that report a home office on Worksheet For freestanding IPFs, we are trimming methodology for the other six S–2, line 140—roughly 85 percent. We proposing capital costs to be equal to cost categories. For the Wages and Medicare allowable capital costs as are proposing to calculate a Home Office Salaries, Employee Benefits, Contract reported on Worksheet B, part II, Contract Labor cost weight for these Labor, Pharmaceuticals, Professional freestanding IPFs by multiplying the column 26, lines 30 through 35, 50 Liability Insurance, and Capital cost ratio calculated in Step (1) by the through 76 (excluding 52 and 75), 90 weights, we first divide the costs for Medicare allowable nonsalary, through 91, and 93. This is the same noncapital cost weight for those methodology used for the 2012-based each of these six categories by total freestanding IPFs with a home office. IPF market basket. Medicare allowable costs calculated for Step 3: We then calculate the For hospital-based IPFs, we are the provider to obtain cost weights for freestanding IPF cost weight by proposing capital costs to be equal to the universe of IPF providers. Next, we multiplying the Home Office Contract IPF inpatient capital costs (as reported apply a mutually exclusive top and Labor cost weight in step (2) by the total on Worksheet B, part II, column 26, line bottom 5 percent trim for each cost Medicare allowable costs for IPFs with 40) and a portion of IPF ancillary capital weight to remove outliers. After the a home office as a percent of total costs. We calculate the portion of outliers have been removed, we sum the Medicare allowable costs for all ancillary capital costs attributable to the costs for each category across all freestanding IPFs. hospital-based IPF for a given cost remaining providers. We then divide To calculate the Home Office Contract center by multiplying total facility this by the sum of total Medicare Labor cost weight, we are proposing to ancillary capital costs for the specific allowable costs across all remaining weight together the freestanding Home ancillary cost center (as reported on providers to obtain a cost weight for the Office Contract Labor cost weight (3.0 Worksheet B, part II, column 26) by the proposed 2016-based IPF market basket ratio of IPF Medicare ancillary costs for percent) and the hospital-based Home for the given category. Office Contract Labor cost weight (3.7 the cost center (as reported on percent) using total Medicare allowable Worksheet D–3, column 3 for IPF Finally, we calculate the residual ‘‘All costs. The resulting overall cost weight subproviders) to total Medicare Other’’ cost weight that reflects all for Home Office is 3.5 percent (3.0 ancillary costs for the cost center (equal remaining costs that are not captured in percent × 37 percent + 3.7 percent × 63 to the sum of Worksheet D–3, column 3 the seven cost categories listed. See percent). for all IPPS, SNF, IRF, and IPF). This is Table 1 for the resulting cost weights for For the 2012-based IPF market basket, the same methodology used for the these major cost categories that we we calculated the Home Office Contract 2012-based IPF market basket. obtain from the Medicare cost reports.

TABLE 1—MAJOR COST CATEGORIES AS DERIVED FROM MEDICARE COST REPORTS

Proposed 2016-based IPF 2012-based IPF Major cost categories market basket market basket (percent) (percent)

Wages and Salaries ...... 51.2 51.0 Employee Benefits ...... 13.5 13.1 Contract Labor ...... 1.3 1.3 Professional Liability Insurance (Malpractice) ...... 0.9 1.1 Pharmaceuticals ...... 4.7 4.8 Home Office/Related Organization Contract Labor ...... 3.5 n/a Capital ...... 7.1 7.0 ‘‘All Other’’ Residual ...... 17.9 21.6 * Total may not sum to 100 due to rounding.

As we did for the 2012-based IPF and Salaries is equal to the Wages and Benefits cost weight. The 2012-based market basket, we are proposing to Salaries cost weight as a percent of the IPF market basket percentage was 80 allocate the Contract Labor cost weight sum of the Wages and Salaries cost percent. Table 2 shows the Wages and to the Wages and Salaries and Employee weight and the Employee Benefits cost Salaries and Employee Benefit cost Benefits cost weights based on their weight. For the proposed rule, this weights after Contract Labor cost weight relative proportions under the rounded percentage was 79 percent; allocation for both the proposed 2016- assumption that contract labor costs are therefore, we are proposing to allocate based IPF market basket and 2012-based comprised of both wages and salaries 79 percent of the Contract Labor cost IPF market basket. and employee benefits. The Contract weight to the Wages and Salaries cost Labor allocation proportion for Wages weight and 21 percent to the Employee

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16955

TABLE 2—WAGES AND SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COST WEIGHTS AFTER CONTRACT LABOR ALLOCATION

Proposed Major cost categories 2016-based IPF 2012-based IPF market basket market basket

Wages and Salaries ...... 52.2 52.1 Employee Benefits ...... 13.8 13.4

iii. Derivation of the Detailed Operating percent), yielding a ‘‘final’’ Food: Direct same methodology used for the 2012- Cost Weights Purchases cost weight of 0.9 percent in based IPF market basket. To further divide the ‘‘All Other’’ the proposed 2016-based IPF market For hospital-based IPFs, data for these residual cost weight estimated from the basket (0.05 * 17.9 percent = 0.9 four categories are not reported 2016 Medicare Cost Report data into percent). separately for the subprovider; more detailed cost categories, we Using this methodology, we propose therefore, we propose to derive these propose to use the 2012 Benchmark to derive seventeen detailed IPF market proportions using data reported on Input-Output (I–O) ‘‘Use Tables/Before basket cost category weights from the Worksheet A–7 for the total facility. We Redefinitions/Purchaser Value’’ for proposed 2016-based IPF market basket are assuming the cost shares for the NAICS 622000 Hospitals, published by residual cost weight (17.9 percent). overall hospital are representative for the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). These categories are: (1) Electricity, (2) the hospital-based subprovider IPF unit. These data, publicly available at http:// Fuel, Oil, and Gasoline, (3) Food: Direct For example, if depreciation costs make www.bea.gov/industry/io_annual.htm, Purchases, (4) Food: Contract Services, up 60 percent of total capital costs for are the most recent data available at the (5) Chemicals, (6) Medical Instruments, the entire facility, we believe it is time of rulemaking. For the 2012-based (7) Rubber and Plastics, (8) Paper and reasonable to assume that the hospital- IPF market basket, we used the 2007 Printing Products, (9) Miscellaneous based IPF will also have a 60 percent Benchmark I–O data. Products, (10) Professional Fees: Labor- proportion because it is a subprovider The BEA Benchmark I–O data are related, (11) Administrative and unit contained within the total facility. scheduled for publication every five Facilities Support Services, (12) This is the same methodology used for years. The 2012 Benchmark I–O data are Installation, Maintenance and Repair, the 2012-based IPF market basket. derived from the 2012 Economic Census (13) All Other Labor-related Services, In order to combine each detailed and are the building blocks for BEA’s (14) Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related, capital cost weight for freestanding and economic accounts. They represent the (15) Financial Services, (16) Telephone hospital-based IPFs into a single capital most comprehensive and complete set Services, and (17) All Other Nonlabor- cost weight for the 2016-based IPF of data on the economic processes or related Services. We note that for the market basket, we propose to weight mechanisms by which output is 2012-based IPF market basket, we had a together the shares for each of the produced and distributed.1 BEA also Water and Sewerage cost weight. For the categories (Depreciation, Interest, Lease, produces Annual I–O estimates; proposed 2016-based IPF market basket, and Other Capital-related costs) based however, while based on a similar we are proposing to include Water and on the share of total capital costs each methodology, these estimates reflect less Sewerage in the Electricity cost weight provider type represents of the total comprehensive and less detailed data due to the small amount of costs in this capital costs for all IPFs for 2016. sources and are subject to revision when category. Applying this methodology results in benchmark data becomes available. proportions of total capital-related costs iv. Derivation of the Detailed Capital Instead of using the less detailed for Depreciation, Interest, Lease and Cost Weights Annual I–O data, we propose to inflate Other Capital-related costs that are the 2012 Benchmark I–O data forward to As described in section III.A.3.a.i. of representative of the universe of IPF 2016 by applying the annual price this proposed rule, we propose a providers. This is the same methodology changes from the respective price Capital-Related cost weight of 7.1 used for the 2012-based IPF market proxies to the appropriate market basket percent as obtained from the 2016 basket. cost categories obtained from the 2012 Medicare cost reports for freestanding Next, we propose to allocate lease Benchmark I–O data. We then propose and hospital-based IPF providers. We costs across each of the remaining to calculate the cost shares that each propose to further separate this total detailed capital-related cost categories cost category represents of the inflated Capital-Related cost weight into more as was done in the 2012-based IPF 2016 data. These resulting 2016 cost detailed cost categories. Using 2016 market basket. This will result in three shares are applied to the ‘‘All Other’’ Medicare cost reports, we are able to primary capital-related cost categories residual cost weight to obtain the group Capital-Related costs into the in the 2016-based IPF market basket: proposed detailed cost weights for the following categories: Depreciation, Depreciation, Interest, and Other 2016-based IPF market basket. For Interest, Lease, and Other Capital- Capital-Related costs. As done in the example, the cost for Food: Direct Related costs. For each of these 2012-based IPF market basket, lease Purchases represents 5.0 percent of the categories, we propose to determine costs are unique in that they are not sum of the ‘‘All Other’’ 2016 Benchmark separately for hospital-based IPFs and broken out as a separate cost category in I–O Hospital Expenditures inflated to freestanding IPFs what proportion of the 2016-based IPF market basket, but 2016. Therefore, the Food: Direct total capital-related costs the category rather we propose to proportionally Purchases cost weight represents 5.0 represent. distribute these costs among the cost percent of the 2016-based IPF market For freestanding IPFs, we propose to categories of Depreciation, Interest, and basket’s ‘‘All Other’’ cost category (17.9 derive the proportions for Depreciation, Other Capital-Related, reflecting the Interest, Lease, and Other Capital- assumption that the underlying cost 1 http://www.bea.gov/papers/pdf/IOmanual_ related costs using the data reported by structure of leases is similar to that of 092906.pdf. the IPF on Worksheet A–7, which is the capital-related costs in general. As was

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16956 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

done under the 2012-based IPF market as the ‘‘fixed percentage.’’ For the proportion of total capital costs each basket, we propose to assume that 10 proposed 2016-based IPF market basket, provider type represents. For both percent of the lease costs as a proportion we propose to use slightly different freestanding and hospital-based IPFs, of total capital-related costs represents methods to obtain the fixed percentages this is the same methodology used for overhead and assign those costs to the for hospital-based IPFs compared to the 2012-based IPF market basket. Other Capital-Related cost category freestanding IPFs. To disaggregate the Interest cost accordingly. We propose to distribute For freestanding IPFs, we propose to weight, we determine the percent of the remaining lease costs proportionally use depreciation data from Worksheet total interest costs for IPFs that are across the three cost categories A–7 of the 2016 Medicare cost reports. attributable to government and (Depreciation, Interest, and Other However, for hospital-based IPFs, we nonprofit facilities, the ‘‘nonprofit Capital-Related) based on the proportion determined that the fixed percentage for percentage.’’ For the 2016-based IPF that these categories comprise of the the entire facility may not be market basket, we propose to use sum of the Depreciation, Interest, and representative of the IPF subprovider interest costs data from Worksheet A–7 Other Capital-related cost categories for both freestanding and hospital-based (excluding lease expenses). This is the unit due to the entire facility likely employing more sophisticated movable IPFs. We then determine the percent of same methodology used for the 2012- total interest costs that are attributed to based IPF market basket. The allocation assets that are not utilized by the hospital-based IPF. Therefore, for government and nonprofit IPFs of these lease expenses are shown in separately for hospital-based and Table 3. hospital-based IPFs, we propose to freestanding IPFs and weight the Finally, we propose to further divide calculate a fixed percentage using: (1) nonprofit percentages for hospital-based the Depreciation and Interest cost Building and fixture capital costs categories. We propose to separate allocated to the subprovider unit as and freestanding IPFs together using the Depreciation into the following two reported on Worksheet B, part I line 40; proportion of total capital costs each categories: (1) Building and Fixed and (2) building and fixture capital costs provider type represents. This is the Equipment; and (2) Movable Equipment; for the top five ancillary cost centers same methodology used for the 2012- and propose to separate Interest into the utilized by hospital-based IPFs. We based IPF market basket. following two categories: (1) propose to then weight these two fixed Table 3 provides the proposed Government/Nonprofit; and (2) For- percentages (inpatient and ancillary) detailed capital cost share composition. profit. using the proportion that each capital These detailed capital cost share To disaggregate the Depreciation cost cost type represents of total capital costs composition percentages are applied to weight, we determine the percent of in the proposed 2016-based IPF market the total Capital-Related cost weight of total Depreciation costs for IPFs that is basket. We then propose to weight the 7.1 percent determined in section attributable to Building and Fixed fixed percentages for hospital-based and III.A.3.a.i. of the proposed rule. Equipment, which we hereafter refer to freestanding IPFs together using the BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

v. 2016-Based IPF Market Basket Cost market basket and the 2012-based IPF Categories and Weights market basket. Table 4 shows the cost categories and weights for the proposed 2016-based IPF

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.000 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16957

Table 4: Proposed 2016-based IPF Market Basket Cost Weights Compared to 2012-based IPF Market Basket Cost Weights . ·•··. ·· . Progosed .2612..:based ....· .. · 2616-based 1··· :IPF Market·· CuslCategor! IPFMarket .. BasketCos~ ···. :Basket Cost· Weight

...... Weight .. ·...... ••• . . . Total 100.0 100.0 Compensation 66.0 65.5 Wages and Salaries 52.2 52.1 Employee Benefits 13.8 13.4 Utilities 1.1 1.7 Electricity 0.8 0.8 Fuel, Oil, and Gasoline 0.3 0.9 Water & Sewerage n/a 0.1 Professional Liability Insurance 0.9 1.1 Malpractice 0.9 1.1 All Other Products and Services 24.9 24.6 All Other Products 10.7 11.5 Pharmaceuticals 4.7 4.8 Food: Direct Purchases 0.9 1.4 Food: Contract Services 1.0 0.9 Chemicals 0.3 0.6 Medical Instruments 2.3 1.9 Rubber & Plastics 0.3 0.5 Paper and Printing Products 0.5 0.9 Miscellaneous Products 0.7 0.6 All Other Services 14.2 13.1 Labor-Related Services 7.7 6.6 Professional Fees: Labor-related 4.4 2.9 Administrative and Facilities Support Services 0.6 0.7 Installation, Maintenance, and Repair 1.3 1.6 All Other: Labor-related Services 1.4 1.5 N onlabor-Related Services 6.5 6.5 Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related 4.5 2.6 Financial services 0.8 2.3 Telephone Services 0.3 0.6 All Other: Nonlabor-related Services 1.0 1.1

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.001 16958 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

b. Selection of Price Proxies We evaluated the price proxies using changes for the cost categories to which the criteria of reliability, timeliness, they would be applied. After developing the cost weights for availability, and relevance: Table 12 lists all price proxies that we the proposed 2016-based IPF market • Reliability. Reliability indicates that propose to use for the 2016-based IPF basket, we select the most appropriate the index is based on valid statistical market basket. A detailed explanation of wage and price proxies currently methods and has low sampling the price proxies we are proposing for available to represent the rate of price variability. Widely accepted statistical each cost category weight is provided. change for each expenditure category. methods ensure that the data were For the majority of the cost weights, we collected and aggregated in a way that i. Price Proxies for the Operating Portion base the price proxies on Bureau of can be replicated. Low sampling of the Proposed 2016-Based IPF Market Labor Statistics (BLS) data and grouped variability is desirable because it Basket them into one of the following BLS indicates that the sample reflects the Wages and Salaries categories: typical members of the population (and There is not a published wage proxy • Employment Cost Indexes. it is representative). (Sampling variability is variation that occurs by that we believe represents the Employment Cost Indexes (ECIs) chance because only a sample was occupational distribution of workers in measure the rate of change in surveyed rather than the entire IPFs. To measure wage price growth in employment wage rates and employer population.) the proposed 2016-based IPF market costs for employee benefits per hour • Timeliness. Timeliness implies that basket, we are proposing to apply a worked. These indexes are fixed-weight the proxy is published regularly, proxy blend based on six occupational indexes and strictly measure the change preferably at least once a quarter. The subcategories within the Wages and in wage rates and employee benefits per market baskets are updated quarterly Salaries category, which would reflect hour. ECIs are superior to Average and, therefore, it is important for the the IPF occupational mix, as was done Hourly Earnings (AHE) as price proxies underlying price proxies to be up-to- for the 2012-based IPF market basket. for input price indexes because they are date, reflecting the most recent data not affected by shifts in occupation or We are proposing to use the National available. We believe that using proxies Industry-Specific Occupational industry mix, and because they measure that are published regularly (at least pure price change and are available by Employment and Wage estimates for quarterly, whenever possible) helps to NAICS 622200, Psychiatric & Substance both occupational group and by ensure that we are using the most recent industry. The industry ECIs are based Abuse Hospitals, published by the BLS data available to update the market Office of Occupational Employment on the NAICS and the occupational ECIs basket. We strive to use publications Statistics (OES), as the data source for are based on the Standard Occupational that are disseminated frequently, the wage cost shares in the wage proxy Classification System (SOC). because we believe that this is an blend. We are proposing to use May • optimal way to stay abreast of the most Producer Price Indexes. Producer 2016 OES data. Detailed information on current data available. Price Indexes (PPIs) measure the average • the methodology for the national change over time in the selling prices Availability. Availability means that the proxy is publicly available. We industry-specific occupational received by domestic producers for their employment and wage estimates survey output. The prices included in the PPI prefer that our proxies are publicly available because this will help ensure can be found at http://www.bls.gov/oes/ are from the first commercial current/oes_tec.htm. For the 2012-based transaction for many products and some that our market basket updates are as transparent to the public as possible. In IPF market basket, we used May 2012 services (https://www.bls.gov/ppi/). addition, this enables the public to be OES data. • Consumer Price Indexes. Consumer able to obtain the price proxy data on Based on the OES data, there are six Price Indexes (CPIs) measure the a regular basis. wage subcategories: Management; average change over time in the prices • Relevance. Relevance means that NonHealth Professional and Technical; paid by urban consumers for a market the proxy is applicable and Health Professional and Technical; basket of consumer goods and services representative of the cost category Health Service; NonHealth Service; and (https://www.bls.gov/cpi/). CPIs are only weight to which it is applied. The CPIs, Clerical. Table 5 lists the 2016 used when the purchases are similar to PPIs, and ECIs that we selected to occupational assignments for the six those of retail consumers rather than propose in this regulation meet these wage subcategories; these are the same purchases at the producer level, or if no criteria. Therefore, we believe that they occupational groups used in the 2012- appropriate PPIs are available. continue to be the best measure of price based IPF market basket.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.002 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16959

Table 5: 2016 Occupational Assignments for IPF Wage Blend 2016 Occupational Groupings Group 1 Management 11-0000 Management Occupations Group 2 NonHealth Professional & Technical 13-0000 Business and Financial Operations Occupations 15-0000 Computer and Mathematical Occupations 19-0000 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 23-0000 Legal Occupations 25-0000 Education, Training, and Library Occupations 27-0000 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations Group 3 Health Professional & Technical 29-1021 Dentists, General 29-1031 Dietitians and Nutritionists 29-1051 Pharmacists 29-1062 Family and General Practitioners 29-1063 Internists, General 29-1066 Psychiatrists 29-1069 Physicians and Surgeons, All Other 29-1071 Physician Assistants 29-1122 Occupational Therapists 29-1123 Physical Therapists 29-1125 Recreational Therapists 29-1126 Respiratory Therapists 29-1127 Speech-Language Pathologists 29-1129 Therapists, All Other 29-1141 Registered Nurses 29-1171 Nurse Practitioners 29-1199 Health Diagnosing and Treating Practitioners, All Other Group 4 Health Service 21-0000 Community and Social Services Occupations 29-2011 Medical and Clinical Laboratory Technologists 29-2012 Medical and Clinical Laboratory Technicians 29-2021 Dental Hygienists 29-2034 Radiologic Technologists 29-2041 Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics 29-2051 Dietetic Technicians 29-2052 Pharmacy Technicians

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.003 16960 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Total expenditures by occupation group’s expenditures relative to the total price proxies are the most technically (that is, occupational assignment) were expenditures of all six groups. These appropriate indices available to measure calculated by taking the OES number of proportions, listed in Table 6, represent the price growth of the Wages and employees multiplied by the OES the weights used in the wage proxy Salaries cost category. These are the annual average salary. These blend. We then propose to use the same price proxies used in the 2012- expenditures were aggregated based on published wage proxies in Table 6 for based IPF market basket. the six groups in Table 5. We next each of the six groups (that is, wage calculated the proportion of each subcategories) as we believe these six

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.004 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16961

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C proposed 2016-based IPF wage blend growth rate is the same for both price A comparison of the yearly changes and the 2012-based IPF wage blend is proxies over 2017–2020. from FY 2017 to FY 2020 for the shown in Table 7. The average annual

TABLE 7—FISCAL YEAR GROWTH IN THE 2016-BASED IPF WAGE PROXY BLEND AND 2012-BASED IPF WAGE PROXY BLEND

Average 2017 2018 2019 2020 2017–2020

2016-based IPF Proposed Wage Proxy Blend ...... 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.3 2.8 2012-based IPF Wage Proxy Blend ...... 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.2 2.8 **Source: IHS Global Inc., 4th Quarter 2018 forecast with historical data through 3rd Quarter 2018.

Benefits The benefit ECIs, listed in Table 8, are Health Agency (HHA), Rehabilitation, not publically available. Therefore, an Psychiatric, and Long-Term Care (RPL), To measure benefits price growth in ‘‘ECIs for Total Benefits’’ is calculated Long-Term Care Hospital (LTCH), and the 2016-based IPF market basket, we using publically available ‘‘ECIs for End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) market are proposing to apply a benefits proxy Total Compensation’’ for each baskets. We believe that the six price blend based on the same six subcategory and the relative importance proxies listed in Table 8 are the most subcategories and the same six blend of wages within that subcategory’s total technically appropriate indices to weights for the wage proxy blend. These compensation. This is the same benefits measure the price growth of the Benefits subcategories and blend weights are ECI methodology that we implemented cost category in the proposed 2016- listed in Table 8. in our 2012-based IPF market basket as based IPF market basket. well as used in the IPPS, SNF, Home

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.005 16962 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 8—PROPOSED 2016-BASED IPF MARKET BASKET BENEFITS PROXY BLEND

2016-based 2012-based Wage subcategory benefit benefit Price proxy blend weight blend weight

Health Service ...... 36.3(%) 36.2 ECI for Total Benefits for All Civilian workers in Healthcare and Social Assistance. Health Professional and Technical .. 34.9 33.5 ECI for Total Benefits for All Civilian workers in Hospitals. NonHealth Service ...... 8.9 9.2 ECI for Total Benefits for Private Industry workers in Service Occupa- tions. NonHealth Professional and Tech- 7.0 7.3 ECI for Total Benefits for Private Industry workers in Professional, Sci- nical. entific, and Technical Services. Management ...... 6.8 7.1 ECI for Total Benefits for Private Industry workers in Management, Business, and Financial. Clerical ...... 6.1 6.7 ECI for Total Benefits for Private Industry workers in Office and Admin- istrative Support.

Total ...... 100.0 100.0

A comparison of the yearly changes blend and the 2012-based IPF benefit annual growth rate is the same for both from FY 2017 to FY 2020 for the proxy is shown in Table 9. The average price proxies over 2017–2020. proposed 2016-based IPF benefit proxy

TABLE 9—FISCAL YEAR GROWTH IN THE PROPOSED 2016-BASED IPF BENEFIT PROXY BLEND AND 2012-BASED IPF BENEFIT PROXY BLEND

Average 2017 2018 2019 2020 2017–2020

2016-based IPF Proposed Benefit Proxy Blend ...... 1.9 2.1 2.8 3.3 2.5 2012-based IPF Benefit Proxy Blend ...... 1.9 2.1 2.8 3.3 2.5 Source: IHS Global Inc., 4th Quarter 2018 forecast with historical data through 3rd Quarter 2018.

Electricity that these two price proxies continue to is the same proxy used in the 2012- be the most technically appropriate based IPF market basket. We are proposing to continue to use indices available to measure the price the PPI Commodity Index for Food: Contract Purchases growth of the Fuel, Oil, and Gasoline Commercial Electric Power (BLS series cost category in the proposed 2016- We are proposing to continue to use code WPU0542) to measure the price based IPF market basket. the CPI for Food Away From Home (BLS growth of this cost category. This is the series code CUUR0000SEFV) to measure same price proxy used in the 2012- Professional Liability Insurance the price growth of this cost category. based IPF market basket. We are proposing to continue to use This is the same proxy used in the 2012- Fuel, Oil, and Gasoline the CMS Hospital Professional Liability based IPF market basket. Similar to the 2012-based IPF market Index to measure changes in Chemicals basket, for the 2016-based IPF market professional liability insurance (PLI) Similar to the 2012-based IPF market basket, we are proposing to use a blend premiums. To generate this index, we basket, we are proposing to use a four of the PPI for Petroleum Refineries and collect commercial insurance premiums part blended PPI as the proxy for the the PPI Commodity for Natural Gas. Our for a fixed level of coverage while chemical cost category in the proposed analysis of the BEA’s 2012 Benchmark holding non-price factors constant (such 2016-based IPF market basket. The I–O data (use table before redefinitions, as a change in the level of coverage). proposed blend is composed of the PPI purchaser’s value for NAICS 622000 This is the same proxy used in the 2012- for Industrial Gas Manufacturing [Hospitals]) shows that Petroleum based IPF market basket. Primary Products (BLS series code Refineries expenses accounts for Pharmaceuticals PCU325120325120P), the PPI for Other approximately 90 percent and Natural Basic Inorganic Chemical Gas accounts for approximately 10 We are proposing to continue to use Manufacturing (BLS series code percent of Hospitals (NAICS 622000) the PPI for Pharmaceuticals for Human PCU32518–32518-), the PPI for Other total Fuel, Oil, and Gasoline expenses. Use, Prescription (BLS series code Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Therefore, we propose to use a blend of WPUSI07003) to measure the price (BLS series code PCU32519–32519-), 90 percent of the PPI for Petroleum growth of this cost category. This is the and the PPI for Other Miscellaneous Refineries (BLS series code same proxy used in the 2012-based IPF Chemical Product Manufacturing (BLS PCU324110324110) and 10 percent of market basket. series code PCU325998325998). the PPI Commodity Index for Natural Food: Direct Purchases We note that the four part blended PPI Gas (BLS series code WPU0531) as the used in the 2012-based IPF market price proxy for this cost category. The We are proposing to continue to use basket is composed of the PPI for 2012-based IPF market basket used a 70/ the PPI for Processed Foods and Feeds Industrial Gas Manufacturing (BLS 30 blend of these price proxies, (BLS series code WPU02) to measure the series code PCU325120325120P), the reflecting the 2007 I–O data. We believe price growth of this cost category. This PPI for Other Basic Inorganic Chemical

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16963

Manufacturing (BLS series code We are proposing to derive the Table 10 shows the weights for each PCU32518–32518-), the PPI for Other weights for the PPIs using the 2012 of the four PPIs used to create proposed Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Benchmark I–O data. The 2012-based blended Chemical proxy for the (BLS series code PCU32519–32519–), IPF market basket used the 2007 proposed 2016 IPF market basket and the PPI for Soap and Cleaning Benchmark I–O data to derive the compared to the 2012-based blended Compound Manufacturing (BLS series weights for the four PPIs. Chemical proxy. code PCU32561–32561–).

TABLE 10—BLENDED CHEMICAL PPI WEIGHTS

Proposed 2016-based 2012-based Name IPF weights IPF weights NAICS (%) (%)

PPI for Industrial Gas Manufacturing ...... 19 32 325120 PPI for Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing ...... 13 17 325180 PPI for Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing ...... 60 45 325190 PPI for Soap and Cleaning Compound Manufacturing ...... n/a 6 325610 PPI for Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product Manufacturing ...... 8 n/a 325998

Medical Instruments Professional Fees: Labor-Related same proxy used in the 2012-based IPF market basket. We are proposing to continue to use We are proposing to continue to use a blend of two PPIs for the Medical the ECI for Total Compensation for Financial Services Instruments cost category. The 2012 Private Industry workers in Professional and Related (BLS series code We are proposing to continue to use Benchmark I–O data shows an the ECI for Total Compensation for approximate 57/43 split between CIU2010000120000I) to measure the price growth of this category. This is the Private Industry workers in Financial Surgical and Medical Instruments and Activities (BLS series code Medical and Surgical Appliances and same proxy used in the 2012-based IPF market basket. CIU201520A000000I) to measure the Supplies for this cost category. price growth of this cost category. This Therefore, we propose a blend Administrative and Facilities Support is the same proxy used in the 2012- composed of 57 percent of the Services based IPF market basket. commodity-based PPI for Surgical and We are proposing to continue to use Telephone Services Medical Instruments (BLS series code the ECI for Total Compensation for WPU1562) and 43 percent of the Private Industry workers in Office and We are proposing to continue to use commodity-based PPI for Medical and Administrative Support (BLS series the CPI for Telephone Services (BLS Surgical Appliances and Supplies (BLS code CIU2010000220000I) to measure series code CUUR0000SEED) to measure series code WPU1563). The 2012-based the price growth of this category. This the price growth of this cost category. IPF market basket used a 50/50 blend of is the same proxy used in the 2012- This is the same proxy used in the 2012- these PPIs based on the 2007 based IPF market basket. based IPF market basket. Benchmark I–O data. Installation, Maintenance, and Repair All Other: Nonlabor-Related Services Rubber and Plastics We are proposing to continue to use We are proposing to continue to use We are proposing to continue to use the ECI for Total Compensation for the CPI for All Items Less Food and the PPI for Rubber and Plastic Products Civilian workers in Installation, Energy (BLS series code (BLS series code WPU07) to measure Maintenance, and Repair (BLS series CUUR0000SA0L1E) to measure the price growth of this cost category. This code CIU1010000430000I) to measure price growth of this cost category. This is the same proxy used in the 2012- the price growth of this cost category. is the same proxy used in the 2012- based IPF market basket. This is the same proxy used in the 2012- based IPF market basket. based IPF market basket. Paper and Printing Products ii. Price Proxies for the Capital Portion All Other: Labor-Related Services of the Proposed 2016-Based IPF Market We are proposing to continue to use We are proposing to continue to use Basket the PPI for Converted Paper and the ECI for Total Compensation for Paperboard Products (BLS series code Capital Price Proxies Prior to Vintage Private Industry workers in Service Weighting WPU0915) to measure the price growth Occupations (BLS series code of this cost category. This is the same CIU2010000300000I) to measure the We are proposing to continue to use proxy used in the 2012-based IPF price growth of this cost category. This the same price proxies for the capital- market basket. is the same proxy used in the 2012- related cost categories as were applied Miscellaneous Products based IPF market basket. in the 2012-based IPF market basket, which are provided and described in We are proposing to continue to use Professional Fees: Nonlabor-Related Table 12. Specifically, we are proposing the PPI for Finished Goods Less Food We are proposing to continue to use to proxy: and Energy (BLS series code the ECI for Total Compensation for • Depreciation: Building and Fixed WPUFD4131) to measure the price Private Industry workers in Professional Equipment cost category by BEA’s growth of this cost category. This is the and Related (BLS series code Chained Price Index for Nonresidential same proxy used in the 2012-based IPF CIU2010000120000I) to measure the Construction for Hospitals and Special market basket. price growth of this category. This is the Care Facilities (BEA Table 5.4.4. Price

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16964 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Indexes for Private Fixed Investment in related component of the proposed continue at current year levels, Structures by Type). 2016-based IPF market basket reflects assuming straight-line depreciation. We • Depreciation: Movable Equipment the underlying stability of the capital- are proposing to determine the expected cost category by the PPI for Machinery related acquisition process. life of building and fixed equipment and Equipment (BLS series code The methodology used to calculate separately for hospital-based IPFs and WPU11). the vintage weights for the proposed freestanding IPFs and weight these • Nonprofit Interest cost category by 2016-based IPF market basket is the expected lives using the percent of total the average yield on domestic municipal same as that used for the 2012-based IPF capital costs each provider type bonds (Bond Buyer 20-bond index). market basket with the only difference represents. We are proposing to apply a • For-profit Interest cost category by being the inclusion of more recent data. similar method for movable equipment. the average yield on Moody’s Aaa bonds To calculate the vintage weights for Using these proposed methods, we (Federal Reserve). depreciation and interest expenses, we determined the average expected life of • Other Capital-Related cost category first need a time series of capital-related building and fixed equipment to be by the CPI–U for Rent of Primary purchases for building and fixed equal to 22 years, and the average Residence (BLS series code equipment and movable equipment. We expected life of movable equipment to CUUS0000SEHA). found no single source that provides an be equal to 11 years. For the expected We believe that these are the most appropriate time series of capital-related life of interest, we believe vintage appropriate proxies for IPF capital- purchases by hospitals for all of the weights for interest should represent the related costs that meet our selection listed components of capital purchases. average expected life of building and criteria of relevance, timeliness, The early Medicare cost reports did not fixed equipment because, based on availability, and reliability. We are also have sufficient capital-related data to previous research described in the FY proposing to continue to vintage weight meet this need. Data we obtained from 1997 IPPS final rule (61 FR 46198), the the capital price proxies for the American Hospital Association expected life of hospital debt Depreciation and Interest in order to (AHA) do not include annual capital- instruments and the expected life of capture the long-term consumption of related purchases. However, the AHA buildings and fixed equipment are capital. This vintage weighting method does provide a consistent database of similar. We note that for the 2012-based is similar to the method used for the total expenses back to 1963. IPF market basket the expected life of 2012-based IPF market basket and is Consequently, we are proposing to use building and fixed equipment is 23 described in the section labeled Vintage data from the AHA Panel Survey and years and the expected life of movable Weights for Price Proxies. the AHA Annual Survey to obtain a equipment is 11 years. Vintage Weights for Price Proxies time series of total expenses for Multiplying these expected lives by hospitals. We then are proposing to use the annual depreciation amounts results Because capital is acquired and paid data from the AHA Panel Survey in annual year-end asset costs for for over time, capital-related expenses supplemented with the ratio of building and fixed equipment and in any given year are determined by depreciation to total hospital expenses movable equipment. We then calculate both past and present purchases of obtained from the Medicare cost reports a time series, beginning in 1964, of physical and financial capital. The to derive a trend of annual depreciation annual capital purchases by subtracting vintage-weighted capital-related portion expenses for 1963 through 2016. We are the previous year’s asset costs from the of the proposed 2016-based IPF market proposing to separate these depreciation current year’s asset costs. basket is intended to capture the long- expenses into annual amounts of For the building and fixed equipment term consumption of capital, using building and fixed equipment and movable equipment vintage vintage weights for depreciation depreciation and movable equipment weights, we are proposing to use the (physical capital) and interest (financial depreciation as previously determined. real annual capital-related purchase capital). These vintage weights reflect From these annual depreciation amounts for each asset type to capture the proportion of capital-related amounts we derive annual end-of-year the actual amount of the physical purchases attributable to each year of book values for building and fixed acquisition, net of the effect of price the expected life of building and fixed equipment and movable equipment inflation. These real annual capital- equipment, movable equipment, and using the expected life for each type of related purchase amounts are produced interest. We are proposing to use vintage asset category. While data are not by deflating the nominal annual weights to compute vintage-weighted available that are specific to IPFs, we purchase amount by the associated price price changes associated with believe this information for all hospitals proxy as provided. For the interest depreciation and interest expenses. serves as a reasonable alternative for the vintage weights, we are proposing to use Capital-related costs are inherently pattern of depreciation for IPFs. the total nominal annual capital-related complicated and are determined by To continue to calculate the vintage purchase amounts to capture the value complex capital-related purchasing weights for depreciation and interest of the debt instrument (including, but decisions, over time, based on such expenses, we also need the expected not limited to, mortgages and bonds). factors as interest rates and debt lives for Building and Fixed Equipment, Using these capital-related purchase financing. In addition, capital is Movable Equipment, and Interest for the time series specific to each asset type, depreciated over time instead of being proposed 2016-based IPF market basket. we are proposing to calculate the consumed in the same period it is We are proposing to calculate the vintage weights for building and fixed purchased. By accounting for the expected lives using Medicare cost equipment, for movable equipment, and vintage nature of capital, we are able to report data from freestanding and for interest. provide an accurate and stable annual hospital-based IPFs. The expected life of The vintage weights for each asset measure of price changes. Annual non- any asset can be determined by dividing type are deemed to represent the vintage price changes for capital are the value of the asset (excluding fully average purchase pattern of the asset unstable due to the volatility of interest depreciated assets) by its current year over its expected life (in the case of rate changes and, therefore, do not depreciation amount. This calculation building and fixed equipment and reflect the actual annual price changes yields the estimated expected life of an interest, 22 years, and in the case of for IPF capital-related costs. The capital- asset if the rates of depreciation were to movable equipment, 11 years). For each

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16965

asset type, we used the time series of fixed equipment and interest, or 11-year then calculate the average vintage annual capital-related purchase period for movable equipment, we weight for a given year of the expected amounts available from 2016 back to calculate annual vintage weights by life by taking the average of these 1964. These data allow us to derive dividing the capital-related purchase vintage weights across the multiple thirty-two 22-year periods of capital- amount in any given year by the total periods of data. related purchases for building and fixed amount of purchases over the entire 22- The vintage weights for the capital- equipment and interest, and forty-two year or 11-year period. This calculation related portion of the proposed 2016- 11-year periods of capital-related is done for each year in the 22-year or based IPF market baskets and the 2012- purchases for movable equipment. For 11-year period and for each of the based IPF market basket are presented each 22-year period for building and periods for which we have data. We in Table 11.

TABLE 11—PROPOSED 2016-BASED IPF MARKET BASKET AND 2012-BASED IPF MARKET BASKET VINTAGE WEIGHTS FOR CAPITAL-RELATED PRICE PROXIES

Building and fixed equipment Movable equipment Interest Year 2016-based 2012-based 2016-based 2012-based 2016-based 2012-based 22 years 23 years 11 years 11 years 22 years 23 years

1 ...... 0.035 0.029 0.071 0.069 0.021 0.017 2 ...... 0.036 0.031 0.075 0.073 0.023 0.019 3 ...... 0.038 0.034 0.080 0.077 0.025 0.022 4 ...... 0.038 0.036 0.085 0.083 0.026 0.024 5 ...... 0.040 0.037 0.087 0.087 0.029 0.026 6 ...... 0.042 0.039 0.091 0.091 0.031 0.028 7 ...... 0.042 0.040 0.095 0.096 0.033 0.030 8 ...... 0.041 0.041 0.099 0.100 0.033 0.032 9 ...... 0.042 0.042 0.102 0.103 0.036 0.035 10 ...... 0.043 0.044 0.105 0.107 0.038 0.038 11 ...... 0.046 0.045 0.110 0.114 0.042 0.040 12 ...... 0.047 0.045 ...... 0.045 0.042 13 ...... 0.048 0.045 ...... 0.048 0.044 14 ...... 0.049 0.046 ...... 0.052 0.046 15 ...... 0.050 0.046 ...... 0.055 0.048 16 ...... 0.050 0.048 ...... 0.057 0.053 17 ...... 0.051 0.049 ...... 0.060 0.057 18 ...... 0.053 0.050 ...... 0.065 0.060 19 ...... 0.053 0.051 ...... 0.068 0.063 20 ...... 0.053 0.051 ...... 0.069 0.066 21 ...... 0.052 0.051 ...... 0.070 0.067 22 ...... 0.052 0.050 ...... 0.072 0.069 23 ...... 0.052 ...... 0.073

Total ...... 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Note: Numbers may not add to total due to rounding.

The process of creating vintage- example vintage weights and example described in the IPPS FY 2010 Proposed weighted price proxies requires price indices. The example can be found Rule.’’ applying the vintage weights to the at the following link: http:// iii. Summary of Price Proxies of the price proxy index where the last applied www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data- Proposed 2016-Based IPF Market Basket vintage weight in Table 11 is applied to and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and- the most recent data point. We have Reports/MedicareProgramRatesStats/ Table 12 shows both the operating provided on the CMS website an MarketBasketResearch.html in the zip and capital price proxies for the example of how the vintage weighting file titled ‘‘Weight Calculations as proposed 2016-based IPF Market Basket. price proxies are calculated, using BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16966 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Table 12: Price Proxies for the Proposed 2016-based IPF Market Basket

:':':; ~ Total 100.0

Compensation 66.0 Wages and Salaries Blended Wages and Salaries Price Proxy 52.2 Employee Benefits Blended Benefits Price Proxy 13.8

Utilities 1.1 Electricity PPI for Commercial Electric Power 0.8 Blend of the PPI for Petroleum Refineries and PPI for Fuel, Oil, and Gasoline Natural Gas 0.3 Professional Liability Insurance 0.9 CMS Hospital Professional Liability Insurance Premium Malpractice Index 0.9

All Other Products and Services 24.9

All Other Products 10.7 Pharmaceuticals PPI for Pharmaceuticals for human use, prescription 4.7

Food: Direct Purchases PPI for Processed Foods and Feeds 0.9

Food: Contract Services CPI-U for Food Away From Home 1.0 Chemicals Blend of Chemical PPis 0.3

Blend of the PPI for Surgical and medical instruments and Medical Instruments PPI for Medical and surgical appliances and supplies 2.3

Rubber & Plastics PPI for Rubber and Plastic Products 0.3 Paper and Printing Products PPI for Converted Paper and Paperboard Products 0.5 Miscellaneous Products PPI for Finished Goods Less Food and Energy 0.7

All Other Services 14.2 Labor-Related Services 7.7 ECI for Total compensation for Private industry workers in Professional Fees: Labor-related Professional and related 4.4 Administrative and Facilities ECI for Total compensation for Private industry workers in Support Services Office and administrative support 0.6 ECI for Total compensation for Civilian workers in Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Installation, maintenance, and repair 1.3 ECI for Total compensation for Private industry workers in All Other: Labor-related Services Service occupations 1.4

Nonlabor-Related Services 6.5 ECI for Total compensation for Private industry workers in Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related Professional and related 4.5 ECI for Total compensation for Private industry workers in Financial services Financial activities 0.8 Telephone Services CPI-U for Telephone Services 0.3 All Other: Nonlabor-related Services CPI-U for All Items Less Food and Energy 1.0

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.006 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16967

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C IGI is a nationally recognized economic (for example, a more recent estimate of 4. FY 2020 Market Basket Update and financial forecasting firm that the market basket) we would use such contracts with CMS to forecast the data, to determine the FY 2020 update For FY 2020 (that is, beginning components of the market baskets and in the final rule. For comparison, the October 1, 2019 and ending September multifactor productivity (MFP). current 2012-based IPF market basket is 30, 2020), we propose to use an estimate Using IGI’s fourth quarter 2018 also projected to increase by 3.1 percent of the 2016-based IPF market basket forecast with historical data through the in FY 2020 based on IGI’s fourth quarter increase factor to update the IPF PPS third quarter of 2018, the projected 2018 forecast. Table 13 compares the base payment rate. Consistent with proposed 2016-based IPF market basket proposed 2016-based IPF market basket historical practice, we estimate the increase factor for FY 2020 is 3.1 and the 2012-based IPF market basket market basket update for the IPF PPS percent. We are proposing that if more percent changes. based on IHS Global Inc.’s (IGI) forecast. recent data are subsequently available

TABLE 13—PROPOSED 2016-BASED IPF MARKET BASKET AND 2012-BASED IPF MARKET BASKET PERCENT CHANGES, FY 2015 THROUGH FY 2022

Proposed 2016-based 2012-based Fiscal year IPF market IPF market (FY) basket index basket index percent change percent change

Historical data: FY 2015 ...... 1.9 1.8 FY 2016 ...... 1.9 1.9 FY 2017 ...... 2.4 2.5 FY 2018 ...... 2.6 2.6

Average 2015–2018 ...... 2.2 2.2

Forecast: FY 2019 ...... 2.9 2.9 FY 2020 ...... 3.1 3.1 FY 2021 ...... 3.1 3.2 FY 2022 ...... 3.1 3.1

Average 2019–2022 ...... 3.1 3.1 Note: These market basket percent changes do not include any further adjustments as may be statutorily required. Source: IHS Global Inc. 4th quarter 2018 forecast.

5. Productivity Adjustment multifactor productivity (MFP) (as growth from output growth. The projected by the Secretary for the 10- projections of the components of MFP Section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act year period ending with the applicable are currently produced by IGI, a requires the application of the FY, year, cost reporting period, or other productivity adjustment described in nationally recognized economic section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act to annual period) (the ‘‘MFP adjustment’’). forecasting firm with which CMS the IPF PPS for the RY beginning in The BLS publishes the official measure contracts to forecast the components of 2012 (that is, a RY that coincides with of private non-farm business MFP. We the market baskets and MFP. For more a FY) and each subsequent RY. The refer readers to the BLS website at information on the productivity statute defines the productivity http://www.bls.gov/mfp for the BLS adjustment, we refer reader to the adjustment to be equal to the 10-year historical published MFP data. discussion in the FY 2016 IPF PPS final moving average of changes in annual MFP is derived by subtracting the rule (80 FR 46675). economy-wide private nonfarm business contribution of labor and capital inputs

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.007 16968 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

For this FY 2020 proposed rule, using We are proposing to include in the Professional Fees: Labor-related costs IGI’s fourth quarter 2018 forecast, the labor-related share the sum of the were determined to be the difference MFP adjustment for FY 2020 (the 10- relative importance of the following cost between the total costs for each year moving average of MFP for the categories: Wages and Salaries, Benchmark I–O category and the period ending FY 2020) is projected to Employee Benefits, Professional Fees: Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related be 0.5 percent. Thus, in accordance with Labor-related, Administrative and costs. This is the same methodology that section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, we Facilities Support Services, Installation, we used to separate the 2012-based IPF are proposing to base the FY 2020 Maintenance, and Repair, All Other: market basket professional fees category market basket update, which is used to Labor-related Services, and a portion of into Professional Fees: Labor-related determine the applicable percentage the Capital-Related cost weight from the and Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related increase for the IPF payments, on the proposed 2016-based IPF market basket. cost categories. most recent estimate of the proposed These are the same categories as the In the proposed 2016-based IPF 2016-based IPF market basket (currently 2012-based IPF market basket. market basket, nonmedical professional estimated to be 3.1 percent based on Similar to the 2012-based IPF market fees that were subject to allocation IGI’s fourth quarter 2018 forecast). We basket, the proposed 2016-based IPF based on these survey results represent propose to then reduce this percentage market basket includes two cost 3.6 percent of total costs (and are increase of 3.1 percent by the current categories for nonmedical Professional limited to those fees related to estimate of the MFP adjustment for FY fees (including but not limited to, Accounting & Auditing, Legal, 2020 of 0.5 percentage point (the 10- expenses for legal, accounting, and Engineering, and Management year moving average of MFP for the engineering services). These are Consulting services). Based on our period ending FY 2020 based on IGI’s Professional Fees: Labor-related and survey results, we proposed to fourth quarter 2018 forecast) yielding a Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related. For apportion 2.3 percentage points of the productivity-adjusted IPF market basket the proposed 2016-based IPF market 3.6 percentage point figure into the update of 2.6 percent. In addition, for basket, we propose to estimate the labor- Professional Fees: Labor-related share FY 2020 the proposed 2016-based IPF related percentage of non-medical cost category and designate the PPS market basket update is further professional fees (and assign these remaining 1.3 percentage point into the reduced by 0.75 percentage point as expenses to the Professional Fees: Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related cost required by sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) Labor-related services cost category) category. and 1886(s)(3)(E) of the Act. This based on the same method that was In addition to the professional statutory language specifies that the 0.75 used to determine the labor-related services listed, for the 2016-based IPF percentage point other adjustment percentage of professional fees in the market basket, we are proposing to allocate a proportion of the Home Office applies to rate years beginning in 2017, 2012-based IPF market basket. Contract Labor cost weight, calculated 2018, and 2019; since fiscal year 2020 As was done in the 2012-based IPF using the Medicare cost reports, into the begins on October 1, 2019, the 0.75 market basket, we propose to determine Professional Fees: Labor-related and percentage point other adjustment the proportion of legal, accounting and Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related cost applies to FY 2020. FY 2020 is the final auditing, engineering, and management categories. We are proposing to classify year of the 0.75 percentage point other consulting services that meet our these expenses as labor-related and adjustment as required by section definition of labor-related services based nonlabor-related as many facilities are 1866(s)(3)(E) of the Act. This results in on a survey of hospitals conducted by not located in the same geographic area an estimated FY 2020 IPF PPS payment CMS in 2008. We notified the public of as their home office and, therefore, do rate update of 1.85 percent our intent to conduct this survey on ¥ ¥ December 9, 2005 (70 FR 73250) and did not meet our definition for the labor- (3.1 0.5 0.75 = 1.85 percent). Finally, related share that requires the services we are proposing that if more recent not receive any public comments in response to the notice (71 FR 8588). A to be purchased in the local labor data are subsequently available (for market. example, a more recent estimate of the discussion of the composition of the survey and post-stratification can be Similar to the 2012-based IPF market market basket and MFP adjustment), we basket, we are proposing for the 2016- would use such data to determine the found in the FY 2010 Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) based IPF market basket to use the FY 2020 market basket update and MFP Medicare cost reports for both adjustment in the final rule. Long-Term Care Hospital (LTCH) Prospective Payment System (PPS) final freestanding IPF providers and hospital- 6. Proposed Labor-Related Share for FY rule (74 FR 43850 through 43856). based IPF providers to determine the 2020 Based on the weighted results of the home office labor-related percentages. survey, we determined that hospitals The Medicare cost report requires a Due to variations in geographic wage purchase, on average, the following hospital to report information regarding levels and other labor-related costs, we portions of contracted professional their home office provider. Using believe that payment rates under the IPF services outside of their local labor information on the Medicare cost report, PPS should continue to be adjusted by market: we then compare the location of the IPF a geographic wage index, which would • 34 percent of accounting and with the location of the IPF’s home apply to the labor-related portion of the auditing services. office. We are proposing to classify an Federal per diem base rate (hereafter • 30 percent of engineering services. IPF with a home office located in their referred to as the labor-related share). • 33 percent of legal services. respective labor market if the IPF and its The labor-related share is determined by • 42 percent of management home office are located in the same identifying the national average consulting services. Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). We proportion of total costs that are related We are proposing to apply each of then determine the proportion of the to, influenced by, or vary with the local these percentages to the respective 2012 Home Office Contract Labor cost weight labor market. We propose to continue to Benchmark I–O cost category that should be allocated to the labor- classify a cost category as labor-related underlying the professional fees cost related share based on the percent of if the costs are labor intensive and vary category to determine the Professional total Medicare allowable costs for those with the local labor market. Fees: Nonlabor-related costs. The IPFs that had home offices located in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16969

their respective local labor markets of related organization contract labor cost importance for Wages and Salaries, total Medicare allowable costs for IPFs weights into the Professional Fees: Employee Benefits, Professional Fees: with a home office. We determined an Labor-Related cost category. This Labor-related, Administrative and IPF’s and its home office’s MSA using amount was added to the portion of Facilities Support Services, Installation their zip code information from the professional fees that we already Maintenance & Repair Services, and All Medicare cost report. Using this identified as labor-related using the I–O Other: Labor-related Services is 73.7 methodology, we determined that 46 data such as contracted advertising and percent. The portion of Capital costs percent of IPFs’ Medicare allowable marketing costs (approximately 0.5 that is influenced by the local labor costs were for home offices located in percentage point of total costs) resulting market is estimated to be 46 percent, their respective local labor markets. in a Professional Fees: Labor-Related which is the same percentage applied to Therefore, we are allocating 46 percent cost weight of 4.4 percent. the 2012-based IPF market basket. Since of the Home Office Contract Labor cost As stated, we are proposing to include weight (1.6 percentage points = 3.5 in the labor-related share the sum of the the relative importance for Capital is 6.8 percent times 46 percent) to the relative importance of Wages and percent of the proposed 2016-based IPF Professional Fees: Labor-related cost Salaries, Employee Benefits, market basket in FY 2020, we took 46 weight and 54 percent of the Home Professional Fees: Labor-Related, percent of 6.8 percent to determine the Office Contract Labor cost weight to the Administrative and Facilities Support proposed labor-related share of Capital Professional Fees: Nonlabor-related cost Services, Installation, Maintenance, and for FY 2020 of 3.1 percent. Therefore, weight (1.9 percentage points = 3.5 Repair, All Other: Labor-related we are proposing a total labor-related percent times 54 percent). For the 2012- Services, and a portion of the Capital- share for FY 2020 of 76.8 percent (the based IPF market basket, we used a Related cost weight from the proposed sum of 73.7 percent for the operating similar methodology but we relied on 2016-based IPF market basket. The cost and 3.1 percent for the labor-related provider counts rather than total relative importance reflects the different share of Capital). Table 14 shows the FY Medicare allowable costs to determine rates of price change for these cost 2020 labor-related share using the the labor-related percentage. categories between the base year (2016) proposed 2016-based IPF market basket In summary, based on the two and FY 2020. Based on IHS Global Inc. relative importance and the FY 2019 allocations mentioned earlier, we 4th quarter 2018 forecast for the labor-related share using the 2012-based apportioned percentage points of the proposed 2016-based IPF market basket, IPF market basket. professional fees and home office/ the sum of the FY 2020 relative

TABLE 14—PROPOSED FY 2020 IPF LABOR-RELATED SHARE AND FY 2019 IPF LABOR-RELATED SHARE

FY 2020 labor- related share FY 2019 final based on labor-related proposed share based on 2016-based IPF 2012-based IPF market basket 2 market basket 1

Wages and Salaries ...... 52.3 52.0 Employee Benefits ...... 13.7 13.2 Professional Fees: Labor-related 3 ...... 4.4 2.8 Administrative and Facilities Support Services ...... 0.6 0.7 Installation, Maintenance and Repair ...... 1.3 1.6 All Other: Labor-related Services ...... 1.4 1.5

Subtotal ...... 73.7 71.8 Labor-related portion of capital (46%) ...... 3.1 3.0

Total LRS ...... 76.8 74.8 1 IHS Global Inc. 4th quarter 2018 forecast. 2 Based on IHS Global Inc. 2nd quarter 2018 forecast as published in the Federal Register (83 FR 38579). 3 Includes all contract advertising and marketing costs and a portion of accounting, architectural, engineering, legal, management consulting, and home office contract labor costs.

B. Proposed Updates to the IPF PPS appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS Therefore, we calculated the budget- Rates for FY Beginning October 1, 2019 final rule (69 FR 66926). neutrality factor by setting the total estimated IPF PPS payments to be equal 1. Determining the Standardized The IPF PPS is based on a to the total estimated payments that Budget-Neutral Federal per Diem Base standardized federal per diem base rate would have been made under the Tax Rate calculated from the IPF average per Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of diem costs and adjusted for budget- Section 124(a)(1) of the BBRA 1982 (TEFRA) (Pub. L. 97–248) neutrality in the implementation year. required that we implement the IPF PPS methodology had the IPF PPS not been The federal per diem base rate is used in a budget-neutral manner. In other implemented. A step-by-step as the standard payment per day under words, the amount of total payments description of the methodology used to the IPF PPS and is adjusted by the under the IPF PPS, including any estimate payments under the TEFRA patient-level and facility-level payment adjustments, must be projected payment system appears in the adjustments that are applicable to the to be equal to the amount of total November 2004 IPF PPS Final rule (69 IPF stay. A detailed explanation of how payments that would have been made if FR 66926). we calculated the average per diem cost the IPF PPS were not implemented.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16970 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Under the IPF PPS methodology, we procedure codes for FY 2020 and is the FY 2019 ECT payment per treatment calculated the final federal per diem available on our website at https:// of $337.00, yielding an ECT payment base rate to be budget-neutral during the www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee- per treatment of $339.12 for FY 2020. IPF PPS implementation period (that is, for-Service-Payment/InpatientPsych C. Proposed Updates to the IPF PPS the 18-month period from January 1, FacilPPS/tools.html. Patient-Level Adjustment Factors 2005 through June 30, 2006) using a July 2. Proposed Update of the Federal per 1 update cycle. We updated the average Diem Base Rate and Electroconvulsive 1. Overview of the IPF PPS Adjustment cost per day to the midpoint of the IPF Therapy Payment per Treatment Factors PPS implementation period (October 1, The IPF PPS payment adjustments 2005), and this amount was used in the The current (FY 2019) federal per were derived from a regression analysis payment model to establish the budget- diem base rate is $782.78 and the ECT of 100 percent of the FY 2002 Medicare neutrality adjustment. payment per treatment is $337.00. For Next, we standardized the IPF PPS the FY 2020 federal per diem base rate, Provider and Analysis Review federal per diem base rate to account for we applied the payment rate update of (MedPAR) data file, which contained the overall positive effects of the IPF 1.85 percent (that is, the 2016-based IPF 483,038 cases. For a more detailed PPS payment adjustment factors by market basket increase for FY 2020 of description of the data file used for the dividing total estimated payments under 3.1 percent less the productivity regression analysis, see the November the TEFRA payment system by adjustment of 0.5 percentage point, and 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66935 estimated payments under the IPF PPS. further reduced by the 0.75 percentage through 66936). We continue to use the Additional information concerning this point required under section existing regression-derived adjustment standardization can be found in the 1886(s)(3)(E) of the Act), and the wage factors established in 2005 for FY 2020. November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 index budget-neutrality factor of 1.0078 However, we have used more recent FR 66932) and the RY 2006 IPF PPS (as discussed in section III.D.1.f of this claims data to simulate payments to final rule (71 FR 27045). We then proposed rule) to the FY 2019 federal finalize the outlier fixed dollar loss reduced the standardized federal per per diem base rate of $782.78, yielding threshold amount and to assess the diem base rate to account for the outlier a federal per diem base rate of $803.48 impact of the IPF PPS updates. policy, the stop loss provision, and for FY 2020. Similarly, we applied the 2. IPF PPS Patient-Level Adjustments anticipated behavioral changes. A 1.85 percent payment rate update and complete discussion of how we the 1.0078 wage index budget-neutrality The IPF PPS includes payment calculated each component of the factor to the FY 2018 ECT payment per adjustments for the following patient- budget-neutrality adjustment appears in treatment, yielding an ECT payment per level characteristics: Medicare Severity the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule treatment of $345.91 for FY 2020. Diagnosis Related Groups (MS–DRGs) (69 FR 66932 through 66933) and in the Section 1886(s)(4)(A)(i) of the Act assignment of the patient’s principal RY 2007 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27044 requires that for RY 2014 and each diagnosis, selected comorbidities, through 27046). The final standardized subsequent RY, in the case of an IPF patient age, and the variable per diem budget-neutral federal per diem base that fails to report required quality data adjustments. rate established for cost reporting with respect to such rate year, the a. Proposed Update to MS–DRG periods beginning on or after January 1, Secretary shall reduce any annual Assignment 2005 was calculated to be $575.95. update to a standard federal rate for The federal per diem base rate has discharges during the RY by 2.0 We believe it is important to maintain been updated in accordance with percentage points. Therefore, we are for IPFs the same diagnostic coding and applicable statutory requirements and applying a 2.0 percentage point Diagnosis Related Group (DRG) § 412.428 through publication of annual reduction to the federal per diem base classification used under the Inpatient notices or proposed and final rules. A rate and the ECT payment per treatment Prospective Payment System (IPPS) for detailed discussion on the standardized as follows: providing psychiatric care. For this budget-neutral federal per diem base • For IPFs that fail requirements reason, when the IPF PPS was rate and the electroconvulsive therapy under the Inpatient Psychiatric implemented for cost reporting periods (ECT) payment per treatment appears in Facilities Quality Reporting (IPFQR) beginning on or after January 1, 2005, the FY 2014 IPF PPS update notice (78 Program, we applied a ¥0.15 percent we adopted the same diagnostic code set FR 46738 through 46740). These payment rate update (that is, the IPF (ICD–9–CM) and DRG patient documents are available on the CMS market basket increase for FY 2020 of classification system (MS–DRGs) that website at https://www.cms.gov/ 3.1 percent less the productivity were utilized at the time under the IPPS. Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- adjustment of 0.5 percentage point, In the RY 2009 IPF PPS notice (73 FR Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ further reduced by the 0.75 percentage 25709), we discussed CMS’ effort to index.html. point for an update of 1.85 percent, and better recognize resource use and the IPFs must include a valid procedure further reduced by 2 percentage points severity of illness among patients. CMS code for ECT services provided to IPF in accordance with section adopted the new MS–DRGs for the IPPS beneficiaries in order to bill for ECT 1886(s)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, which in the FY 2008 IPPS final rule with services, as described in our Medicare results in a negative update percentage) comment period (72 FR 47130). In the Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 3, and the wage index budget-neutrality RY 2009 IPF PPS notice (73 FR 25716), Section 190.7.3 (available at https:// factor of 1.0078 to the FY 2019 federal we provided a crosswalk to reflect www.cms.gov/Regulations-and- per diem base rate of $782.78, yielding changes that were made under the IPF Guidance/Guidance/Manuals/ a federal per diem base rate of $787.70 PPS to adopt the new MS–DRGs. For a Downloads/clm104c03.pdf.) There were for FY 2020. detailed description of the mapping no changes to the ECT procedure codes • For IPFs that fail to meet changes from the original DRG used on IPF claims as a result of the requirements under the IPFQR Program, adjustment categories to the current proposed update to the ICD–10–PCS we applied the ¥0.15 percent annual MS–DRG adjustment categories, we code set for FY 2020. Addendum B–4 to payment rate update and the 1.0078 refer readers to the RY 2009 IPF PPS this proposed rule shows the ECT wage index budget-neutrality factor to notice (73 FR 25714).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16971

The IPF PPS includes payment Code First IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 26451 through adjustments for designated psychiatric As discussed in the ICD–10–CM 26452), we explained that the IPF PPS DRGs assigned to the claim based on the Official Guidelines for Coding and includes 17 comorbidity categories and patient’s principal diagnosis. The DRG Reporting, certain conditions have both identified the new, revised, and deleted adjustment factors were expressed an underlying etiology and multiple ICD–9–CM diagnosis codes that generate relative to the most frequently reported body system manifestations due to the a comorbid condition payment psychiatric DRG in FY 2002, that is, underlying etiology. For such adjustment under the IPF PPS for RY DRG 430 (psychoses). The coefficient conditions, the ICD–10–CM has a 2012 (76 FR 26451). Comorbidities are specific patient values and adjustment factors were coding convention that requires the conditions that are secondary to the derived from the regression analysis. underlying condition be sequenced first patient’s principal diagnosis and that Mapping the DRGs to the MS–DRGs followed by the manifestation. require treatment during the stay. resulted in the current 17 IPF MS– Wherever such a combination exists, DRGs, instead of the original 15 DRGs, Diagnoses that relate to an earlier there is a ‘‘use additional code’’ note at episode of care and have no bearing on for which the IPF PPS provides an the etiology code, and a ‘‘code first’’ adjustment. For FY 2020, we are not the current hospital stay are excluded note at the manifestation code. These and must not be reported on IPF claims. proposing any changes to the IPF MS– instructional notes indicate the proper DRG adjustment factors but propose to Comorbid conditions must exist at the sequencing order of the codes (etiology time of admission or develop maintain the existing IPF MS–DRG followed by manifestation). In adjustment factors. subsequently, and affect the treatment accordance with the ICD–10–CM received, length of stay (LOS), or both In the FY 2015 IPF PPS final rule Official Guidelines for Coding and published August 6, 2014 in the Federal treatment and LOS. Reporting, when a primary (psychiatric) For each claim, an IPF may receive Register titled, ‘‘Inpatient Psychiatric diagnosis code has a ‘‘code first’’ note, Facilities Prospective Payment only one comorbidity adjustment within the provider would follow the a comorbidity category, but it may System—Update for FY Beginning instructions in the ICD–10–CM text. The receive an adjustment for more than one October 1, 2014 (FY 2015)’’ (79 FR submitted claim goes through the CMS comorbidity category. Current billing 45945 through 45947), we finalized processing system, which will identify instructions for discharge claims, on or conversions of the ICD–9–CM–based the primary diagnosis code as non- after October 1, 2015, require IPFs to MS–DRGs to ICD–10–CM/PCS–based psychiatric and search the secondary enter the complete ICD–10–CM codes MS–DRGs, which were implemented on codes for a psychiatric code to assign a for up to 24 additional diagnoses if they October 1, 2015. Further information on DRG code for adjustment. The system co-exist at the time of admission, or the ICD–10–CM/PCS MS–DRG will continue to search the secondary develop subsequently and impact the conversion project can be found on the codes for those that are appropriate for treatment provided. CMS ICD–10–CM website at https:// comorbidity adjustment. The comorbidity adjustments were www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/ICD10/ For more information on the code first determined based on the regression ICD-10-MS-DRG-Conversion- policy, see our November 2004 IPF PPS analysis using the diagnoses reported by Project.html. final rule (69 FR 66945) and see sections IPFs in FY 2002. The principal For FY 2020, we propose to continue I.A.13 and I.B.7 of the FY 2019 ICD–10– diagnoses were used to establish the to make the existing payment CM Coding Guidelines, available at DRG adjustments and were not adjustment for psychiatric diagnoses https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/data/ accounted for in establishing the that group to one of the existing 17 IPF 10cmguidelines-FY2019-final.pdf. In the comorbidity category adjustments, MS–DRGs listed in Addendum A. FY 2015 IPF PPS final rule, we provided except where ICD–9–CM code first Addendum A is available on our a code first table for reference that instructions applied. In a code first website at https://www.cms.gov/ highlights the same or similar situation, the submitted claim goes Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- manifestation codes where the code first through the CMS processing system, Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ instructions apply in ICD–10–CM that which will identify the principal tools.html. Psychiatric principal were present in ICD–9–CM (79 FR diagnosis code as non-psychiatric and diagnoses that do not group to one of 46009). In FY 2018 and FY 2019, there search the secondary codes for a the 17 designated MS–DRGs will still were no changes to the final ICD–10– psychiatric code to assign an MS–DRG receive the federal per diem base rate CM/PCS codes in the IPF Code First code for adjustment. The system will and all other applicable adjustments, table. For FY 2020, there continue to be continue to search the secondary codes but the payment will not include an no changes to the ICD–10–CM/PCS for those that are appropriate for MS–DRG adjustment. codes in the proposed IPF Code First comorbidity adjustment. The diagnoses for each IPF MS–DRG table. The proposed FY 2020 Code First As noted previously, it is our policy will be updated as of October 1, 2019, table is shown in Addendum B–1 on our to maintain the same diagnostic coding using the final IPPS FY 2020 ICD–10– website at https://www.cms.gov/ set for IPFs that is used under the IPPS CM/PCS code sets. The FY 2020 IPPS Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- for providing the same psychiatric care. proposed rule includes tables of the Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ The 17 comorbidity categories formerly proposed changes to the ICD–10–CM/ tools.html. defined using ICD–9–CM codes were PCS code sets which underlie the FY converted to ICD–10–CM/PCS in our FY 2020 IPF MS–DRGs. Both the FY 2020 b. Proposed Payment for Comorbid 2015 IPF PPS final rule (79 FR 45947 IPPS proposed rule and the tables of Conditions through 45955). The goal for converting proposed changes to the ICD–10–CM/ The intent of the comorbidity the comorbidity categories is referred to PCS code sets which underlie the FY adjustments is to recognize the as replication, meaning that the 2020 MS–DRGs are available on the increased costs associated with payment adjustment for a given patient IPPS website at https://www.cms.gov/ comorbid conditions by providing encounter is the same after ICD–10–CM Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- additional payments for certain existing implementation as it would be if the Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/ medical or psychiatric conditions that same record had been coded in ICD–9– index.html. are expensive to treat. In our RY 2012 CM and submitted prior to ICD–10–CM/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16972 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

PCS implementation on October 1, patient age adjustments currently in IPF’s geographic wage index value is 2015. All conversion efforts were made effect in FY 2019, as shown in determined based on the actual location with the intent of achieving this goal. Addendum A of this rule (see https:// of the IPF in an urban or rural area, as For FY 2020, we are proposing to use www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee- defined in § 412.64(b)(1)(ii)(A) and (C). the same comorbidity adjustment factors for-Service-Payment/InpatientPsych b. Proposed Change to the IPF Wage in effect in FY 2019, which are found in FacilPPS/tools.html). Index Methodology Addendum A, available on our website d. Proposed Variable per Diem at https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/ Due to the variation in costs and Adjustments Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/ because of the differences in geographic InpatientPsychFacilPPS/tools.html. We explained in the November 2004 wage levels, in the November 15, 2004 We have updated the ICD–10–CM/ IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66946) that the IPF PPS final rule, we required that PCS codes which are associated with regression analysis indicated that per payment rates under the IPF PPS be the existing IPF PPS comorbidity diem cost declines as the length of stay adjusted by a geographic wage index. categories, based upon the proposed FY (LOS) increases. The variable per diem We proposed and finalized a policy to 2020 update to the ICD–10–CM/PCS adjustments to the federal per diem base use the unadjusted, pre-floor, pre- code set. The proposed FY 2020 ICD– rate account for ancillary and reclassified IPPS hospital wage index to 10–CM/PCS updates include 4 ICD–10– administrative costs that occur account for geographic differences in CM codes added to the Poisoning disproportionately in the first days after IPF labor costs. We implemented use of comorbidity category and 2 ICD–10–PCS admission to an IPF. We used a the pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS codes added to the Oncology Procedures regression analysis to estimate the hospital wage data to compute the IPF comorbidity category. These updates are average differences in per diem cost wage index since there was not an IPF- detailed in Addenda B–2 and B–3 of among stays of different lengths. As a specific wage index available. We this proposed rule, which are available result of this analysis, we established believe that IPFs generally compete in on our website at https://www.cms.gov/ variable per diem adjustments that the same labor market as IPPS hospitals Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- begin on day 1 and decline gradually so the pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ until day 21 of a patient’s stay. For day hospital wage data should be reflective tools.html. 22 and thereafter, the variable per diem of labor costs of IPFs. We believe this In accordance with the policy adjustment remains the same each day pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital established in the FY 2015 IPF PPS final for the remainder of the stay. However, wage index to be the best available data rule (79 FR 45949 through 45952), we the adjustment applied to day 1 to use as proxy for an IPF specific wage reviewed all new FY 2020 ICD–10–CM depends upon whether the IPF has a index. As discussed in the rate year (RY) codes to remove site unspecified codes qualifying ED. If an IPF has a qualifying 2007 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27061 from the FY 2020 ICD–10–CM/PCS ED, it receives a 1.31 adjustment factor through 27067), under the IPF PPS, the codes in instances where more specific for day 1 of each stay. If an IPF does not wage index is calculated using the IPPS codes are available. As we stated in the have a qualifying ED, it receives a 1.19 wage index for the labor market area in FY 2015 IPF PPS final rule, we believe adjustment factor for day 1 of the stay. which the IPF is located, without taking that specific diagnosis codes that The ED adjustment is explained in more into account geographic narrowly identify anatomical sites detail in section III.D.4 of this rule. reclassifications, floors, and other where disease, injury, or condition For FY 2020, we are proposing to adjustments made to the wage index exists should be used when coding continue to use the variable per diem under the IPPS. For a complete patients’ diagnoses whenever these adjustment factors currently in effect, as description of these IPPS wage index codes are available. We finalized that shown in Addendum A of this rule adjustments, we refer readers to the FY we would remove site unspecified codes (available at https://www.cms.gov/ 2019 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (83 FR from the IPF PPS ICD–10–CM/PCS Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- 41362 through 41390). Our wage index codes in instances in which more Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ policy was put into regulation at 42 CFR specific codes are available, as the tools.html). A complete discussion of 412.424(a)(2), and requires us to use the clinician should be able to identify a the variable per diem adjustments best Medicare data available to estimate more specific diagnosis based on appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS costs per day, including an appropriate clinical assessment at the medical final rule (69 FR 66946). wage index to adjust for wage encounter. None of the proposed D. Proposed Updates to the IPF PPS differences. When the IPF PPS was implemented additions to the FY 2020 ICD–10–CM/ Facility-Level Adjustments PCS codes were site unspecified, in the November 15, 2004 IPF PPS final therefore we are not removing any of the The IPF PPS includes facility-level rule, with an effective date of January 1, new codes. adjustments for the wage index, IPFs 2005, the pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS located in rural areas, teaching IPFs, hospital wage index that was available c. Proposed Patient Age Adjustments cost of living adjustments for IPFs at the time was the FY 2005 pre-floor, As explained in the November 2004 located in Alaska and Hawaii, and IPFs pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66922), we with a qualifying ED. index. Historically, the IPF wage index analyzed the impact of age on per diem 1. Wage Index Adjustment for a given RY has used the pre-floor, cost by examining the age variable pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage (range of ages) for payment adjustments. a. Background index from the prior fiscal year as its In general, we found that the cost per As discussed in the RY 2007 IPF PPS basis. This has been due in part to the day increases with age. The older age final rule (71 FR 27061), RY 2009 IPF pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital groups are more costly than the under PPS (73 FR 25719) and the RY 2010 IPF wage index data that were available 45 age group, the differences in per PPS notices (74 FR 20373), in order to during the IPF rulemaking cycle, where diem cost increase for each successive provide an adjustment for geographic an annual IPF notice or IPF final rule age group, and the differences are wage levels, the labor-related portion of was usually published in early May. statistically significant. For FY 2020, we an IPF’s payment is adjusted using an This publication timeframe was are proposing to continue to use the appropriate wage index. Currently, an relatively early compared to other

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16973

Medicare payment rules because the IPF data timeframe used by the IPPS for FY If finalized, this proposed change to PPS follows an RY, which was defined 2020 and subsequent years. Specifically, the IPF wage index methodology would in the implementation of the IPF PPS as we are proposing to use the pre-floor, be implemented in a budget-neutral the 12-month period from July 1 to June pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage fashion, so that total IPF payments 30 (69 FR 66927). Therefore the best index from the fiscal year concurrent would not be affected. However, there available data at the time the IPF PPS with the IPF fiscal year as the basis for would be distributional effects, as was implemented was the pre-floor, pre- the IPF wage index. For example, under shown in Table 15. Table 15 compares reclassified IPPS hospital wage index this proposal, the FY 2020 IPF wage the estimated payments calculated using from the prior fiscal year (for example, index would be based on the FY 2020 the FY 2020 IPF wage index based on the RY 2006 IPF wage index was based pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital the IPPS hospital wage index data from on the FY 2005 pre-floor, pre- wage index rather than on the FY 2019 the prior fiscal year (the current reclassified IPPS hospital wage index). pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital methodology) with the estimated In the RY 2012 IPF PPS final rule, we wage index. changed the reporting year timeframe payments calculated using the proposed for IPFs from a RY to the FY, which Using the concurrent pre-floor, pre- FY 2020 IPF wage index based on begins October 1 and ends September 30 reclassified IPPS hospital wage index concurrent IPPS hospital wage index (76 FR 26434 through 26435). In that FY would result in the most up-to-date data (the proposed change in 2012 IPF PPS final rule, we continued wage data being the basis for the IPF methodology). Due to budget neutrality, our established policy of using the pre- wage index. It would also result in more the effect on total estimated FY 2020 IPF floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital consistency and parity in the wage payments is zero. Table 15 shows that wage index from the prior year (that is, index methodology used by other urban IPFs are estimated to experience from FY 2011) as the basis for the FY Medicare payment systems. The a smaller increase in payments if we 2012 IPF wage index. This policy of Medicare SNF PPS already uses the were to implement the proposed basing a wage index on the prior year’s concurrent IPPS hospital wage index methodology (0.01 percent increase) pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital data as the basis for the SNF PPS wage compared to if we were to maintain the wage index has been followed by other index. Thus, if our proposal is finalized, current methodology (0.08 percent the wage adjusted Medicare payments of Medicare payment systems, such as increase). Rural IPFs are estimated to various provider types would be based hospice and inpatient rehabilitation have a smaller decrease in estimated upon wage index data from the same facilities. By continuing with our payments if the proposed methodology established policy, we remained timeframe. CMS is considering similar were implemented (0.05 percent consistent with other Medicare payment policies to use the concurrent pre-floor, decrease) compared to if we were to systems. pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage We are proposing to change the IPF index data in other Medicare payment maintain the current methodology (0.52 wage index methodology to align the systems, such as hospice and inpatient percent decrease). IPF PPS wage index with the same wage rehabilitation facilities. BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16974 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Table 15. Distributional Effects of the Proposed Changes to the IPF Wage Index Methodology [P ercen tCh ange m co umns 3 & 4]

Estimated Estimated Impact of Impact of Wage Index Wage Index Update Update Under Under Number of Current Proposed Facility by Type Facilities Methodology Methodology (1) (2) (3) (4) All Facilities 1,593 0.00 0.00

Total Urban 1,269 0.08 0.01 Urban unit 792 0.04 -0.07 Urban hospital 477 0.13 0.12

Total Rural 324 -0.52 -0.05 Rural unit 258 -0.60 -0.07 Rural hospital 66 -0.33 -0.02

By Type of Ownership: Freestanding IPFs Urban Psychiatric Hospitals Government 121 -0.21 -0.11 Non-Profit 100 0.17 -0.11 For-Profit 256 0.17 0.23 Rural Psychiatric Hospitals Government 32 -0.62 -0.28 Non-Profit 15 -0.26 -0.38 For-Profit 19 -0.21 0.22

IPF Units Urban Government 117 0.28 0.13 Non-Profit 510 -0.01 -0.05

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.008 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16975

For-Profit 165 0.02 -0.26 Rural Government 69 -0.54 0.04 Non-Profit 136 -0.45 0.04 For-Profit 53 -0.98 -0.46

By Teachine Status: Non-teaching 1,403 -0.04 -0.03 Less than 10% interns and residents to beds 108 0.09 0.10 10% to 30% interns and residents to beds 60 0.35 0.26 More than 30% interns and residents to beds 22 0.15 0.76

By Region: New England 105 -0.27 -0.73 Mid-Atlantic 230 0.18 0.01 South Atlantic 243 -0.11 -0.15 East North Central 269 -0.30 -0.21 East South Central 161 -0.62 -0.59 West North Central 117 -0.12 0.50 West South Central 236 -0.05 0.11 Mountain 105 -0.89 -0.57 Pacific 127 1.48 1.43

By Bed Size: Psychiatric Hospitals Beds: 0-24 86 0.01 0.01 Beds: 25-49 90 -0.10 -0.28 Beds: 50-75 87 -0.14 0.13 Beds: 76 + 280 0.21 0.21 Psychiatric Units Beds: 0-24 605 -0.25 -0.12 Beds: 25-49 271 0.02 -0.15 Beds: 50-75 108 0.21 0.15 Beds: 76 + 66 0.02 -0.02

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C for-Service-Payment/InpatientPsych For FY 2020, we propose to use the To provide additional information to FacilPPS/WageIndex.html. FY 2020 pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS IPFs about the effect of this proposed We invite comments on this proposal hospital wage index as the basis for the change in the IPF wage index to align the IPF wage index data IPF wage index; this pre-floor, pre- methodology on estimated payments, timeframes with that of the IPPS, by reclassified IPPS hospital wage index is we have also posted a provider-level using the concurrent pre-floor, pre- the most appropriate wage index as it table of effects (Addendum C) on the reclassified IPPS hospital wage index as best reflects the variation in local labor CMS website, available at https:// the basis for the IPF wage index for FY costs of IPFs in the various geographic www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee- 2020 and subsequent years. areas using the most recent IPPS

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.009 16976 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

hospital wage data (data from hospital statistical areas. A copy of this bulletin available as soon as is reasonably cost reports for the cost reporting period may be obtained at https:// possible to maintain a more accurate beginning during FY 2016) without any www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bulletins/. and up-to-date payment system that geographic reclassifications, floors, or Because the FY 2014 pre-floor, pre- reflects the reality of population shifts other adjustments. We would apply the reclassified IPPS hospital wage index and labor market conditions. As FY 2020 IPF wage index to payments did not reflect the statistical area discussed in the FY 2017 IPPS/LTCH beginning October 1, 2019. revisions set forth in OMB Bulletin 13– PPS final rule (81 FR 56913), the We would apply the IPF wage index 01, the FY 2015 IPF PPS wage index, updated labor market area definitions adjustment to the labor-related portion which was based on the FY 2014 pre- from OMB Bulletin 15–01 were of the national base rate or ECT payment floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital implemented under the IPPS beginning per treatment. The labor-related share of wage index, did not reflect OMB’s new on October 1, 2016 (FY 2017). the national rate and ECT payment per area delineations based on the 2010 Therefore, we implemented these treatment would change from 74.8 Census. According to OMB, ‘‘[t]his revisions for the IPF PPS beginning percent in FY 2019 to 76.8 percent in bulletin provides the delineations of all October 1, 2017 (FY 2018), consistent FY 2020. This percentage reflects the Metropolitan Statistical Areas, with our historical practice of modeling labor-related share of the proposed Metropolitan Divisions, Micropolitan IPF PPS adoption of the labor market 2016-based IPF market basket for FY Statistical Areas, Combined Statistical area delineations after IPPS adoption of 2020 (see section III.A.6 of this rule). Areas, and New England City and Town these delineations (historically the IPF Areas in the United States and Puerto c. Office of Management and Budget wage index has been based upon the Rico based on the standards published Bulletins pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital on June 28, 2010, in the Federal wage index from the prior year). OMB publishes bulletins regarding Register (75 FR 37246 through 37252) On August 15, 2017, OMB announced CBSA changes, including changes to and Census Bureau data.’’ These OMB in OMB Bulletin No. 17–01 that one CBSA numbers and titles. In the RY Bulletin changes are reflected in the FY Micropolitan Statistical Area now 2007 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27061 2015 pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS qualifies as a Metropolitan Statistical through 27067), we adopted the changes hospital wage index, upon which the FY Area . The new urban CBSA is as discussed in the OMB Bulletin No. 03– 2016 IPF wage index was based. We follows: 04 (June 6, 2003), which announced adopted these new OMB CBSA • Twin Falls, Idaho (CBSA 46300). revised definitions for MSAs, and the delineations in the FY 2016 IPF wage This CBSA is comprised of the creation of Micropolitan Statistical index and subsequent IPF wage indexes. principal city of Twin Falls, Idaho in Areas and Combined Statistical Areas. Generally, OMB issues major Jerome County, Idaho and Twin Falls In adopting the OMB CBSA geographic revisions to statistical areas every 10 County, Idaho. Prior to this designations in RY 2007, we did not years, based on the results of the redesignation, Jerome County and Twin provide a separate transition for the decennial census. However, OMB Falls County, Idaho were classified as CBSA-based wage index since the IPF occasionally issues minor updates and rural. The OMB bulletin is available on PPS was already in a transition period revisions to statistical areas in the years the OMB website at https:// from TEFRA payments to PPS between the decennial censuses. On www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ payments. July 15, 2015, OMB issued OMB whitehouse.gov/files/omb/bulletins/ In the RY 2009 IPF PPS notice, we Bulletin No. 15–01, which provided 2017/b-17-01.pdf. incorporated the CBSA nomenclature minor updates to, and superseded, OMB With the change made by OMB changes published in the most recent Bulletin No. 13–01 that was issued on Bulletin No. 17–01, these two counties OMB bulletin that applied to the IPPS February 28, 2013. The attachment to are now designated as urban, and any hospital wage index used to determine OMB Bulletin No. 15–01 provides IPFs in those areas would change their the current IPF wage index and stated detailed information on the update to status from being rural to being urban. that we expected to continue to do the statistical areas since February 28, 2013. We are proposing to adopt these new same for all the OMB CBSA The updates provided in the attachment OMB designations in FY 2020 as they nomenclature changes in future IPF PPS to OMB Bulletin No. 15–01 are based on would be included in the FY 2020 pre- rules and notices, as necessary (73 FR the application of the 2010 Standards floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital 25721). The OMB bulletins may be for Delineating Metropolitan and wage index upon which the FY 2020 accessed online at https:// Micropolitan Statistical Areas to Census IPF wage index is proposed to be based. www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bulletins/. Bureau population estimates for July 1, That is, the FY 2020 pre-floor, pre- In accordance with our established 2012 and July 1, 2013. The complete list reclassified IPPS hospital wage index, methodology, we have historically of statistical areas incorporating these which is the basis of the proposed FY adopted any CBSA changes that are changes is provided in OMB Bulletin 2020 IPF wage index, would include published in the OMB bulletin that No. 15–01. A copy of this bulletin may this new OMB designation. corresponds with the IPPS hospital be obtained at https:// Therefore, the 17 percent IPF rural wage index used to determine the IPF www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bulletins/. adjustment would cease for IPF wage index. For the FY 2015 IPF wage OMB Bulletin No. 15–01 establishes providers in these two counties. index, we used the FY 2014 pre-floor, revised delineations for the Nation’s Currently, there is a single IPF in new pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage Metropolitan Statistical Areas, CBSA 46300, which would lose its 17 index to adjust the IPF PPS payments. Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and percent rural adjustment as a result of On February 28, 2013, OMB issued Combined Statistical Areas. The bulletin being re-designated as urban. However, OMB Bulletin No. 13–01, which also provides delineations of the FY 2020 pre-floor, pre-reclassified established revised delineations for Metropolitan Divisions as well as hospital IPPS wage index value for MSAs, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, delineations of New England City and CBSA 46300 is 0.8252, which is 3.5 and Combined Statistical Areas in the Town Areas. percent higher than the rural wage United States and Puerto Rico based on In accordance with our longstanding index value for Idaho (0.7971). As such, the 2000 Census, and provided guidance policy, the IPF PPS continues to use the the loss of the 17 percent IPF wage on the use of the delineations of these latest labor market area delineations index adjustment would be mitigated in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16977

part by the increase in the wage index updates do not increase expenditures. address the estimated higher indirect value when changing from the rural Therefore, for FY 2020, we are operating costs teaching hospitals may Idaho wage index value to the urban proposing to continue to apply a budget- face. CBSA 46300 wage index value. Given neutrality adjustment in accordance The results of the regression analysis that the loss of the rural adjustment with our existing budget-neutrality of FY 2002 IPF data established the would be mitigated in part by the policy. This policy requires us to update basis for the payment adjustments increase in wage index value, and that the wage index in such a way that total included in the November 2004 IPF PPS only a single IPF is affected by this estimated payments to IPFs for FY 2020 final rule. The results showed that the change, we do not believe it is necessary are the same with or without the indirect teaching cost variable is to transition this provider from its rural changes (that is, in a budget-neutral significant in explaining the higher to newly urban status. manner) by applying a budget neutrality costs of IPFs that have teaching Thus, we propose to adopt this new factor to the IPF PPS rates. We use the programs. We calculated the teaching OMB designation in the proposed IPF following steps to ensure that the rates adjustment based on the IPF’s ‘‘teaching wage index for FY 2020 and for reflect the update to the wage indexes variable,’’ which is (1 + (the number of subsequent fiscal years. The FY 2020 (based on the FY 2016 hospital cost FTE residents training in the IPF/the IPF wage index already includes the report data) and the labor-related share IPF’s ADC)). The teaching variable is OMB delineations that were adopted in in a budget-neutral manner: then raised to 0.5150 power to result in prior fiscal years. The proposed FY 2020 Step 1. Simulate estimated IPF PPS the teaching adjustment. This formula is IPF wage index (including the CBSA payments, using the FY 2019 IPF wage subject to the limitations on the number update from OMB Bulletin No. 17–01) is index values (available on the CMS of FTE residents, which are described located on the CMS website at https:// website) and labor-related share (as later in this section of this rule. www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee- published in the FY 2019 IPF PPS final We established the teaching for-Service-Payment/InpatientPsych rule (83 FR 38579)). adjustment in a manner that limited the FacilPPS/WageIndex.html. Step 2. Simulate estimated IPF PPS incentives for IPFs to add FTE residents payments using the proposed FY 2020 for the purpose of increasing their d. Solicitation of Public Comments on IPF wage index values (available on the teaching adjustment. We imposed a cap the IPF Wage Index CMS website) and proposed FY 2020 on the number of FTE residents that Historically, we have calculated the labor-related share (based on the latest may be counted for purposes of IPF PPS wage index values using available data as discussed previously). calculating the teaching adjustment. The unadjusted wage index values from Step 3. Divide the amount calculated cap limits the number of FTE residents another provider setting. Stakeholders in step 1 by the amount calculated in that teaching IPFs may count for the have frequently commented on certain step 2. The resulting quotient is the FY purpose of calculating the IPF PPS aspects of the IPF PPS wage index 2020 budget-neutral wage adjustment teaching adjustment, not the number of values and their impact on payments. factor of 1.0078. residents teaching institutions can hire We are soliciting comments on concerns Step 4. Apply the FY 2020 budget- or train. We calculated the number of stakeholders may have regarding the neutral wage adjustment factor from FTE residents that trained in the IPF wage index used to adjust IPF PPS step 3 to the FY 2019 IPF PPS federal during a ‘‘base year’’ and used that FTE payments and suggestions for possible per diem base rate after the application resident number as the cap. An IPF’s updates and improvements to the of the market basket update described in FTE resident cap is ultimately geographic adjustment of IPF PPS section III.A.4 of this rule, to determine determined based on the final payments. the FY 2020 IPF PPS federal per diem settlement of the IPF’s most recent cost base rate. report filed before November 15, 2004 e. Proposed Adjustment for Rural (publication date of the IPF PPS final 2. Proposed Teaching Adjustment Location rule). A complete discussion of the In the November 2004 IPF PPS final In the November 2004 IPF PPS final temporary adjustment to the FTE cap to rule, we provided a 17 percent payment rule, we implemented regulations at reflect residents added due to hospital adjustment for IPFs located in a rural § 412.424(d)(1)(iii) to establish a facility- closure and by residency program area. This adjustment was based on the level adjustment for IPFs that are, or are appears in the RY 2012 IPF PPS regression analysis, which indicated part of teaching hospitals. The teaching proposed rule (76 FR 5018 through that the per diem cost of rural facilities adjustment accounts for the higher 5020) and the RY 2012 IPF PPS final was 17 percent higher than that of urban indirect operating costs experienced by rule (76 FR 26453 through 26456). facilities after accounting for the hospitals that participate in graduate In the regression analysis, the influence of the other variables included medical education (GME) programs. The logarithm of the teaching variable had a in the regression. This 17 percent payment adjustments are made based on coefficient value of 0.5150. We adjustment has been part of the IPF PPS the ratio of the number of full-time converted this cost effect to a teaching each year since the inception of the IPF equivalent (FTE) interns and residents payment adjustment by treating the PPS. For FY 2020, we are proposing to training in the IPF and the IPF’s average regression coefficient as an exponent continue to apply a 17 percent payment daily census (ADC). and raising the teaching variable to a adjustment for IPFs located in a rural Medicare makes direct GME payments power equal to the coefficient value. We area as defined at § 412.64(b)(1)(ii)(C). A (for direct costs such as resident and note that the coefficient value of 0.5150 complete discussion of the adjustment teaching physician salaries, and other was based on the regression analysis for rural locations appears in the direct teaching costs) to all teaching holding all other components of the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 hospitals including those paid under a payment system constant. A complete FR 66954). PPS, and those paid under the TEFRA discussion of how the teaching rate-of-increase limits. These direct adjustment was calculated appears in f. Proposed Budget Neutrality GME payments are made separately the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule Adjustment from payments for hospital operating (69 FR 66954 through 66957) and the Changes to the wage index are made costs and are not part of the IPF PPS. RY 2009 IPF PPS notice (73 FR 25721). in a budget-neutral manner so that The direct GME payments do not As with other adjustment factors

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16978 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

derived through the regression analysis, The COLA factors through 2009 are We did not intend to propose the we do not plan to rerun the teaching published on the Office of Personnel reduced COLA rates because that would adjustment factors in the regression Management (OPM) website (https:// have understated the adjustment. Since analysis until we more fully analyze IPF www.opm.gov/oca/cola/rates.asp). the 2009 COLA rates did not reflect the PPS data as part of the IPF PPS We note that the COLA areas for phase-in of locality pay, we finalized refinement we discuss in section IV of Alaska are not defined by county as are the FY 2009 COLA rates for RY 2010 this rule. Therefore, in this FY 2020 the COLA areas for Hawaii. In 5 CFR through RY 2014. proposed rule, we are proposing to 591.207, the OPM established the In the FY 2013 IPPS/LTCH final rule continue to retain the coefficient value following COLA areas: (77 FR 53700 through 53701), we • City of Anchorage, and 80-kilometer of 0.5150 for the teaching adjustment to established a new methodology to (50-mile) radius by road, as measured the federal per diem base rate. update the COLA factors for Alaska and from the federal courthouse. 3. Proposed Cost of Living Adjustment • City of Fairbanks, and 80-kilometer Hawaii, and adopted this methodology for IPFs Located in Alaska and Hawaii (50-mile) radius by road, as measured for the IPF PPS in the FY 2015 IPF final The IPF PPS includes a payment from the federal courthouse. rule (79 FR 45958 through 45960). We adjustment for IPFs located in Alaska • City of Juneau, and 80-kilometer adopted this new COLA methodology and Hawaii based upon the area in (50-mile) radius by road, as measured for the IPF PPS because IPFs are which the IPF is located. As we from the federal courthouse. hospitals with a similar mix of explained in the November 2004 IPF • Rest of the State of Alaska. commodities and services. We think it PPS final rule, the FY 2002 data As stated in the November 2004 IPF is appropriate to have a consistent demonstrated that IPFs in Alaska and PPS final rule, we update the COLA policy approach with that of other Hawaii had per diem costs that were factors according to updates established hospitals in Alaska and Hawaii. disproportionately higher than other by the OPM. However, sections 1911 Therefore, the IPF COLAs for FY 2015 IPFs. Other Medicare prospective through 1919 of the Nonforeign Area through FY 2017 were the same as those payment systems (for example: The Retirement Equity Assurance Act, as applied under the IPPS in those years. IPPS and LTCH PPS) adopted a COLA contained in subtitle B of title XIX of the As finalized in the FY 2013 IPPS/LTCH to account for the cost differential of National Defense Authorization Act PPS final rule (77 FR 53700 and 53701), care furnished in Alaska and Hawaii. (NDAA) for FY 2010 (Pub. L. 111–84, the COLA updates are determined every We analyzed the effect of applying a October 28, 2009), transitions the Alaska 4 years, when the IPPS market basket COLA to payments for IPFs located in and Hawaii COLAs to locality pay. labor-related share is updated during Alaska and Hawaii. The results of our Under section 1914 of NDAA, locality rebasing. Because the labor-related share analysis demonstrated that a COLA for pay was phased in over a 3-year period of the IPPS market basket was updated IPFs located in Alaska and Hawaii beginning in January 2010, with COLA for FY 2018, the COLA factors were would improve payment equity for rates frozen as of the date of enactment, updated in FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH these facilities. As a result of this October 28, 2009, and then rulemaking (82 FR 38529). As such, we analysis, we provided a COLA in the proportionately reduced to reflect the also updated the IPF PPS COLA factors November 2004 IPF PPS final rule. phase-in of locality pay. for FY 2018 (82 FR 36780 through A COLA for IPFs located in Alaska When we published the proposed 36782) to reflect the updated COLA and Hawaii is made by multiplying the COLA factors in the RY 2012 IPF PPS factors finalized in the FY 2018 IPPS/ non-labor-related portion of the federal proposed rule (76 FR 4998), we LTCH rulemaking. We propose to per diem base rate by the applicable inadvertently selected the FY 2010 continue to apply the same COLA COLA factor based on the COLA area in COLA rates, which had been reduced to factors in FY 2020 that were used in FY which the IPF is located. account for the phase-in of locality pay. 2018 and FY 2019.

TABLE 16—COMPARISON OF IPF PPS COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT FACTORS: IPFS LOCATED IN ALASKA AND HAWAII

FY 2015 FY 2018 Area through through FY 2017 FY 2020

Alaska: City of Anchorage and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ...... 1.23 1.25 City of Fairbanks and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ...... 1.23 1.25 City of Juneau and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ...... 1.23 1.25 Rest of Alaska ...... 1.25 1.25 Hawaii: City and County of Honolulu ...... 1.25 1.25 County of Hawaii ...... 1.19 1.21 County of Kauai ...... 1.25 1.25 County of Maui and County of Kalawao ...... 1.25 1.25

The proposed IPF PPS COLA factors 4. Proposed Adjustment for IPFs With a service ED. The adjustment is intended for FY 2020 are also shown in Qualifying Emergency Department (ED) to account for ED costs incurred by a Addendum A to this proposed rule, psychiatric hospital with a qualifying available at https://www.cms.gov/ The IPF PPS includes a facility-level ED or an excluded psychiatric unit of an Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service- adjustment for IPFs with qualifying EDs. IPPS hospital or a CAH, for Payment/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/ We provide an adjustment to the federal preadmission services otherwise tools.html. per diem base rate to account for the payable under the Medicare Hospital costs associated with maintaining a full- Outpatient Prospective Payment System

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16979

(OPPS), furnished to a beneficiary on case payment for IPF stays that are update the fixed dollar loss threshold the date of the beneficiary’s admission extraordinarily costly. Providing amount to maintain an outlier to the hospital and during the day additional payments to IPFs for percentage that equals 2 percent of total immediately preceding the date of extremely costly cases strongly estimated IPF PPS payments. We would admission to the IPF (see § 413.40(c)(2)), improves the accuracy of the IPF PPS in update the IPF outlier threshold amount and the overhead cost of maintaining determining resource costs at the patient for FY 2020 using FY 2018 claims data the ED. This payment is a facility-level and facility level. These additional and the same methodology that we used adjustment that applies to all IPF payments reduce the financial losses to set the initial outlier threshold admissions (with one exception which that would otherwise be incurred in amount in the RY 2007 IPF PPS final we described), regardless of whether a treating patients who require more rule (71 FR 27072 and 27073), which is particular patient receives preadmission costly care, and therefore, reduce the also the same methodology that we used services in the hospital’s ED. incentives for IPFs to under-serve these to update the outlier threshold amounts The ED adjustment is incorporated patients. We make outlier payments for for years 2008 through 2019. Based on into the variable per diem adjustment discharges in which an IPF’s estimated an analysis of these updated data, we for the first day of each stay for IPFs total cost for a case exceeds a fixed estimate that IPF outlier payments as a with a qualifying ED. Those IPFs with dollar loss threshold amount percentage of total estimated payments a qualifying ED receive an adjustment (multiplied by the IPF’s facility-level are approximately 2.15 percent in FY factor of 1.31 as the variable per diem adjustments) plus the federal per diem 2019. Therefore, we propose to update adjustment for day 1 of each patient payment amount for the case. the outlier threshold amount to $14,590 stay. If an IPF does not have a qualifying In instances when the case qualifies to maintain estimated outlier payments ED, it receives an adjustment factor of for an outlier payment, we pay 80 at 2 percent of total estimated aggregate 1.19 as the variable per diem adjustment percent of the difference between the IPF payments for FY 2020. This for day 1 of each patient stay. estimated cost for the case and the proposed rule update is an increase The ED adjustment is made on every adjusted threshold amount for days 1 from the FY 2019 threshold of $12,865. qualifying claim except as described in through 9 of the stay (consistent with this section of the proposed rule. As the median LOS for IPFs in FY 2002), 3. Proposed Update to IPF Cost-to- specified in § 412.424(d)(1)(v)(B), the ED and 60 percent of the difference for day Charge Ratio Ceilings adjustment is not made when a patient 10 and thereafter. We established the 80 Under the IPF PPS, an outlier is discharged from an IPPS hospital or percent and 60 percent loss sharing payment is made if an IPF’s cost for a CAH and admitted to the same IPPS ratios because we were concerned that stay exceeds a fixed dollar loss hospital’s or CAH’s excluded a single ratio established at 80 percent threshold amount plus the IPF PPS psychiatric unit. We clarified in the (like other Medicare PPSs) might amount. In order to establish an IPF’s November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 provide an incentive under the IPF per cost for a particular case, we multiply FR 66960) that an ED adjustment is not diem payment system to increase LOS the IPF’s reported charges on the made in this case because the costs in order to receive additional payments. discharge bill by its overall cost-to- After establishing the loss sharing associated with ED services are reflected charge ratio (CCR). This approach to ratios, we determined the current fixed in the DRG payment to the IPPS hospital determining an IPF’s cost is consistent dollar loss threshold amount through or through the reasonable cost payment with the approach used under the IPPS payment simulations designed to made to the CAH. and other PPSs. In the FY 2004 IPPS compute a dollar loss beyond which Therefore, when patients are final rule (68 FR 34494), we payments are estimated to meet the 2 discharged from an IPPS hospital or implemented changes to the IPPS policy percent outlier spending target. Each CAH and admitted to the same used to determine CCRs for IPPS year when we update the IPF PPS, we hospital’s or CAH’s excluded hospitals, because we became aware simulate payments using the latest psychiatric unit, the IPF receives the that payment vulnerabilities resulted in available data to compute the fixed 1.19 adjustment factor as the variable inappropriate outlier payments. Under dollar loss threshold so that outlier per diem adjustment for the first day of the IPPS, we established a statistical payments represent 2 percent of total the patient’s stay in the IPF. For FY measure of accuracy for CCRs to ensure estimated IPF PPS payments. 2020, we propose to continue to retain that aberrant CCR data did not result in the 1.31 adjustment factor for IPFs with 2. Proposed Update to the Outlier Fixed inappropriate outlier payments. qualifying EDs. A complete discussion Dollar Loss Threshold Amount As we indicated in the November of the steps involved in the calculation In accordance with the update 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66961), of the ED adjustment factor in our methodology described in § 412.428(d), we believe that the IPF outlier policy is November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 we are proposing to update the fixed susceptible to the same payment FR 66959 through 66960) and the RY dollar loss threshold amount used under vulnerabilities as the IPPS; therefore, we 2007 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27070 the IPF PPS outlier policy. Based on the adopted a method to ensure the through 27072). regression analysis and payment statistical accuracy of CCRs under the E. Other Proposed Payment simulations used to develop the IPF IPF PPS. Specifically, we adopted the Adjustments and Policies PPS, we established a 2 percent outlier following procedure in the November policy, which strikes an appropriate 2004 IPF PPS final rule: 1. Outlier Payment Overview balance between protecting IPFs from • Calculated two national ceilings, The IPF PPS includes an outlier extraordinarily costly cases while one for IPFs located in rural areas and adjustment to promote access to IPF ensuring the adequacy of the federal per one for IPFs located in urban areas. care for those patients who require diem base rate for all other cases that are • Computed the ceilings by first expensive care and to limit the financial not outlier cases. calculating the national average and the risk of IPFs treating unusually costly Based on an analysis of the latest standard deviation of the CCR for both patients. In the November 2004 IPF PPS available data (the December 2018 urban and rural IPFs using the most final rule, we implemented regulations update of FY 2018 IPF claims) and rate recent CCRs entered in the CY 2019 at § 412.424(d)(3)(i) to provide a per- increases, we believe it is necessary to Provider Specific File.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16980 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

For FY 2020, we propose to continue regression analysis until we have IPF (see 42 CFR 412.404(d)), as specified in to follow this methodology. PPS data that include as much 42 CFR 409.10. To determine the rural and urban information as possible regarding the We will continue to analyze data from ceilings, we multiplied each of the patient-level characteristics of the claims and cost reports that do not standard deviations by 3 and added the population that each IPF serves. We include ancillary charges or costs, and result to the appropriate national CCR have begun and will continue the will be sharing our findings with CMS average (either rural or urban). The necessary analysis to better understand Office of the Center for Program upper threshold CCR for IPFs in FY IPF industry practices so that we may Integrity and CMS Office of Financial 2020 is 2.0588 for rural IPFs, and 1.7321 refine the IPF PPS in the future, as Management for further investigation, as for urban IPFs, based on CBSA-based appropriate. Our preliminary analysis the results warrant. Our refinement geographic designations. If an IPF’s CCR has also revealed variation in cost and analysis is dependent on recent precise is above the applicable ceiling, the ratio claim data, particularly related to labor data for costs, including ancillary costs. is considered statistically inaccurate, costs, drugs costs, and laboratory We will continue to collect these data and we assign the appropriate national services. Some providers have very low and analyze them for both timeliness (either rural or urban) median CCR to labor costs, or very low or missing drug and accuracy with the expectation that the IPF. or laboratory costs or charges, relative to these data will be used in a future We apply the national CCRs to the other providers. As we noted in the FY refinement. It is currently our intent to following situations: 2016 IPF PPS final rule (80 FR 46693 explore refinements to the adjustments • New IPFs that have not yet through 46694), our preliminary in future rulemaking. Since we are not submitted their first Medicare cost analysis of 2012 to 2013 IPF data found proposing refinements in this proposed report. We continue to use these that over 20 percent of IPF stays rule, for FY 2020 we will continue to national CCRs until the facility’s actual reported no ancillary costs, such as use the existing adjustment factors. CCR can be computed using the first laboratory and drug costs, in their cost tentatively or final settled cost report. V. Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities • reports, or laboratory or drug charges on Quality Reporting (IPFQR) Program IPFs whose overall CCR is in excess their claims. Because we expect that of three standard deviations above the most patients requiring hospitalization A. Background and Statutory Authority corresponding national geometric mean for active psychiatric treatment will (that is, above the ceiling). We refer readers to the FY 2019 IPF • need drugs and laboratory services, we PPS final rule (83 FR 38589) for a Other IPFs for which the Medicare again remind providers that the IPF PPS Administrative Contractor (MAC) discussion of the background and federal per diem base rate includes the 2 obtains inaccurate or incomplete data statutory authority of the IPFQR cost of all ancillary services, including Program. with which to calculate a CCR. drugs and laboratory services. We propose to continue to update the B. Covered Entities FY 2020 national median and ceiling On November 17, 2017, we issued CCRs for urban and rural IPFs based on Transmittal 12, which made changes to In the FY 2013 IPPS/LTCPPS final the CCRs entered in the latest available the hospital cost report form CMS– rule (77 FR 53645), we established that IPF PPS Provider Specific File. 2552–10 (OMB No. 0938–0050), and the IPFQR Program’s quality reporting Specifically, for FY 2020, to be used in included the requirement that cost requirements cover those psychiatric each of the three situations listed reports from psychiatric hospitals hospitals and psychiatric units paid previously, using the most recent CCRs include certain ancillary costs, or the under Medicare’s IPF PPS entered in the CY 2019 Provider cost report will be rejected. On January (§ 412.404(b)). Generally, psychiatric Specific File, we provide an estimated 30, 2018, we issued Transmittal 13, hospitals and psychiatric units within national median CCR of 0.5810 for rural which changed the implementation date acute care and critical access hospitals IPFs and a national median CCR of for Transmittal 12 to be for cost that treat Medicare patients are paid 0.4330 for urban IPFs. These reporting periods ending on or after under the IPF PPS. Consistent with calculations are based on the IPF’s September 30, 2017. For details, we previous regulations, we continue to use location (either urban or rural) using the refer readers to see these Transmittals, the term IPF to refer to both inpatient CBSA-based geographic designations. A which are available on the CMS website psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations- complete discussion regarding the 2 national median CCRs appears in the and-Guidance/Guidance/Transmittals/ We note that the statute uses the term ‘‘rate index.html. CMS suspended the year’’ (RY). However, beginning with the annual November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 update of the inpatient psychiatric facility FR 66961 through 66964). requirement that cost reports from prospective payment system (IPF PPS) that took psychiatric hospitals include certain effect on July 1, 2011 (RY 2012), we aligned the IPF IV. Update on IPF PPS Refinements ancillary costs effective April 27, 2018, PPS update with the annual update of the ICD in order to consider excluding all- codes, effective on October 1 of each year. This For RY 2012, we identified several change allowed for annual payment updates and areas of concern for future refinement, inclusive rate providers from this the ICD coding update to occur on the same and we invited comments on these requirement. CMS issued Transmittal 15 schedule and appear in the same Federal Register issues in the RY 2012 IPF PPS proposed on October 19, 2018, reinstating the document, promoting administrative efficiency. To requirement that cost reports from reflect the change to the annual payment rate and final rules. For further discussion of update cycle, we revised the regulations at 42 CFR these issues and to review the public psychiatric hospitals, except all- 412.402 to specify that, beginning October 1, 2012, comments, we refer readers to the RY inclusive rate providers, include certain the RY update period would be the 12-month 2012 IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR ancillary costs. period from October 1 through September 30, We only pay the IPF for services which we refer to as a ‘‘fiscal year’’ (FY) (76 FR 4998) and final rule (76 FR 26432). 26435). Therefore, with respect to the IPFQR We have delayed making refinements furnished to a Medicare beneficiary who Program, the terms ‘‘rate year,’’ as used in the to the IPF PPS until we have completed is an inpatient of that IPF (except for statute, and ‘‘fiscal year’’ as used in the regulation, a thorough analysis of IPF PPS data on certain professional services), and both refer to the period from October 1 through payments are considered to be payments September 30. For more information regarding this which to base those refinements. terminology change, we refer readers to section III. Specifically, we will delay updating the in full for all inpatient hospital services of the RY 2012 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 26434 adjustment factors derived from the provided directly or under arrangement through 26435).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16981

units. This usage follows the D. IPFQR Program Measures PPS final rule (83 FR 38591 through terminology in our IPF PPS regulations 38593) for more information. We will 1. Measure Selection Process at § 412.402. For more information on continue to retain measures from each covered entities, we refer readers to the Before being proposed for inclusion in previous year’s IPFQR Program measure FY 2013 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (77 the IPFQR Program, measures are placed set for subsequent years’ measure sets, FR 53645). on a list of measures under except when we specifically propose to consideration (MUC), which is remove or replace a measure. We will C. Previously Finalized Measures and published annually by December 1 on continue to use the notice-and-comment Administrative Procedures behalf of CMS by the NQF. Following rulemaking process to propose measures The current IPFQR Program includes publication on the MUC list, the for removal or replacement, as we 13 measures. For more information on Measure Applications Partnership described upon adopting these factors in these measures, we refer readers to the (MAP), a multi-stakeholder group the 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (82 following final rules: convened by the NQF, reviews the FR 38464 through 38465). measures under consideration for the • The FY 2013 IPPS/LTCH PPS final IPFQR Program, among other Federal b. Application of Considerations for rule (77 FR 53646 through 53652); programs, and provides input on those Removal and Retention to Current • The FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH PPS final measures to the Secretary. We Measure Set rule (78 FR 50889 through 50897); considered the input and • recommendations provided by the MAP In the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final The FY 2015 IPF PPS final rule (79 rule, we noted that several commenters FR 45963 through 45975); in selecting all measures for the IPFQR Program. Further details concerning the requested that we evaluate the current • The FY 2016 IPF PPS final rule (80 input and recommendations from the measures in the IPFQR Program using FR 46695 through 46714); MAP for the measure proposed in this the removal and retention factors that • The FY 2017 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (Medication Continuation we finalized in that rule (82 FR 38464). rule (81 FR 57238 through 57247); and Following Inpatient Psychiatric Following this evaluation, we proposed • The FY 2019 IPF PPS final rule (83 Discharge, NQF #3205) are provided in to remove eight measures from the FR 38590 through 38606). Section V.D.3. IPFQR Program in the FY 2019 IPF PPS proposed rule (83 FR 21118 through For more information on previously 2. Removal or Retention of IPFQR 21123) for the FY 2020 program year adopted procedural requirements, we Program Measures and subsequent years. In the FY 2019 refer readers to the following rules: a. Background IPF PPS final rule (83 FR 38593 through • The FY 2013 IPPS/LTCH PPS final 38604) we finalized removal of five of In the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53653 through 53660); these measures. In our evaluation of the rule (82 FR 38463 through 38465), we • The FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH PPS final finalized our proposals to adopt IPFQR Program measure set subsequent rule (78 FR 50897 through 50903; considerations for removing or retaining to publication of the FY 2019 IPF PPS • The FY 2015 IPF PPS final rule (79 measures within the IPFQR Program final rule, we have not identified FR 45975 through 45978); and criteria for determining when a additional measures to which our • measure is ‘‘topped out.’’ In the FY 2019 measure removal factors apply. The FY 2016 IPF PPS final rule (80 Therefore, we are not proposing to FR 46715 through 46719); IPF PPS final rule (83 FR 38591 through 38593), we added one additional remove any additional measures at this • The FY 2017 IPPS/LTCH PPS final measure removal factor. We are not time. rule (81 FR 57248 through 57249); proposing any changes to these removal The previously finalized number of • The FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final factors, topped-out criteria, or retention measures for the FY 2021 payment rule (82 FR 38471 through 38474); and factors and refer readers to the FY 2018 determination and subsequent years • The FY 2019 IPF PPS final rule (83 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (82 FR 38463 totals 13. FR 38606 through 38608). through 38465) and the FY 2019 IPF BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16982 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C associated with non-adherence to schizophrenia who do not adhere to 3. Proposed New Quality Measure for medication regimens. For example, their medication regimen are more the FY 2021 Payment Determination patients with MDD who do not remain likely to be hospitalized, use emergency and Subsequent Years—Medication on prescribed medications are more psychiatric services, be arrested, be Continuation Following Inpatient likely to have negative health outcomes victims of crimes, and consume alcohol Psychiatric Discharge (NQF #3205) such as relapse and readmission, or drugs compared to those who adhere decreased quality of life, and increased to their medication regimen.5 Patients a. Background healthcare costs.34 Patients with Medication continuation is important trials in depressive disorders. The Australian and 3 Geddes JR, Carney SM, Davies C, et al. Relapse for patients discharged from the New Zealand journal of psychiatry. 2010;44(8):697– inpatient psychiatric setting with major prevention with antidepressant drug treatment in depressive disorders: a systematic review. Lancet. 705. depressive disorder (MDD), 2003;361(9358):653–661. 5 Gilmer TP, Dolder CR, Lacro JP, et al. Adherence schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder 4 Glue P, Donovan MR, Kolluri S, Emir B. to treatment with antipsychotic medication and because of significant negative outcomes Metaanalysis of relapse prevention antidepressant health care costs among Medicaid beneficiaries

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.010 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16983

with bipolar disorder who do not adhere relationships, shared decision-making, including reliability and validity testing. to their medications have increased and text-message reminders, with The measure was subsequently suicide risk.6 For these reasons, multidimensional approaches resulting endorsed by NQF. We continue to guidelines from the American in the best outcomes. believe that this measure evaluates a Psychiatric Association (APA) and the We proposed to adopt the Medication process with a demonstrated quality Department of Veterans Affairs/ Continuation Following Inpatient gap, because in testing this measure, we Department of Defense (VA/DoD), Psychiatric Discharge measure (NQF found that the range of performance which are based on extensive literature, #3205) for the FY 2020 payment between the 10th percentile and the recommend pharmacotherapy as the determination and subsequent years in 80th percentile facility performance was primary form of treatment for patients the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed between 67 percent and 88 percent. We with these conditions.7891011 rule (82 FR 20122 through 20126) to found that if all facilities had at least the Furthermore, we believe that there are address this important clinical topic. In median rate then 16,000 additional factors external to the IPF that influence the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule Medicare beneficiaries would fill filling prescriptions post-discharge in (82 FR 38465 through 38470), we did prescriptions for an evidence-based the psychiatric population. While it may not finalize adoption of the Medication medication to manage their condition not be possible to achieve complete Continuation Following Inpatient following discharge.17 Furthermore, we post-discharge compliance with Psychiatric Discharge measure (NQF believe this measure has the potential to pharmacotherapy, there is evidence that #3205), because we recognized that this benefit patients by encouraging facilities improvements to the quality of care measure may place undue burden on to adopt interventions to improve post provided by IPFs, including discharge facilities that were updating processes discharge medication continuation rates processes, can help to increase to account for previously adopted with no additional reporting burden to medication continuation rates.12 13 14 15 16 measures despite being calculated from IPFs. These interventions include patient claims data, which should not require In response to our proposal in the FY education, enhanced therapeutic additional information collection 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed rule, burden. We did not want to place undue many comments focused on the with schizophrenia. The American journal of burden on facilities, especially small, potential undue burden of the measure psychiatry. 2004;161(4):692–699. rural facilities, and we wished to given the fact that many facilities were 6 Gonzalez-Pinto A, Mosquera F, Alonso M, et al. accommodate the need for facilities to Suicidal risk in bipolar I disorder patients and still updating processes to account for adherence to long-term lithium treatment. Bipolar develop and implement innovative previously adopted measures (82 FR disorders. 2006;8(5 Pt 2):618–624. efforts, such as updating their processes 38469). Between the FY 2018 IPPS/ 7 American Psychiatric Association. (2002). and clinical workflows, for this Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with LTCH PPS final rule and this proposed measure. rule, we have not adopted any new bipolar disorder, second edition. Retrieved from: At that time, we stated that we would http://psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/ measures into the program. We believe _ consider proposing this measure again practice guidelines/guidelines/bipolar.pdf. that IPFs no longer need to update 8 in future rulemaking. We note that since American Psychiatric Association. processes to account for previously (2010).Practice guideline for the treatment of the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule, adopted measures because they have patients with major depressive disorder, 3rd ed. we have removed five measures from Retrieved from: http://psychiatryonline.org/pb/ had 2 years to complete all such the IPFQR Program (83 FR 38593 assets/raw/sitewide/practice_guidelines/guidelines/ updates. Therefore, we believe that through 38602), reducing burden on mdd.pdf. there is less burden associated with the 9 American Psychiatric Association. (2010). IPFs by approximately 546,000 hours IPFQR program than when we proposed Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with and $20 million (83 FR38610 through to adopt this measure in the FY 2018 schizophrenia: 2nd ed. Retrieved from: http:// 38611), and IPFs have had an additional psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/ 2 years to familiarize themselves with IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed rule. practice_guidelines/guidelines/schizophrenia.pdf. Some commenters also expressed 10 the remaining IPFQR Program measure U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, & U.S. concern that patients may experience Department of Defense. (2016). Management of set and to update processes and clinical major depressive disorder (MDD). Retrieved from: workflows accordingly. Therefore, we barriers to filling prescriptions that are http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/ beyond the control of IPFs (82 FR 38469 mdd/VADoDMDDCPGFINAL82916.pdf. believe that it is now appropriate to propose this measure for the IPFQR through 38470). While we believe that 11 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs & U.S. there are factors external to an IPF that Department of Defense. (2010) VA/DOD clinical Program again. practice guideline for management of bipolar Since the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS influence filling prescriptions after a disorder in adults. Retrieved from: http:// final rule, we have not made any patient is discharge, as the methodology _ www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/bd/bd changes to the Medication Continuation report for the measure indicates,18 IPFs 305_full.pdf. can also undertake interventions to 12 Haddad PM, Brain C, Scott J. Nonadherence Following Inpatient Psychiatric with antipsychotic medication in schizophrenia: Discharge (NQF #3205) measure’s improve the likelihood of a patient’s challenges and management strategies. Patient specifications. However, we have taken medication continuation post-discharge. related outcome measures. 2014;5:43–62. steps to improve upon the suitability of In response to comments that the 13 Hung CI. Factors predicting adherence to this measure for the IPFQR Program. affected population may be too small to antidepressant treatment. Current opinion in report meaningful data because it is psychiatry. 2014;27(5):344–349. First, we considered recommendations 14 Lanouette NM, Folsom DP, Sciolla A, Jeste DV. and comments received on the limited to Medicare patients enrolled in Psychotropic medication nonadherence among Medication Continuation Following Parts A, B, and D (82 FR 38469 through United States Latinos: a comprehensive literature Inpatient Psychiatric Discharge (NQF 17 review. Psychiatric services (Washington, DC). #3205) measure from the FY 2018 IPPS/ https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- 2009;60(2):157–174. Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/ 15 Mitchell AJ. Understanding Medication LTCH PPS final rule (82 FR 38468 HospitalQualityInits/Downloads/Version_1-0_ Discontinuation in Depression. BMedSci through 38470). We provide more detail Inpatient_Psychiatric_Facility_Medication_ Psychiatric Times. 2007;24(4). about these comments below. Continuation_Public.zip. 16 Sylvia LG, Hay A, Ostacher MJ, et al. Second, since the FY 2018 IPPS/ 18 https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- Association between therapeutic alliance, care Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/ satisfaction, and pharmacological adherence in LTCH PPS final rule, we have provided HospitalQualityInits/Downloads/Version_1-0_ bipolar disorder. Journal of clinical additional information about this Inpatient_Psychiatric_Facility_Medication_ psychopharmacology. 2013;33(3):343–350. measure to the MAP and to the NQF, Continuation_Public.zip.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16984 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

38470), we note that the NQF found this Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- each medication 26 27 28 29 30 and measure to be valid and reliable 19 Instruments/QualityMeasures/ information about how facilities can indicating that the size of the Downloads/Measures-under- help patients fill prescriptions for population is sufficient to report Consideration-List-for-2016.pdf). The medications to ensure that the facility meaningful data. These commenters MAP Hospital Workgroup concluded in knows that the prescription has been additionally expressed that because the its December 2016 meeting that the filled. Additionally, the methodology measure is limited to Medicare patients measure addressed a critical quality report provides details about measure enrolled in Parts A, B, and D, there may objective, was evidence-based, and performance among patients with Part D not be a performance gap because these would contribute to efficient use of and the performance gap for this patient patients do not experience the same population. resources.22 One Workgroup member access barriers as other inpatient This measure was submitted to NQF commented that it was appropriate to psychiatric populations. However, we for endorsement on December 16, 2016. note that in their endorsement review of hold IPFs accountable for patients Consistent with the recommendation the measure, the NQF found that there filling a prescription for an evidence- from the December 2016 MAP meeting was evidence of a performance gap in based medication post-discharge. that testing for reliability and validity the quality area that was addressed by The MAP Hospital Workgroup should be completed, in Spring 2017 we the measure even though the measure is classified the measure as ‘‘Refine and refined our NQF submission by limited to patients enrolled in Medicare Resubmit Prior to Rulemaking.’’ 23 The providing the complete results of all A, B, and D.20 measure received this classification testing for NQF’s review of the measure Finally, in response to comments that because the MAP recommended that for endorsement. The measure received 31 the measure had not completed full measure testing be completed to NQF endorsement on June 28, 2017. endorsement review by NQF (82 FR demonstrate reliability and validity at This measure supports the CMS Meaningful Measure Area ‘‘promote 38469), the measure is now fully the facility level in the hospital setting endorsed by the NQF as discussed in effective prevention and treatment of and that the measure be submitted to more detail in section b of this rule. chronic disease,’’ which includes the NQF for review and endorsement.24 The Further, in its review of the measure for meaningful measure area of endorsement, the NQF standing MAP also requested additional details ‘‘prevention, treatment, and committee agreed that there is evidence on the measure, such as: (1) The management of mental health.’’ The that lack of adherence to medication definition of medication dispensation; measure would also complement the leads to relapse and negative outcomes (2) how the facility would know portfolio of facility-level measures in and that claims data related to whether the medication was dispensed; the IPFQR Program that assess the medication adherence are directly and (3) how the measure would be transition from the inpatient to correlated to outcomes.21 impacted if Medicare Part D coverage is outpatient setting: Follow-Up After optional.25 The methodology report for Hospitalization for Mental Illness; b. Overview of Measure the measure (https://www.cms.gov/ Thirty-day All Cause Unplanned The Medication Continuation Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient- Readmission Following Psychiatric Following Inpatient Psychiatric Assessment-Instruments/ Hospitalization in an Inpatient Discharge measure (NQF #3205) QualityMeasures/Downloads/Measures- Psychiatric Facility; Transition Record assesses whether patients admitted to under-Consideration-List-for-2016.pdf) with Specified Elements Received by IPFs with diagnoses of MDD, that we are proposing here, includes the Discharged Patients; and Timely schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder filled results of reliability and validity testing, Transmission of Transition Record. at least one evidence-based medication and additional measure updates that prior to discharge or during the post- c. Data Sources discharge period. As detailed in the occurred after the MAP review. This The proposed Medication following discussion, the NQF endorsed newest methodology report also Continuation Following Inpatient this measure on June 28, 2017. For more provides the additional details Psychiatric Discharge measure (NQF information about this measure, we refer requested by MAP at the December 2016 readers to the measure specifications in meeting. This includes the specific 26 American Psychiatric Association. (2010). the measure technical report https:// medication list, which is based on APA Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder, 3rd ed. Retrieved from: www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- and VA/DoD practice guidelines for http://psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/ Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- practice_guidelines/guidelines/mdd.pdf. Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/ 27 American Psychiatric Association. (2002). Downloads/Version_1-0_Inpatient_ Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with _ _ _ bipolar disorder, second edition. Retrieved from: Psychiatric Facility Medication http://psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/ Continuation_Public.zip) or the practice_guidelines/guidelines/bipolar.pdf. measure’s NQF page (https:// 28 American Psychiatric Association. (2010). www.qualityforum.org/QPS/3205). Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with In compliance with section schizophrenia: 2nd ed. Retrieved from: http:// psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/ 1890A(a)(2) of the Act, this measure was practice_guidelines/guidelines/schizophrenia.pdf. included in a publicly available 29 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs & U.S. document: ‘‘List of Measures under 22 MAP Hospital Workgroup, Preliminary Department of Defense. (2016). Management of Consideration for December 1, 2016’’ Analysis Worksheet. December 2016. http:// major depressive disorder (MDD). Retrieved from: (https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/ www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/linkit.aspx? http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/ LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=84199. mdd/VADoDMDDCPGFINAL82916.pdf. 30 23 http://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs & U.S. 19 https://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/ linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=84452. Department of Defense. (2010) VA/DOD clinical linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=85831. practice guideline for management of bipolar 24 20 https://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/ http://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/ disorder in adults. Retrieved from: http:// linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=85831. linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=84452. www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/bd/bd_ 21 https://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/ 25 http://www.qualityforum.org/WorkArea/ 305_full.pdf. linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=85831. linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=84452. 31 https://www.qualityforum.org/QPS/3205.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16985

#3205) uses Medicare fee-for-service discharge through 30 days post- (https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/ (FFS) claims to identify whether discharge. The denominator for the Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- patients admitted to IPFs with diagnoses measure includes Medicare fee-for- Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/ of MDD, schizophrenia, or bipolar service (FFS) beneficiaries with Part D Downloads/Version1-0_Inpatient_ disorder filled at least one evidence- coverage aged 18 years and older Psychiatric_Facility_Medication_ based medication such that they would discharged to home or home health care Continuation_Public.zip). have medication for use post-discharge. from an IPF with a principal diagnosis We invite public comment on our The performance period for this of MDD, schizophrenia, or bipolar proposal to adopt the Medication measure is 24 months. For example, if disorder. The denominator excludes Continuation Following Inpatient finalized as proposed, for the FY 2021 discharges for patients who: Psychiatric Discharge (NQF #3205) payment determination, the • Received Electroconvulsive measure for the FY 2021 payment performance period would include Therapy (ECT) during the inpatient stay determination and subsequent years as discharges between July 1, 2017 and or 30 day post-discharge period; discussed above. June 30, 2019.32 • Received Transcranial Magnetic 4. Summary of Previously Finalized and Stimulation (TMS) during the inpatient d. Measure Calculation Newly Proposed Measures for the FY stay or follow-up; 2021 Payment Determination and The numerator for the measure • Were pregnant during the inpatient Subsequent Years includes discharges for patients with a stay; principal diagnosis of MDD, • Had a secondary diagnosis of The previously finalized number of schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder in the delirium; or measures for the FY 2021 payment denominator who were dispensed at • Had a principal diagnosis of determination and subsequent years least one evidence-based outpatient schizophrenia with a secondary totals 13. In this proposed rule, we are medication within 2 days prior to diagnosis of dementia. proposing to adopt one additional For more information about the measure for the FY 2021 payment 32 If data availability or operational issues prevent development of the measure, including determination and subsequent years use of this performance period, we would announce rationale for the 2 day prior to 30 day which, if finalized as proposed, would the updated performance period through sub- bring the total to 14, as shown in table regulatory communications including post-discharge period and the announcement on a CMS website and/or on our denominator exclusions, we refer 18. applicable listservs. readers to the measure technical report BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16986 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) addition to serving as an indicator of 5. Possible IPFQR Program Measures Survey, and potential future measures quality within IPFs, information and Topics for Future Consideration and topics as part of CMS’ Meaningful gathered through the collection of this measure would be helpful in developing As we have previously indicated in Measures Framework. a standardized survey as a successor to the FY 2015 IPF PPS final rule (79 FR a. Future Adoption a Patient Experience the measure (79 FR 45964). When we 45974 through 45975), we seek to of Care Survey develop a comprehensive set of quality removed the Assessment of Patient measures to be available for widespread In past assessments of the IPFQR Experience of Care measure from the use for informed decision-making and Program Measure Set, we identified IPFQR Program, we stated we believe quality improvement in the IPF setting. Patient Experience of Care as a measure that we have now collected sufficient In this proposed rule, we seek public gap area for this program (78 FR 50897, information to inform development of a comments on possible new measures or 79 FR 45964 through 45965 and 83 FR patient experience of care measure (83 new measure topics. We welcome all 38596 through 38597), which is FR 38596). comments but are particularly interested consistent with input from past public At that time, several commenters in comments on future adoption of one comment (77 FR 53653). When we expressed support for ensuring that or more measures of patient experience adopted the ‘‘Assessment of Patient patients have an opportunity to express of care based on a consumer survey, Experience of Care Measure’’ for the FY their perspectives on their experience of especially such as the Hospital 2016 payment determination and receiving care at an IPF (83 FR 38597). Consumer Assessment of Healthcare subsequent years, we noted that in Our analysis of the FY 2018 payment

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.011 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16987

determination data (that is, data that 38472) for our previously finalized 6. Data Accuracy and Completeness represents facility assessment of patient procedural requirements. In this Acknowledgement (DACA) experience of care as of December 31, proposed rule, we are not proposing any Requirements 2016) collected under the Assessment of changes to these policies. We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ Patient Experience of Care measure 2. Data Submission Requirements for LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53658) for shows that approximately one third of our previously finalized DACA the FY 2021 Payment Determination facilities use the Hospital Consumer requirements. In this proposed rule, we and Subsequent Years Assessment of Healthcare Providers and are not proposing any changes to these Systems (HCAHPS) survey 33 to assess We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ requirements. patient experience of care. This is more LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53655 than the portion of facilities using any G. Reconsideration and Appeals other survey. through 53657), the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH Procedures We are seeking public comment on PPS final rule (78 FR 50899 through We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ how such providers have implemented 50900), and the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53658 the survey in their facilities, on whether PPS final rule (82 FR 38472 through through 53659) and the FY 2014 IPPS/ they use the entire HCAHPS survey, or 38473) for our previously finalized data LTCH PPS final rule (78 FR 50903) for a subset of the survey questions; and if submission requirements. our previously finalized reconsideration a subset, which specific questions they Because the Medication Continuation and appeals procedures. In this use. Additionally, we are seeking public following Discharge from an IPF (NQF proposed rule, we are not proposing any comment on other potential surveys that #3205) measure is calculated by CMS changes to these policies. commenters believe would be using Medicare Fee-for-Service claims, H. Extraordinary Circumstances appropriate to adopt for the IPFQR there would be no additional data Exceptions (ECE) Policy Program. We intend to use this submission requirements for the FY We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ information to inform future 2021 payment determination and development and testing of a survey- LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53659 subsequent years. Therefore, in this through 53660), the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH based patient experience of care proposed rule, we are not proposing any measure (or measures) for the inpatient PPS final rule (78 FR 50903), the FY changes to our previously finalized data psychiatric patient population. 2015 IPF PPS final rule (79 FR 45978), submission policies. and the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final b. Other Future Measures 3. Reporting Requirements for the FY rule (82 FR 38473 through 38474) for In this proposed rule, we are also 2021 Payment Determination and our previously finalized ECE policies. In seeking feedback and suggestions for Subsequent Years this proposed rule, we are not proposing future measures and topics for the any changes to these policies. IPFQR Program that align with CMS’s We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ VI. Collection of Information Meaningful Measures Framework (FY LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53656 Requirements IPF PPS final rule, 83 FR 38590 through through 53657), the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH 38591). PPS final rule (78 FR 50900 through This rule does not propose any new or revised ‘‘collection of information’’ 50901), and the FY 2015 IPF PPS final E. Public Display and Review requirements as defined under 5 CFR rule (79 FR 45976 through 45977) for Requirements 1320.3 the Paperwork Reduction Act’s our previously finalized reporting We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ (PRA) implementing regulations. Nor requirements. In this proposed rule, we LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53653 would it impose any new or revised are not proposing any changes to these through 53654), the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH burden within the context of the PRA of policies. PPS final rule (78 FR 50897 through 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). However, 50898), and the FY 2017 IPPS/LTCH 4. Quality Measure Sampling we are proposing to make a number of PPS final rule (81 FR 57248 through Requirements burden adjustments based on updated 57249) for discussion of our previously Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) wage finalized public display and review We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ figures and more recent facility counts requirements. We are not proposing any LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53657 and estimated case data. The changes to these requirements. through 53658), the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH adjustments would reduce our overall PPS final rule (78 FR 50901 through time estimate by 50,067 hours and F. Form, Manner, and Timing of Quality 50902), the FY 2016 IPF PPS final rule increase our cost estimate by Data Submission for the FY 2021 (80 FR 46717 through 46719), and the $1,820,149. Payment Determination and Subsequent FY 2019 IPF PPS final rule (83 FR 38607 Years A. Collection of Information through 38608) discussions for our Requirements for the IPFQR Program 1. Procedural Requirements for the FY previously finalized sampling policies. With regard to the IPFQR Program, we 2021 Payment Determination and In this proposed rule, we are not are proposing to add one new measure Subsequent Years proposing any changes to these policies. (Medication Continuation Following We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ 5. Non-Measure Data Collection Inpatient Psychiatric Discharge (NQF LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53654 #3205)) that would impact the FY 2021 through 53655), the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH We refer readers to the FY 2015 IPF payment determination and subsequent PPS final rule (78 FR 50898 through PPS final rule (79 FR 45973), the FY years. If finalized as proposed, the 50899), and the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH 2016 IPF PPS final rule (80 FR 46717), measure would be calculated by CMS PPS final rule (82 FR 38471 through and the FY 2019 IPF PPS final rule (83 using IPF submitted claims data. The FR 38608) for our previously finalized claims’ requirements and burden are 33 For more information about the HCAHPS non-measure data collection policies. In approved by OMB under control survey, please see https://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/ surveys-guidance/hospital/about/adult_hp_ this proposed rule, we are not proposing number 0938–0050 (CMS–2552–10) for survey.html. any changes to these policies. our Medicare cost report. The proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16988 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

measure would not impact any of the FR 38609 through 38612) for a detailed adjusted by 100 percent to account for cost report’s data fields or burden discussion of the burden for the fringe benefits and overhead. This is estimates as all worksheets and lines program requirements that we have necessarily a rough adjustment, both would remain unchanged. Similarly, previously adopted. Information because fringe benefits and overhead this proposed rule would not impose pertaining to the requirements and costs vary significantly from employer- any new or revised collection of burden that are currently approved by to-employer and because methods of information requirements or burden OMB can be found at reginfo.gov under estimating these costs vary widely from under OMB control number 0938–1171 control numbers 0938–0050 and 0938– study-to-study. Nonetheless, we believe (CMS–10432) which contains 1171. that doubling the hourly wage rate information about our non-claims based × B. Adjustments to IPFQR Program ($18.83 2 = $37.66) to estimate total IPFQR Program quality measure and Burden Estimates cost is a reasonably accurate estimation non-quality measure information method. collection/reporting requirements and In the FY 2019 IPF PPS final rule (83 We are also proposing to update our burden. FR 38609), we estimated that reporting facility count and case estimates to the We refer readers to the FY 2013 IPPS/ measures for the IPFQR Program could most recent data available. Specifically, LTCH PPS final rule (77 FR 53673), the be accomplished by a Medical Records we estimate that there are now FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (78 and Health Information Technician approximately 1,679 (down from the FR 50964, the FY 2015 IPF PPS final (BLS Occupation Code: 29–2071) with a previous estimate of 1,734) facilities and rule (79 FR 45978 through 45980), the median hourly wage of $18.29 per hour that for measures which require FY 2016 IPF PPS final rule (80 FR 46720 (as of May 2016). Since then, BLS (the reporting on the entire patient through 46721), the FY 2017 IPPS/LTCH Bureau of Labor Statistics) has revised population, these facilities will report PPS 34 final rule (81 FR 57265 through their wage data with May 2017 serving on an average of 1,283 cases per facility 35 57266), the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS as their most recent update. In (up from the previous estimate of 1,213). final rule (82 FR 38507 through 38508), response, we propose to update our cost Accordingly, we propose to adjust our and the FY 2019 IPF PPS final rule (83 estimates using the May 2017 figure of currently approved cost estimate from $18.83 per hour, an increase of $0.54 $125,511,558 (see tables 19, 20, and 21) 34 We note that for operational reasons we per hour or $1.08 per hour when to $127,331,707 (see tables 22, 23, and sometimes publish IPFQR program requirements in 24). the IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed and final rule as 35 https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/medical- opposed to the IPF PPS proposed and final rule. records-and-health-information-technicians.htm. BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16989

Table 19: Currently Approved Burden: Measure Data Collection and Reporting

· .. . .. · > · ...... ·· .·. I ••• .. Anuna lPFs ·· Estimate I Effort . ··Ailnual . . ·.· Effort .. · . ... · Measl)te. ··.· ••••• Measure d•(?ases .. ·• per·. .,• (P~r Effort > ;QF> ID .. ·. ·c~st(s) .·. . D~scrfptjon .. (per Case r~eility .. .' (}'()tal) I . facility) .{hours} ). .• ())ours) .. . . • ••• •••• .. ; .·· .. • . .·.· .. •(bours) .··• .· .. ···.Hours of 525,835. 0640 HBIPS-2 Physical 1,213 0.25 303.25 1,734 19,235,063 5 Restraint Use Hours of 525,835. 0641 HBIPS-3 1,213 0.25 303.25 1,734 19,235,063 Seclusion Use 5 Patients Discharged on Multiple Antipsychotic 264,001. 0560 HBIPS-5 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 Medications 5 with Appropriate Justification Alcohol Use Brief SUB-2 and 264,001. 1663 Intervention 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 SUB-2a 5 Provided or Offered Alcohol and Other Drug Use Disorder Treatment Provided or SUB-3 and Offered at 264,001. 1664 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 SUB-3a Discharge and 5 Alcohol and Other Drug Use Disorder Treatment at Discharge

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.012 16990 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

.• ..· .•. ·.· < .·. Alln~ta IPFs· ..... ·.·· ·. . ..·•··.· .. . . ••• Estbn:ate Effort !Effort Anm.tal . NQF•·· Measure Measure ... dCases per (per .Effort ·.. .·· Cost($) # .ID Descriptipn (per Cas~ faCility (Totfll) .... I .: facility)·•···• (b'ours) ) .·· ·· (hours) ··.· t. . ., . . . ·. . ·.·· .. . ·.·· ·.· .• ·•·· (hou~s} .. Follow-up After 0 0 0 0576 FUH Hospi talizati o 0 0 0 n for Mental Illness* Tobacco Use Treatment TOB-2 Provided or 264,001. 1654 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657.175 TOB-2a Offered and 5 Tobacco Use Treatment Tobacco Use Treatment Provided or TOB-3 Offered at 264,001. 1656 and TOB- 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 Discharge and 5 3a Tobacco Use Treatment at Discharge Influenza 264,001. 1659 IMM-2 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 Immunization 5 Transition Record with Specified Elements Received by Discharged Patients 264,001. 647 n/a (Discharges 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 5 from an Inpatient Facility to Home/Self Care or Any Other Site of Care)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.013 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16991

Timely Transmission of Transition Record (Discharges from an 264,001. 648 n/a 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 Inpatient 5 Facility to Home/Self Care or Any Other Site of

Screening for 264,001. n/a n/a Metabolic 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,657,175 5 Disorders Thirty-day all-cause unplanned readmission following 2860 n/a Psychiatric 0 0 0 0 0 0 hospitalizatio nman Inpatient Psychiatric Facir *

* CMS will collect this data using Medicare Part A and Part B claims; therefore these measures will not require facilities to submit data on any cases.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.014 16992 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Table 20: Currently Approved Burden: Non-Measure Data Collection and Reporting

1'otat Co$t tot AUIPF$($) Non-measure 1,734 2.0 3,468 36.58 73.16 126,859 Data Collection and Submission

Table 21: Currently Approved Burden: Total

Requirement Respondents Responses Time Cost($) (hours) Measure Data 1,734 13,710,738 3,427,685 125,384,699 Collection and (7,907 Reporting responses per facility * 1,734 facilities) Non-Measure Data 1,734 4 3,468 126,859 Collection and Reporting Notice of n/a n/a n/a n/a Participation, Data Accuracy Acknowledgement, and Vendor Authorization Form* .. .. ··. TOTAL .· .. ·. 1,'734 ... .13,710,742 .. . $,4:l1,153 . .>125.,511,558 *The 15 minutes per measure estimate for chart abstraction under Measure Data Collection and Reporting also includes the time for completing and submitting any forms.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.015 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16993

Table 22: Proposed Burden Adjustments: Measure Data Collection and Reporting

Hours of 538,539. 0640 HBIPS-2 Physical 1,283 0.25 320.75 1,679 20,281,388 25 Restraint Use Hours of 538,539. 0641 HBIPS-3 1,283 0.25 320.75 1,679 20,281,388 Seclusion Use 25 Patients Discharged on Multiple Antipsychotic 255,627. 0560 HBIPS-5 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 Medications 75 with Appropriate Justification Alcohol Use Brief SUB-2 and 255,627. 1663 Intervention 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 SUB-2a 75 Provided or Offered Alcohol and Other Drug Use Disorder Treatment Provided or SUB-3 and Offered at 255,627. 1664 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 SUB-3a Discharge and 75 Alcohol and Other Drug Use Disorder Treatment at Dischar e Follow-up After 0 0 0 0576 FUH Hospi talizati o 0 0 0 n for Mental Illness*

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.016 16994 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

... ' . Alln~ta IPFs· ...... • ...... ' . Estbn:ate Effort !Effort Anm.tal NQF•·• Measure Measure .·· dCases per (per .Effort ', .·· Cost($) # .ID Descriptipn (per Cas~ fatjlity (Totfll) I I. ) .• • i [,·. ·' facility)······ (b'ours) (hours) ··.· • ...... '<' .• (hou~s) Tobacco Use Treatment TOB-2 Provided or 255,627. 1654 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 TOB-2a Offered and 75 Tobacco Use Treatment Tobacco Use Treatment Provided or TOB-3 Offered at 255,627. 1656 and TOB- 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 Discharge and 75 3a Tobacco Use Treatment at Discharge Influenza 255,627. 1659 IMM-2 609 0.25 152.25 1,734 9,626,941 Immunization 75 Transition Record with Specified Elements Received by Discharged Patients 255,627. 647 n/a (Discharges 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 75 from an Inpatient Facility to Home/Self Care or Any Other Site of Care)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.017 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16995

Timely Transmission of Transition Record (Discharges from an 255,627. 648 n/a 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 Inpatient 75 Facility to Home/Self Care or Any Other Site of Care Screening for 255,627. n/a n/a Metabolic 609 0.25 152.25 1,679 9,626,941 75 Disorders Thirty-day all-cause unplanned readmission following 2860 n/a Psychiatric 0 0 0 0 0 0 hospitalizatio nman Inpatient Psychiatric Facilit *

* CMS will collect this data using Medicare Part A and Part B claims; therefore these measures will not require facilities to submit data on any cases.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.018 16996 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C wish to comment, identify the rule 3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at As mentioned above, the adjustments (CMS–1712–P) along with the 410–786–1326. are in response to updates to BLS wage information collection’s CMS ID number See this rule’s DATES and ADDRESSES figures and more recent facility counts (CMS–10432) and OMB control number sections for the comment due date and and estimated case data. They are not a (0938–1171). for additional instructions. result of any of the provisions proposed To obtain copies of the supporting in this rule. The adjusted burden figures statement and any applicable VII. Response to Comments will be submitted to OMB for approval supplementary materials, you may make Because of the large number of public under control number 0938–1171 your request using one of following: (CMS–10432) as a non-substantive comments we normally receive on change. 1. Access CMS’ website address at Federal Register documents, we are not https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and- able to acknowledge or respond to them C. Submission of PRA-Related Guidance/Legislation/ individually. We will consider all Comments PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA- comments we receive by the date and We invite public comments on our Listing.html. time specified in the DATES section of proposed burden adjustments as well as 2. Email your request, including your this preamble, and, when we proceed on any of the information collection address, phone number, OMB control with a subsequent document, we will requirements/burden set out under number, and CMS document identifier respond to the comments in the OMB control number 0938–1171. If you to [email protected]. preamble to that document.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.019 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16997

VIII. Regulatory Impact Statement effect on the economy of $100 million offset. As discussed in the RY 2009 IPF or more in any 1 year, or adversely and PPS notice (73 FR 25711), the stop-loss A. Statement of Need materially affecting a sector of the adjustment is no longer applicable This rule proposes updates to the economy, productivity, competition, under the IPF PPS. prospective payment rates for Medicare jobs, the environment, public health or As discussed in section III.D.1 of this inpatient hospital services provided by safety, or state, local or tribal proposed rule, we are using the wage IPFs for discharges occurring during FY governments or communities (also index and labor-related share in a 2020 (October 1, 2019 through referred to as ‘‘economically budget neutral manner by applying a September 30, 2020). We propose to significant’’); (2) creating a serious wage index budget neutrality factor to apply the proposed 2016-based IPF inconsistency or otherwise interfering the federal per diem base rate and ECT market basket increase of 3.1 percent, with an action taken or planned by payment per treatment. Therefore, the less the productivity adjustment of 0.5 another agency; (3) materially altering budgetary impact to the Medicare percentage point as required by the budgetary impacts of entitlement program of this proposed rule will be 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, and further grants, user fees, or loan programs or the due to the market basket update for FY reduced by 0.75 percentage point as rights and obligations of recipients 2020 of 3.1 percent (see section III.A.4 required by sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or of this proposed rule) less the and 1886(s)(3)(E) of the Act, for a policy issues arising out of legal productivity adjustment of 0.5 proposed total FY 2020 payment rate mandates, the President’s priorities, or percentage point required by section update of 1.85 percent. In this proposed the principles set forth in the Executive 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act; further rule, we are proposing to revise and Order. reduced by the ‘‘other adjustment’’ of rebase the IPF market basket to reflect A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) 0.75 percentage point under sections a 2016 base year. We also are proposing must be prepared for major rules with 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886 (s)(3)(E) of the to align the IPF wage index data with economically significant effects ($100 Act; and the update to the outlier fixed the concurrent IPPS wage index data by million or more in any 1 year). This dollar loss threshold amount. removing the 1-year lag of the pre-floor, proposed rule is not economically We estimate that the FY 2020 impact pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage significant under Executive Order will be a net increase of $75 million in index upon which the IPF wage index 12866. payments to IPF providers. This reflects is based. We also are proposing to We estimate that the total proposed an estimated $80 million increase from update the IPF labor-related share and impact of these changes for FY 2020 the update to the payment rates and a the IPF wage index including adoption payments compared to FY 2019 $5 million decrease due to the update to of a new OMB designation, and are payments will be a net increase of the outlier threshold amount to set total soliciting comments on the IPF wage approximately $75 million. This reflects estimated outlier payments at 2.0 index. Finally, we are proposing an $80 million increase from the update percent of total estimated payments in updates to the IPFQR Program for the to the payment rates (+$135 million FY 2020. This estimate does not include FY 2021 payment determination and from the fourth quarter 2018 IGI forecast the implementation of the required 2.0 subsequent years. of the proposed 2016-based IPF market percentage point reduction of the ¥ market basket increase factor for any IPF B. Overall Impact basket of 3.1 percent, $20 million for the productivity adjustment of 0.5 that fails to meet the IPF quality We have examined the impacts of this percentage point, and ¥$35 million for reporting requirements (as discussed in proposed rule as required by Executive the ‘‘other adjustment’’ of 0.75 section V.A. of this proposed rule). Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning percentage point), as well as a $5 The RFA requires agencies to analyze and Review (September 30, 1993), million decrease as a result of the options for regulatory relief of small Executive Order 13563 on Improving update to the outlier threshold amount. entities if a rule has a significant impact Regulation and Regulatory Review Outlier payments are estimated to on a substantial number of small (January 18, 2011), the Regulatory change from 2.15 percent in FY 2019 to entities. For purposes of the RFA, small Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19, 2.00 percent of total estimated IPF entities include small businesses, 1980, Pub. L. 96 354), section 1102(b) of payments in FY 2020. nonprofit organizations, and small the Social Security Act, section 202 of governmental jurisdictions. Most IPFs the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of C. Anticipated Effects and most other providers and suppliers 1995 (March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104–4), In this section, we discuss the are small entities, either by nonprofit Executive Order 13132 on Federalism historical background of the IPF PPS status or having revenues of $7.5 (August 4, 1999), the Congressional and the impact of this proposed rule on million to $38.5 million or less in any Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)) and the Federal Medicare budget and on 1 year, depending on industry Executive Order 13771 on Reducing IPFs. classification (for details, refer to the Regulation and Controlling Regulatory SBA Small Business Size Standards 1. Budgetary Impact Costs (January 30, 2017). found at http://www.sba.gov/sites/ Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 As discussed in the November 2004 default/files/files/Size_Standards_ direct agencies to assess all costs and and RY 2007 IPF PPS final rules, we Table.pdf). Individuals and states are benefits of available regulatory applied a budget neutrality factor to the not included in the definition of a small alternatives and, if regulation is federal per diem base rate and ECT entity. necessary, to select regulatory payment per treatment to ensure that Because we lack data on individual approaches that maximize net benefits total estimated payments under the IPF hospital receipts, we cannot determine (including potential economic, PPS in the implementation period the number of small proprietary IPFs or environmental, public health and safety would equal the amount that would the proportion of IPFs’ revenue derived effects, distributive impacts, and have been paid if the IPF PPS had not from Medicare payments. Therefore, we equity). Section 3(f) of Executive Order been implemented. The budget assume that all IPFs are considered 12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory neutrality factor includes the following small entities. action’’ as an action that is likely to components: Outlier adjustment, stop- The Department of Health and Human result in a rule: (1) Having an annual loss adjustment, and the behavioral Services generally uses a revenue

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 16998 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

impact of 3 to 5 percent as a significance million in 1995 dollars, updated To illustrate the impacts of the FY threshold under the RFA. As shown in annually for inflation. In 2019, that 2020 changes in this proposed rule, our Table 25, we estimate that the overall threshold is approximately $154 analysis begins with a FY 2019 baseline revenue impact of this proposed rule on million. This proposed rule does not simulation model based on FY 2018 IPF all IPFs is to increase estimated impose spending costs on state, local, or payments inflated to the midpoint of FY Medicare payments by approximately tribal governments in the aggregate, or 2019 using IHS Global Inc.’s fourth 1.7 percent. As a result, since the by the private sector of $154 million or quarter 2018 forecast of the market estimated impact of this proposed rule more. basket update (see section III.A.4 of this is a net increase in revenue across Executive Order 13132 establishes proposed rule); the estimated outlier almost all categories of IPFs, the certain requirements that an agency payments in FY 2019; the FY 2019 IPF Secretary has determined that this must meet when it promulgates a wage index; the FY 2019 labor-related proposed rule will have a positive proposed rule (and subsequent final share; and the FY 2019 percentage revenue impact on a substantial number rule) that imposes substantial direct amount of the rural adjustment. During of small entities. requirement costs on state and local the simulation, total outlier payments are maintained at 2 percent of total In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act governments, preempts state law, or requires us to prepare a regulatory estimated IPF PPS payments. otherwise has Federalism implications. impact analysis if a rule may have a Each of the following changes is This proposed rule will not have a significant impact on the operations of added incrementally to this baseline substantial effect on state and local a substantial number of small rural model in order for us to isolate the governments. hospitals. This analysis must conform to effects of each change: the provisions of section 604 of the 2. Impact on Providers • The proposed update to the outlier RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of fixed dollar loss threshold amount. the Act, we define a small rural hospital To show the impact on providers of • The proposed FY 2020 IPF wage as a hospital that is located outside of the changes to the IPF PPS discussed in index and the proposed FY 2020 labor- a metropolitan statistical area and has this proposed rule, we compare related share. fewer than 100 beds. As discussed in estimated payments under the IPF PPS • The proposed market basket update section VIII.C.1 of this proposed rule, rates and factors for FY 2020 versus for FY 2020 of 3.1 percent less the the rates and policies set forth in this those under FY 2019. We determined productivity adjustment of 0.5 proposed rule will not have an adverse the percent change in the estimated FY percentage point in accordance with impact on the rural hospitals based on 2020 IPF PPS payments compared to the section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act and the data of the 258 rural excluded estimated FY 2019 IPF PPS payments further reduced by the ‘‘other psychiatric units and 66 rural for each category of IPFs. In addition, adjustment’’ of 0.75 percentage point in psychiatric hospitals in our database of for each category of IPFs, we have accordance with sections 1,593 IPFs for which data were included the estimated percent change 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(E) of the available. Therefore, the Secretary has in payments resulting from the update Act, for a proposed payment rate update determined that this proposed rule will to the outlier fixed dollar loss threshold of 1.85 percent. not have a significant impact on the amount; the updated wage index data Our final column comparison in Table operations of a substantial number of including the updated labor-related 25 illustrates the percent change in small rural hospitals. share; and the market basket update for payments from FY 2019 (that is, October Section 202 of the Unfunded FY 2020, as adjusted by the productivity 1, 2018, to September 30, 2019) to FY Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) adjustment according to section 2020 (that is, October 1, 2019, to also requires that agencies assess 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, and the September 30, 2020) including all the anticipated costs and benefits before ‘‘other adjustment’’ according to payment policy changes in this issuing any rule whose mandates sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and proposed rule. require spending in any 1 year of $100 1886(s)(3)(E) of the Act. BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 16999

Table 25. IPF Impacts for FY 2020 [P ercent Ch ange m co umns 3throug1 h 5] CBSA Wage Index & Total Number of Labor Percent Facility by Type Facilities Outlier Share1 Change2 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) All Facilities 1,593 -0.15 0.00 1.70

Total Urban 1,269 -0.15 0.01 1.71 Urban unit 792 -0.24 -0.07 1.54 Urban hospital 477 -0.05 0.12 1.92

Total Rural 324 -0.15 -0.05 1.63 Rural unit 258 -0.18 -0.07 1.56 Rural hospital 66 -0.06 -0.02 1.80

By Type of Ownership: Freestanding IPFs Urban Psychiatric Hospitals Government 121 -0.25 -0.11 1.55 Non-Profit 100 -0.05 -0.11 1.70 For-Profit 256 -0.01 0.23 2.07 Rural Psychiatric Hospitals Government 32 -0.10 -0.28 1.53 Non-Profit 15 -0.20 -0.38 1.29 For-Profit 19 0.00 0.22 2.07

IPF Units Urban Government 117 -0.37 0.13 1.62 Non-Profit 510 -0.25 -0.05 1.55 For-Profit 165 -0.12 -0.26 1.46 Rural Government 69 -0.19 0.04 1.67 Non-Profit 136 -0.19 0.04 1.66 For-Profit 53 -0.15 -0.46 1.20

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.020 17000 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4120–01–C The top row of the table shows the outlier portion of total payments is 3. Impact Results overall impact on the 1,593 IPFs expected to decrease from included in this analysis. In column 3, approximately 2.15 percent to 2.0 Table 25 displays the results of our we present the effects of the update to percent. analysis. The table groups IPFs into the the outlier fixed dollar loss threshold The overall impact of this outlier categories listed here based on amount. We estimate that IPF outlier adjustment update (as shown in column characteristics provided in the Provider payments as a percentage of total IPF 3 of Table 25), across all hospital of Services (POS) file, the IPF provider payments are 2.15 percent in FY 2019. groups, is to decrease total estimated specific file, and cost report data from Thus, we are adjusting the outlier payments to IPFs by 0.15 percent. The the Healthcare Cost Report Information threshold amount in this proposed rule largest decrease in payments is System: estimated to be ¥0.45 percent for • to set total estimated outlier payments Facility Type. equal to 2.0 percent of total payments in teaching IPFs with more than 30 percent • Location. FY 2020. The estimated change in total interns and residents to beds. • Teaching Status Adjustment. IPF payments for FY 2020, therefore, In column 4, we present the effects of • Census Region. includes an approximate 0.15 percent the budget-neutral update to the IPF • Size. decrease in payments because the wage index and the Labor-Related Share

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP23AP19.021 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17001

(LRS). This represents the effect of using will enhance the efficiency of the fair estimate of the number of reviewers the concurrent hospital wage data and Medicare program. of this proposed rule. We solicit taking into account the updated OMB comments on this assumption. 5. Effects of Updates to the Inpatient delineations. That is, the impact Psychiatric Facilities Quality Reporting We also recognize that different types represented in this column reflects the (IPFQR) Program of entities are in many cases affected by update from the FY 2019 IPF wage mutually exclusive sections of this index to the proposed FY 2020 IPF wage As discussed in section V. of this proposed rule; therefore, for the index, which includes basing the FY proposed rule and in accordance with purposes of our estimate, we assume 2020 IPF wage index on the FY 2020 section 1886(s)(4)(A)(i) of the Act, we that each reviewer reads approximately pre-floor, pre-reclassified IPPS hospital will implement a 2 percentage point 50 percent of the proposed rule. We wage index data, updating the OMB reduction in the market basket update solicit comments on this assumption. when calculating the FY 2021 national designations for two counties in Idaho, Using the May, 2017 mean (average) per diem rate for discharges from IPFs and updating the LRS from 74.8 percent wage information from the BLS for that have failed to comply with the in FY 2019 to 76.8 percent in FY 2020. medical and health service managers IPFQR Program requirements for the FY We note that there is no projected (Code 11–9111), we estimate that the 2021 payment determination. In section change in aggregate payments to IPFs, as cost of reviewing this proposed rule is II.B. of this proposed rule, we discuss indicated in the first row of column 4, $107.38 per hour, including overhead how the 2 percentage point reduction however, there will be distributional and fringe benefits (https://www.bls.gov/ effects among different categories of will be applied. For the FY 2019 payment determination (that is, data oes/current/oes119111.htm). Assuming IPFs. For example, we estimate the an average reading speed of 250 words largest increase in payments to be 1.43 submitted in CY 2018), of the 1,679 IPFs eligible for the IPFQR Program, 50 did per minute, we estimate that it would percent for Pacific IPFs, and the largest take approximately 1.3 hours for the decrease in payments to be 0.73 percent not receive the full market basket update due to reasons specific to the staff to review half of this proposed rule. for New England IPFs. For each IPF that reviews the proposed Finally, column 5 compares our IPFQR Program; 24 of these IPFs chose rule, the estimated cost is (1.3 hours × estimates of the total proposed changes not to participate and 26 did not meet $107.38) or $139.59. Therefore, we reflected in this proposed rule for FY the requirements of the Program. Thus, estimate that the total cost of reviewing 2020 to the estimates for FY 2019 we estimate similar numbers for the FY this proposed rule is $12,283.92 (without these changes). The average 2021 payment determination and that × estimated increase for all IPFs is the IPFQR Program will have a ($139.59 88 reviewers). approximately 1.7 percent. This negligible impact on overall IPF D. Alternatives Considered estimated net increase includes the payments in FY 2021. effects of the proposed 3.1 percent 2016- We are proposing provisions that The statute does not specify an update based market basket update reduced by impact the FY 2021 payment strategy for the IPF PPS and is broadly the productivity adjustment of 0.5 determination and subsequent years. We written to give the Secretary discretion percentage point, as required by section refer readers to section VI. of the in establishing an update methodology. 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act and further preamble of this proposed rule for Therefore, we are updating the IPF PPS reduced by the ‘‘other adjustment’’ of details discussing information using the methodology published in the 0.75 percentage point, as required by collection requirements for the IPFQR November 2004 IPF PPS final rule; sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and Program. We intend to closely monitor applying the proposed FY 2020 2016- 1886(s)(3)(E) of the Act. It also includes the effects of this quality reporting based IPF PPS market basket update of the overall estimated 0.15 percent program on IPFs and to help facilitate 3.1 percent, reduced by the statutorily decrease in estimated IPF outlier successful reporting outcomes through required multifactor productivity payments as a percent of total payments ongoing stakeholder education, national adjustment of 0.5 percentage point and from the proposed update to the outlier trainings, and a technical help desk. the ‘‘other adjustment’’ of 0.75 percentage point, along with the fixed dollar loss threshold amount. 6. Regulatory Review Costs Column 5 also includes the proposed wage index budget neutrality distributional effects of the updates to If regulations impose administrative adjustment to update the payment rates; the IPF wage index and the labor-related costs on private entities, such as the proposing a FY 2020 IPF wage index share. time needed to read and interpret this which is fully based upon the OMB IPF payments are estimated to proposed rule, we should estimate the CBSA designations from Bulletin 17–01 increase by 1.71 percent in urban areas cost associated with regulatory review. and which uses the FY 2020 pre-floor, and 1.63 percent in rural areas. Overall, Due to the uncertainty involved with pre-reclassified IPPS hospital wage IPFs are estimated to experience a net accurately quantifying the number of index as its basis; and implementing increase in payments as a result of the entities that will review this proposed changes to the IPFQR Program. rule, we assume that the total number of updates in this proposed rule. The E. Accounting Statement largest payment increase is estimated at unique commenters on the most recent 3.07 percent for IPFs in the Pacific IPF proposed rule from FY 2019 (83 FR As required by OMB Circular A–4 region. 38576) will be the number of reviewers (available at www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ of this proposed rule. We acknowledge whitehouse.gov/files/omb/circulars/A4/ 4. Effect on Beneficiaries that this assumption may understate or a-4.pdf), in Table 26, we have prepared Under the IPF PPS, IPFs will receive overstate the costs of reviewing this an accounting statement showing the payment based on the average resources proposed rule. It is possible that not all classification of the expenditures consumed by patients for each day. We commenters reviewed the FY 2019 IPF associated with the proposed updates to do not expect changes in the quality of proposed rule in detail, and it is also the IPF wage index and payment rates care or access to services for Medicare possible that some reviewers chose not in this proposed rule. Table 26 provides beneficiaries under the FY 2020 IPF to comment on that proposed rule. For our best estimate of the increase in PPS, but we continue to expect that these reasons we thought that the Medicare payments under the IPF PPS paying prospectively for IPF services number of past commenters would be a as a result of the changes presented in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 17002 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

this proposed rule and based on the data was reviewed by the Office of for 1,593 IPFs in our database. Management and Budget. Dated: March 29, 2019. TABLE 26—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT: Seema Verma, CLASSIFICATION OF ESTIMATED EX- PENDITURES Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Change in Estimated Impacts from FY 2019 IPF PPS to FY 2020 IPF PPS Dated: April 2, 2019. Alex M. Azar II, Category Transfers Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services. Annualized Monetized $75 million. Transfers. [FR Doc. 2019–07884 Filed 4–18–19; 4:15 pm] From Whom to Federal Government BILLING CODE 4120–01–P Whom?. to IPF Medicare Providers.

F. Conclusion In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this regulation

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APP2.SGM 23APP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Vol. 84 Tuesday, No. 78 April 23, 2019

Part III

Department of Energy

10 CFR Part 431 Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Small Electric Motors and Electric Motors; Proposed Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17004 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number comments and the docket, or to request and/or RIN in the subject line of the a public meeting, contact the Appliance 10 CFR Part 431 message. and Equipment Standards Program staff [EERE–2017–BT–TP–0047] Postal Mail: Appliance and at (202) 287–1445 or by email: Equipment Standards Program, U.S. ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ RIN 1904–AE18 Department of Energy, Building ee.doe.gov. Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, Energy Conservation Program: Test SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Procedures for Small Electric Motors proposes to maintain previously Washington, DC 20585–0121. and Electric Motors approved incorporations by reference or Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, newly incorporate by reference the AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and please submit all items on a compact following industry standards into 10 Renewable Energy, Department of disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not CFR part 431: Energy. necessary to include printed copies. (1) Canadian Standards Association ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance (CSA) CSA Standard C390–10, ‘‘Test and request for comment. and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. methods, marking requirements, and Department of Energy, Building energy efficiency levels for three-phase SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza induction motors.’’ Energy (DOE) proposes amending its SW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. (2) CSA Standard C747–09, ‘‘Energy test procedures for small electric Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, efficiency test methods for small motors. First, DOE proposes further please submit all items on a CD, in motors.’’ harmonizing its procedures with which case it is not necessary to include Copies of CSA C390–10 and CSA industry practice by incorporating a printed copies. C747–09 can be obtained from Canadian new industry standard manufacturers No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be Standards Association, Sales would be permitted to use in addition accepted. For detailed instructions on Department, 5060 Spectrum Way, Suite to the industry standards currently submitting written comments and 100, Mississauga, Ontario, L4W 5N6, incorporated by reference as options for additional information on the Canada, 1–800–463–6727, or http:// use when testing small electric motor rulemaking process, see section V of this www.shopcsa.ca/onlinestore/ efficiency. Second, with respect to document (Public Participation). welcome.asp. electric motors, DOE proposes further Docket: The docket, which includes (3) IEEE 112–2004, ‘‘IEEE Standard harmonizing its test procedures by Federal Register notices, public meeting Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction incorporating an additional industry attendee lists and transcripts, Motors and Generators.’’ standard to the two that are already comments, and other supporting (4) IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard incorporated by reference as options documents/materials, is available for Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction when testing the efficiency of this review at http://www.regulations.gov. Motors and Generators.’’ equipment. Each of these changes is All documents in the docket are listed (5) IEEE Standard 114–2010, ‘‘Test expected to reduce testing burdens on in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Procedure for Single-Phase Induction manufacturers. Finally, DOE proposes to However, some documents listed in the Motors.’’ adopt industry provisions related to the index, such as those containing Copies of IEEE 112–2004, IEEE 112– test conditions to ensure the information that is exempt from public 2017, and IEEE 114–2010 can be comparability of test results for small disclosure, may not be publicly obtained from: IEEE, 445 Hoes Lane, electric motors. None of these proposed available. P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855– changes would affect the measured The docket web page can be found at 1331, (732) 981–0060, or by visiting average full-load efficiency of small http://www.regulations.gov/#!docket http://www.ieee.org. electric motors or the measured nominal Detail;D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047. The (6) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, ‘‘Rotating full-load efficiency of electric motors docket web page contains instructions electrical machines—Part 2–1: Standard when compared to the current test on how to access all documents, methods for determining losses and procedures. including public comments, in the efficiency from tests (excluding docket. See section V.A for information machines for traction vehicles).’’ DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, (7) IEC 60034–1:2010, ‘‘Rotating on how to submit comments through and information regarding this proposal electric machines—Part 1: Rating and http://www.regulations.gov. no later than June 24, 2019. See section performance’’. V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. (8) IEC 60051–1:2016, ‘‘Direct acting DOE will hold a public meeting on this Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of indicating analogue electrical measuring proposed test procedure if one is Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and instruments and their accessories—Part requested by May 7, 2019. Renewable Energy, Building 1: Definitions and general requirements ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted Technologies Program, EE–5B, 1000 common to all parts’’. must identify the Test Procedure NOPR Independence Avenue SW, Washington, Copies of IEC 60034–2–1:2014, IEC for small electric motors and electric DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586– 60034–1:2010, and IEC 60051–1:2016 motors and provide docket number 9870. Email: may be purchased from International EERE–2017–BT–TP–0047 and/or ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ Electrotechnical Commission, 3 rue de regulatory information number (RIN) ee.doe.gov. Varembe´, 1st floor, P.O. Box 131, CH— 1904–AE18. Comments may be Michael Kido, U.S. Department of 1211 Geneva 20—Switzerland, +41 22 submitted using any of the following Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 919 02 11, or by going to https:// methods: GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, webstore.iec.ch/home. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Washington, DC 20585–0121. (9) National Electrical Manufacturers www.regulations.gov. Follow the Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email: Association (NEMA) MG 1–2016, instructions for submitting comments. [email protected]. ‘‘Motors and Generators.’’ Email: For further information on how to Copies of NEMA MG 1–2016 may be SmallElectricMotors2017TP0047@ submit a comment, review other public purchases from National Electrical

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17005

Manufacturers Association, 1300 North I. Authority and Background and (4) certification and enforcement 17th Street, Suite 900, Arlington, DOE is authorized to establish and procedures. Relevant provisions of the Virginia 22209, +1 703 841 3200, or by amend energy conservation standards Act include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), going to https://www.nema.org. and test procedures for small electric energy conservation standards (42 For a further discussion of these motors and electric motors.1 (42 U.S.C. U.S.C. 6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. standards, see section IV.N. 6311(1)(A); 42 U.S.C. 6317(b)) The 6315), and the authority to require current DOE test procedures for small Table of Contents information and reports from electric motors appear at Title 10 of the manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316). EPCA I. Authority and Background Code of Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) includes specific authority to establish A. Authority section 431.444. The current DOE test test procedures and standards for small B. Background procedures for electric motors appear in electric motors. (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)) II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed appendix B to subpart B of 10 CFR part Rulemaking Federal energy efficiency III. Discussion 431 (‘‘Appendix B’’). The following requirements for covered equipment A. Scope of the Test Procedures for sections discuss DOE’s authority to established under EPCA generally Currently Regulated Small Electric amend test procedures for small electric supersede State laws and regulations Motors and Electric Motors motors and electric motors, as well as concerning energy conservation testing, 1. Definitions Relevant to ‘‘Small Electric relevant background information labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. Motor’’ regarding DOE’s consideration of test 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) 2. Scope of the Small Electric Motor Test procedures for these motors. The Federal testing requirements Procedure 3. Scope of the Electric Motor Test A. Authority consist of test procedures that Procedure manufacturers of covered equipment The Energy Policy and Conservation must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying B. Metric for Small Electric Motors Act of 1975, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’) 2 (42 1. Average and Nominal Efficiency to DOE that their equipment complies 2. Representations U.S.C. 6291–6317), among other things, with the applicable energy conservation C. Industry Standards for Existing Test authorizes DOE to regulate the energy standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 Procedures efficiency of a number of consumer U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and 1. IEEE 112–2017 products and industrial equipment. In (2) making representations about the 2. IEC 60034–2–1:2014 1978, Title III, Part C 3 of EPCA was efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C. D. Rated Output Power of Small Electric added by section 441(a) of Title IV of 6314(d)) Similarly, DOE uses these test Motors the National Energy Conservation Policy procedures to determine whether the 1. Background Act, Public Law 95–619 (November 9, equipment complies with relevant 2. NEMA Breakdown Torque Method 1978), which established the Energy standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 3. NEMA Service Factor Load Method Conservation Program for Certain E. Rated Values Specified for Testing Small U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) Electric Motors Industrial Equipment, and set forth a Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth 1. Rated Frequency variety of provisions designed to criteria and procedures for prescribing 2. Rated Load improve the energy efficiency of certain and amending test procedures for 3. Rated Voltage industrial equipment. Later, in 1992, the covered equipment. EPCA provides in F. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization, Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law relevant part that any test procedures and Other Topics 102–486 (October 24, 1992), further prescribed or amended under this 1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact amended EPCA by adding, among other section must be reasonably designed to 2. Harmonization with Industry Standards things, provisions governing the produce test results which reflect the 3. Other Test Procedure Topics regulation of small electric motors. energy efficiency, energy use, or G. Compliance Date and Waivers EPCA was further amended by the estimated annual operating cost of IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 American Energy Manufacturing covered equipment during a B. Review Under Executive Orders 13771 Technical Corrections Act, Public Law representative average use cycle or and 13777 112–210 (December 18, 2012), which period of use and not be unduly C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility explicitly permitted DOE to examine the burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. Act possibility of regulating ‘‘other motors’’ 6314(a)(2)) D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction in addition to those electric and small In addition, if DOE determines that a Act of 1995 electric motors that Congress had test procedure amendment is warranted, E. Review Under the Treasury and General already otherwise defined and required it must publish proposed test Government Appropriations Act, 1999 DOE to regulate. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A), procedures and offer the public an F. Review Under the National 6311(2)(B)(xiii); 42 U.S.C. 6317(b)) opportunity to present oral and written Environmental Policy Act of 1969 G. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Under EPCA, DOE’s energy comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)) H. Review Under Executive Order 12988 conservation program consists of four EPCA also requires that, at least once I. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) every 7 years, DOE evaluate test Reform Act of 1995 Federal energy conservation standards, procedures for each type of covered J. Review Under Executive Order 12630 equipment including small electric K. Review Under Treasury and General 1 EPCA authorized DOE to establish and amend motors, to determine whether amended Government Appropriations Act, 2001 energy conservation standards and test procedure test procedures would more accurately L. Review Under Executive Order 13211 for small electric motors pending a determination of feasibility and justification (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)), or fully comply with the requirements M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal for the test procedures to not be unduly Energy Administration Act of 1974 completed on July 10, 2006. 71 FR 38799 2 burdensome to conduct and be N. Description of Materials Incorporated by All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through America’s Water Reference reasonably designed to produce test Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115–270 results that reflect the energy efficiency, V. Public Participation (October 23, 2018). A. Submission of Comments 3 For editorial purposes, upon codification into energy use, and estimated operating B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment the U.S. Code, Part C was re-designated as Part A– costs during a representative average VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 1. use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) If the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17006 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

Secretary determines that a test Publication MG 1–1987.’’ (42 U.S.C. establishment of the required test procedure amendment is warranted, the 6311(13)(G)) (The term ‘‘NEMA’’ refers procedures, DOE establish energy Secretary must publish proposed test to the National Electrical Manufacturers conservation standards for those small procedures in the Federal Register, and Association.) EPCA directed DOE to electric motors for which test afford interested persons an opportunity establish a test procedure for small procedures were prescribed. (42 U.S.C. (of not less than 45 days’ duration) to electric motors for which DOE makes a 6317(b)(2)) In a final rule published on present oral and written data, views, determination that energy conservation March 9, 2010 (the ‘‘March 2010 ECS and arguments on the proposed test standards would be technologically final rule’’), DOE adopted energy procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)) DOE is feasible and economically justified, and conservation standards for small electric publishing this NOPR to satisfy the 7- would result in significant energy motors. 75 FR 10874.4 year review requirement specified in savings. (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)(1)) On July EPCA, which requires that DOE publish 10, 2006, DOE published its Subsequently, DOE updated the test either a final rule amending the test determination that energy conservation procedures for small electric motors on procedures or a determination that standards for certain polyphase and May 4, 2012 (the ‘‘May 2012 EM/SEM amended test procedures are not certain single-phase, capacitor-start, TP final rule’’). 77 FR 26608. The required. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) induction-run, small electric motors are existing test procedures for small technologically feasible and electric motors appear at 10 CFR B. Background economically justified, and would result 431.444, and incorporate certain EPCA defines ‘‘small electric motor,’’ in significant energy savings. 71 FR industry standards from the Institute of as ‘‘a NEMA general purpose alternating 38799. In a final rule published July 7, Electrical and Electronics Engineers current single-speed induction motor, 2009, DOE adopted test procedures for (‘‘IEEE’’) and Canadian Standards built in a two-digit frame number series small electric motors. 74 FR 32059. Association (‘‘CSA’’), as listed in Table in accordance with NEMA Standards EPCA also required that following I–1.

TABLE I–1—INDUSTRY STANDARDS CURRENTLY INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS

Equipment description Industry test procedure

Single-phase small electric motors ...... IEEE 114–2010, CSA C747–09. Polyphase small electric motors less than or equal to 1 horsepower ..... IEEE 112–2004 Test Method A, CSA C747–09. Polyphase small electric motors greater than 1 horsepower ...... IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B, CSA C390–10.

DOE published a request for the test procedures for small electric Procedure for Polyphase Induction information pertaining to the test motors and incorporate an additional Motors and Generators;’’ procedures for small electric motors and industry test method for testing small (2) Incorporate by reference an electric motors. 82 FR 35468 (July 31, electric motors and electric motors. alternative test procedure for the 2017) (the ‘‘July 2017 TP RFI’’). In the Comments regarding other matters measurement of energy efficiency in July 2017 TP RFI, DOE solicited public related to electric motors are not small electric motors and electric comments, data, and information on all addressed in this document. DOE also motors, the International aspects of, and any issues or problems notes that it received a number of Electrotechnical Commission (‘‘IEC’’) with, the existing DOE test procedure comments unrelated to either small 60034–2–1:2014, ‘‘Standard methods for for small electric motors, including on electric motors or electric motors—these determining losses and efficiency from any needed updates or revisions. DOE are also not addressed.6 tests (excluding machines for traction also discussed potential categories of vehicles);’’ II. Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed electric motors (as defined at 10 CFR Add definitions for ‘‘rated load’’, Rulemaking 431.12) that may be considered in future ‘‘rated output power’’, and ‘‘breakdown DOE test procedures. 82 FR at 35470– In this notice of proposed rulemaking torque’’ of small electric motors based 35474. At the request of commenters, (‘‘NOPR’’), DOE proposes to update 10 on NEMA MG 1–2016; and DOE extended the comment period for CFR part 431 as follows: Specify the frequency used for testing the July 2017 TP RFI in a notice (1) Incorporate by reference a revised and specify that manufacturers select published on August 30, 2017. 82 FR test procedure for the measurement of the voltage used for testing 41179. energy efficiency in small electric Table II–1 summarizes the proposed DOE received a number of comments motors and electric motors, the Institute test procedure amendments compared in response to the July 2017 TP RFI.5 of Electrical and Electronics Engineers to the current test procedure as well as This NOPR proposes to further clarify (‘‘IEEE’’) 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test the reason for the change.

4 A technical correction was published on April 5 All comments received in response to the July 6 Anonymous, No. 9, No. 11, No. 12, No. 13, No. 5, 2010, to correct the compliance date. 75 FR 2017 TP RFI are available for review at http:// 14, No. 15, and No. 17; Raymond Calore, No. 10. 17036. www.regulations.gov under docket number EERE– 2017–BT–TP–0047.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17007

TABLE II–1—SYNOPSIS OF THE NOTICE OF PROPOSED TEST PROCEDURE

Reason for proposed Current test procedure Proposed test procedure change

Incorporates by reference IEEE 112–2004 to measure —Adds IEEE 112–2017 as an alternative to IEEE 112– Achieve consistency with full-load efficiency of polyphase small electric motors. 2004. This latest version: industry update to IEEE —Updates certain requirements regarding measure- 112. ment instrument selection and accuracy. —Aligns core loss calculation with CSA 390–10 and Method 2–1–1B of IEC 60034–2–1:2014. Does not incorporate by reference IEC 60034–2–1:2014 —Adds Method 2–1–1B of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 as an Address suggestions of- alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B, IEEE fered in industry petition 112–2017 Test Method B and CSA C390–10. (EERE–2017–BT–TP– 0047–0030). —Adds method 2–1–1A of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 as an alternative to IEEE 114–2010, IEEE 112–2004, IEEE 112–2017 Test Method A and CSA C747–09. For Small Electric Motors: Specifies testing at rated load —Adds definition for ‘‘rated load’’ (and ‘‘rated output Harmonize with definitions but does not define that term. power’’ and ‘‘breakdown torque’’ to support the defini- from industry standards. tion of ‘‘rated load’’) of small electric motors based on NEMA MG 1–2016. For Small Electric Motors: Specifies testing at rated volt- —Adds a definition for rated voltage, which provides Improved repeatability of age and rated frequency, but does not define those that manufacturers select the voltage that is used for the test procedure. terms. testing, and a definition for rated frequency.

DOE has tentatively determined that those motors that otherwise satisfied the encouraging the increased production of the proposed amendments described in small electric motor definition but were IEC motors that, if unaddressed, would section III of this NOPR would not alter built in accordance with metric-units be inadvertently treated as unregulated the measured efficiency of small electric would be treated in a like manner as motors. See 74 FR 32059, 32062. motors or electric motors, and that the their counterparts that were built in The current definition at 10 CFR proposed test procedures would not be accordance with U.S. customary units of 431.442 lists the criteria that must be unduly burdensome to conduct. measurement. DOE offered three met for a motor to be defined as a ‘‘small Discussion of DOE’s proposed actions primary reasons in support of this electric motor.’’ Under these criteria, a are addressed in detail in section III of approach. small electric motor is: this NOPR. First, IEC-equivalent small electric • A NEMA general purpose motor 7 that Æ Uses alternating current, and III. Discussion motors generally can perform the identical functions of those motors Æ Is single-speed, and A. Scope of the Test Procedures for Æ Is an induction motor; and strictly defined under EPCA. DOE noted Æ Currently Regulated Small Electric that the differences in criteria between Is built in a two-digit frame size in accordance with NEMA Standards Motors and Electric Motors the relevant IEC and MG 1–1987 Publication MG 1–1987, including IEC metric This NOPR does not propose changes provisions lay in the nomenclature, equivalent motors. units of measurement, standard motor to the scope of the test procedure with See 10 CFR 431.442. respect to small electric motors and configurations and design details—not In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, electric motors. DOE discusses test in the function of the motor itself. NEMA supported maintaining all procedure scoping issues for currently Consequently, DOE concluded that in existing criteria specified in the current regulated motors in sections III.A.1 most general purpose applications, IEC regulatory definition. (NEMA, No. 24, at through III.A.3 of this document. motors can be used interchangeably p. 7) 8 No other commenters argued in with small electric motors built in favor of altering the current definition. 1. Definitions Relevant to ‘‘Small accordance with MG 1–1987. See 74 FR Electric Motor’’ Accordingly, DOE is not proposing to 32059, 32062. modify the definition of small electric EPCA defines the term ‘‘small electric Second, a broad exclusion of IEC- motor. However, a number of issues motor’’ as ‘‘a NEMA general purpose equivalent motors from DOE’s alternating-current single-speed regulatory framework would create a 7 In response to questions from NEMA and induction motor, built in a two-digit regulatory gap. Moreover, any efficiency various motor manufacturers, DOE issued a frame number series in accordance with standards applying to small electric guidance document that identifies some key design elements that manufacturers should consider when NEMA Standards Publication MG 1– motors built according to MG 1–1987’s determining whether a given individual motor 1987.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6311(13)(G) After specified units of measurement would meets the small electric motor definition and is considering comments received on its be readily applicable to IEC motors. See subject to the energy conservation standards 74 FR 32059, 32062. promulgated for small electric motors. See https:// proposal for establishing test procedures www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT- for evaluating small electric motor Finally, treating IEC-based motors as TP-0047-0082. efficiency, DOE adopted a modified falling outside of the small electric 8 A notation in this form provides a reference for version of this definition at 10 CFR motor definition would effectively information that is in the docket of DOE’s rulemaking to develop test procedures for small 431.442 in an attempt to clarify that the provide preferential treatment to electric motors and electric motors (EERE–2017– term also encompassed those motors manufacturers of IEC motors. DOE noted BT–TP–0047), which is maintained at http:// that were built as ‘‘IEC metric at the time that the creation of such a www.regulations.gov. This notation indicates that equivalent motors.’’ 74 FR 32059, situation would likely lead to a the statement preceding the reference is document number 0024 in the docket for small electric motor 32062. DOE made this adjustment to its reduction in the production of NEMA and electric motor test procedure rulemaking, and regulatory definition to ensure that (i.e., MG 1–1987-based) motors while appears at page 7 of that document.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17008 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

relevant to small electric motors were a lower output power limit of 0.125 hp. No. 16 at p. 1; Detech Inc., no. 18 at p. also raised and are discussed in the Id.. In the July 2017 TP RFI, DOE also 1; Lennox, No. 22 at p. 1–2) As noted, following sections. discussed applying an upper limit of 15 EPCA directed DOE to establish test hp for single-phase electric motors and procedures and energy conservation a. Synchronous Operation of 5 hp for 2-digit frame size polyphase standards for small electric motors, In the July 2017 TP RFI, DOE electric motors. Id.. except those motors that are a included a table of motor topologies, NEMA opposed changes to the component of a covered product or categorized by induction or current output power range of regulated covered equipment, (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)), synchronous operation. 82 FR 35468, motors. (NEMA, No. 24 at p. 6) and this NOPR, which focuses solely on 35471. In response to the July 2017 TP Advanced Energy commented that 15 test procedure issues, does not propose RFI, Advanced Energy commented that hp and 5 hp upper limits for single and altering the scope of applicability of that line-start permanent magnet motors are polyphase motors in two-digit frames procedure or related energy better classified as synchronous motors are reasonable. However, Advanced conservation standards. rather than as induction (or Energy noted that expanding the scope d. Air-Over Motors asynchronous) motors. Advanced to include motors in the subfractional Energy noted that these motors do not horsepower range may not lead to DOE defines the term ‘‘air-over operate on the principle of induction significant energy savings. (Advanced electric motor’’ as ‘‘an electric motor (i.e., production of electric current in a Energy, No. 25, at p. 2) The Pacific Gas rated to operate in and be cooled by the conductor by varying the magnetic field and Electric Company, Southern airstream of a fan or blower that is not applied to it), and the presence of the California Gas Company, San Diego Gas supplied with the motor and whose squirrel cage is only for starting the and Electric, and Southern California primary purpose is providing airflow to motor. (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at p. Edison (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘CA an application other than the motor 3) IOUs’’) commented in support of driving it.’’ 10 CFR 431.12. In the July DOE agrees that line-start permanent expanding the scope of small electric 2017 TP RFI, DOE sought comment on magnet motors are more properly motor test procedures to 0.125 hp defining ‘‘air-over electric motors’’— considered synchronous, rather than through 15 hp. The CA IOUs noted that among others—based on physical and induction, motors. Line-start permanent having greater information about the technical features of the motor. 82 FR magnet motors contain inductive small motor market has many benefits, 35468, 35473. elements, but these elements are used such as aiding in the development of Air-over electric motors do not have only to start the motor and bring it to new utility incentive programs. (CA a factory-attached fan and require a synchronous operation. As a result, the IOUs, No. 26 at p. 2) separate means of convecting air over inductive portions of the motor are not As stated in section III.A, DOE is not the frame of the motor. The external representative of the motor’s operation. proposing to modify the present scope cooling keeps internal motor winding As noted earlier, the definition of ‘‘small of test procedure applicability; DOE is temperatures beneath the motor’s electric motor’’ limits the test not proposing to include motors with insulation class’ permissible procedure’s scope to induction motors. additional horsepower ratings. If temperature rise or the maximum Accordingly, line-start permanent finalized as proposed, the test procedure temperature value specified by the magnet motors are best classified as would continue to apply to small manufacturer. Without external cooling, synchronous motors rather than electric motors as pursuant to EPCA. the air-over electric motor would induction motors, and would not fall See 10 CFR 431.444. overheat during continuous operation. under the small electric motor DOE requests comments on its Air-over motors can be found in direct- definition or be subject to the small proposal to maintain the current scope drive axial fans, blowers and several electric motor test procedure. of applicability, with respect to other applications. Single-phase air-over horsepower ratings, of the small electric motors are widely used in residential b. Rated Output Power motors test procedure. and commercial HVAC systems, appliances, and equipment as well as in DOE’s regulations provide a method c. Motors Used as a Component of agricultural applications. for evaluating small electric motor Another Covered Product efficiency. See 10 CFR 431.444. As part DOE reviewed catalog offerings of air- of its review of the current test Under EPCA, no standard prescribed over motors to understand the typical procedures for this equipment, DOE for small electric motors shall apply to configurations available on the market. discussed the possibility of revising the any such motor that is a component of Air-over motors can be broadly output power range for motors a covered product under section 322(a) categorized into open air-over and considered in the scope of applicability of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)), or of enclosed air-over motors and into of this test procedure. 82 FR 35468, covered equipment under section 340 polyphase and single-phase motors. In terms of physical construction, 35470. As explained in the 2017 TP RFI, (42 U.S.C. 6311). (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)(3). DOE did not find clear differences only motors with a power rating of In the July 2017 TP RFI, DOE requested between air-over motors and non-air- greater than or equal to 0.25 horsepower comment on the feasibility of testing motors that are components of other over motors. For example, there is little (‘‘hp’’) and less than or equal to 3 hp 9 equipment. While not offering comment difference between a totally-enclosed are subject to the regulations in subpart on testing, NEMA, AHAM and AHRI, fan-cooled motor (‘‘TEFC’’) and a X to 10 CFR part 431. 82 FR 35468, McMillan Electric Company, Detech totally-enclosed air-over motor 35470. DOE used the existing scope for Inc., and Lennox International indicated (‘‘TEAO’’). In fact, a user could remove small electric motors as a starting point, that they do not support regulating the fan on a TEFC motor, and then place and reviewed market data to determine motors as components of covered the motor in an airstream of the whether the limits could be revised. products or equipment but instead application to obtain an air-over motor Specifically, DOE discussed considering supported a finished-product approach configuration. Further, the absence of a 9 For certain motor configurations within this to energy efficiency regulations. (NEMA, fan is not a differentiating feature as range, DOE has not established standards. See 10 No. 24 at p. 1; AHAM and AHRI, No. 21 with other motor categories, such as CFR 431.446. at p. 2–3; McMillian Electric Company, totally-enclosed non-ventilated

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17009

(‘‘TENV’’) motors, which do not have definition of an air-over electric motor ‘‘thermal equilibrium’’ in its internal fans or blowers and are similar as a motor that does not thermally recommended air-over motor definition in construction to TEAO motors. stabilize without the application of is defined in the referenced test Based on these observations, DOE external cooling by a free flow of air standards, but that DOE could consider initially finds that what differentiates during a rated temperature test adding a definition for that term as part air-over motors from non-air-over according to either IEEE 112–2004, CSA of the air-over motor definition. motors is that air-over motors require C747–09, or CSA C390–10 for polyphase (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at p. 5) external cooling by a free flow of air to motors or IEEE 114–2010 or CSA C747– Finally, Lennox commented that air- avoid overheating during continuous 09 for single-phase motors.’’ 82 FR over motors are already defined at 10 operation. That is, the internal motor 35468, 35472–35473. CFR 431.12, and did not see a need to winding temperatures would exceed the NEMA and Advanced Energy asserted make changes to this definition. maximum temperature value that it would be extremely difficult or (Lennox, No. 22, at p. 4) corresponding to the motor’s insulation impossible to identify air-over motors class or specified by the manufacturer. by physical and technical features As stated in section III.A of this The risk of overheating can be verified alone. (NEMA, No. 24 at p. 6; Advanced NOPR, DOE is not proposing to modify by observing whether the motor’s Energy, No. 25 at p. 4) Advanced Energy the scope of applicability of the current temperature keeps rising during a rated stated that air-over motors could be test procedures for small electric motors load temperature test instead of defined by their inability to achieve a and electric motors. The definition of stabilizing. During a rated load stable temperature under standard test air-over electric motors implicates temperature test, the motor is loaded at conditions. (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at equipment beyond those electric and its rated full load using a dynamometer p. 4) Advanced Energy suggested that small electric motors DOE already until it is thermally stable. The current the term ‘‘rated temperature test’’ be regulates under subpart B of 10 CFR part industry standards referenced by the replaced by ‘‘rated load temperature 431. As a result, DOE is not proposing existing DOE small electric motors test test,’’ and emphasized the need to to amend the definition at this time. procedure each contain a rated load specify that the external cooling air 2. Scope of the Small Electric Motor temperature test, wherein thermal comes from a source that is not Test Procedure stability is defined as the condition mechanically attached to the motor. where the motor temperature does not Advanced Energy suggested that air- In the March 2010 ECS final rule, change by more than 1 ßC over either 30 over motors be defined as ‘‘a motor that DOE identified motor topologies that minutes or 15 minutes, depending on does not reach thermal equilibrium (or met the small electric motor definition. the motor category (See section 5.8.4.4 thermal stability) during a rated load DOE reviewed the topologies of of IEEE 112–2004 and section 10.3.1.3 of temperature test according to test alternating-current single-speed IEEE 114–2010). Further, specifying that standards incorporated by reference, induction motors, identifying six in external cooling is obtained by a free without the application of forced total: Split-phase, shaded-pole, flow of air would differentiate air-over cooling by a free flow of air from an capacitor-start induction-run (‘‘CSIR’’), motors from other totally-enclosed pipe- external device not mechanically capacitor-start capacitor-run (‘‘CSCR’’), ventilated motors. connected to the motor.’’ (Advanced permanent-split capacitor (‘‘PSC’’), and In the July 2017 TP RFI, DOE Energy, No. 25 at pp. 4–5) Advanced polyphase (see descriptions in Table III– discussed potentially revising the Energy further added that the term 1). 75 FR 10874, 10882.

TABLE III–1—ALTERNATING CURRENT, SINGLE-SPEED, INDUCTION MOTOR TOPOLOGIES

Topology Description

Permanent-Split Capacitor ...... A capacitor motor * having the same value of capacitance for both starting and running condi- tions. (MG 1–2014, 1.20.3.3.2). Capacitor-Start Induction-Run ...... A capacitor motor * in which the capacitor phase is in the circuit only during the starting pe- riod. (MG 1–2014, 1.20.3.3.1). Capacitor-Start Capacitor-Run ...... A capacitor motor * using different values of effective capacitance for the starting and running conditions. (MG 1–2014, 1.20.3.3.3). Shaded-Pole ...... A single-phase induction motor provided with an auxiliary short-circuited winding or windings displaced in magnetic position from the main winding. (MG 1–2014, 1.20.3.4). Split-phase ...... A single-phase induction motor equipped with an auxiliary winding, displaced in magnetic posi- tion from, and connected in parallel with the main winding. (MG 1–2014, 1.20.3.1). Polyphase induction, squirrel cage ...... A polyphase induction motor in which the secondary circuit (squirrel-cage winding) consists of a number of conducting bars having their extremities connected by metal rings or plates at each end. (MG 1–2014, 1.18.1.1). * A capacitor motor is a single-phase induction motor with a main winding arranged for direct connection to a source of power and an auxiliary winding connected in series with a capacitor. (MG 1–2014 1.20.3.3).

Of these six topologies, DOE conservation standards and test response to the July 2017 TP RFI. Many concluded that three would satisfy the procedures regarding these three of these comments addressed whether small electric motor definition: CSIR, topologies that meet the definition of a the test procedure should be expanded CSCR, and certain polyphase motors. Id. small electric motor. to apply to additional motors. Parties Therefore, DOE added subpart X of 10 DOE received a number of comments commenting on the test procedure’s CFR part 431 to address energy related to the test procedure’s scope in scope are listed in Table III–2:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17010 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE III–2—PARTIES COMMENTING ON THE TEST PROCEDURE’S SCOPE

Party Affiliation

Advanced Energy ...... Laboratory. AHAM and AHRI (Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers and Air-conditioning, Heating, and Re- Trade Association—Manufacturer. frigeration Institute). Anonymous Commenters (7 total) ...... Anonymous. APSP (Association of Pool and Spa Professionals) ...... Trade Association—Manufacturer. CA IOUs (Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Gas Company, San Diego Gas and Utility. Electric, Southern California Edison). CEC (California Energy Commission) ...... State Government. Detech Inc. (Detector Technology Inc.) ...... Manufacturer. EEI (Edison Electric Institute) ...... Association—Utility. Gent University ...... University. Joint Advocates (American Council for an Energy-efficient Economy, Appliance Standards Awareness Efficiency Advocate. Project, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance). Lennox (Lennox International Inc.) ...... Manufacturer. McMillan Electric Company ...... Manufacturer. NEMA (National Electrical Manufacturers Association) ...... Trade Association—Manufacturer. Raymond Calore ...... Individual.

As stated, DOE is not proposing to Advanced Energy, No. 25 at p. 9) NEMA does not propose to adopt NEMA’s modify the test procedure’s scope; stated that the NEMA nominal full load suggestion to amend the metric for small instead, the test procedure would efficiency metric is established in the electric motor energy conservation continue to apply only to small electric industry and is harmonized with global standards (i.e., average full-load motors that are currently subject to the IEC standards. NEMA asserted that the efficiency). DOE’s existing test procedure at 10 CFR difference between the metrics used for 2. Representations 431.444. electric motor standards and small In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, 3. Scope of the Electric Motor Test electric motor standards causes AHAM and AHRI commented that if Procedure confusion in the industry. (NEMA, No. 24 at p. 8) Advanced Energy stated that DOE elects to expand the scope of the As noted, this NOPR also addresses if DOE decided to use the NEMA small electric motors and electric the test procedure for electric motors in nominal efficiency metric for small motors test procedures, DOE should not response to a petition for rulemaking. electric motors, DOE would need to make these newly expanded test The current electric motor test ensure that the translation from average procedures mandatory, including for procedure is at subpart B of 10 CFR part efficiencies to nominal efficiencies representations, until or unless energy 431. DOE is not proposing any changes would not change the stringency of conservation standards are established. to the scope of applicability of the existing energy conservation standards. (AHAM and AHRI, No. 21 at p. 4) electric motor test procedure. (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at p. 8) As discussed in section III.A of this B. Metric for Small Electric Motors The nominal efficiency values for NOPR, DOE is not proposing to expand electric motors are based on a sequence the scope of applicability of the small DOE’s existing test procedure for of discretized standard values in NEMA electric motors test procedure. small electric motors requires that motor efficiency of this equipment be Standard MG 1–2016 Table 12–10, and C. Industry Standards for Existing Test determined using the average full-load are familiar to motor users. Under this Procedures efficiency of the small electric motor’s approach, the full-load efficiency is identified on the electric motor The DOE test procedures rely on basic model. 10 CFR 431.445(b)(1). This industry standards that are incorporated formulation of efficiency represents the nameplate by a nominal efficiency selected from Table 12–10 that shall not by reference at 10 CFR 431.443 and 10 mechanical output power at full-load CFR 431.15. Specifically, the existing (i.e., the rated output power) divided by be greater than the average efficiency of a large population of motors of the same DOE test procedures for small electric the electrical input power, and is motors and electric motors rely on the expressed as a percentage. DOE further design. However, NEMA has not adopted a comparable set of following test methods: requires manufacturers to test at least (1) For polyphase small electric five units of a basic model to determine standardized values for small electric motors. Because no standardized motors of less than or equal to 1 hp, the limit on represented value of either Section 6.3 ‘‘Efficiency Test average full-load efficiency by applying nominal values are published for small Method A, Input-Output’’ of IEEE 112– the equations at 10 CFR 431.445(c)(3). electric motors, DOE is unable to 2004, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test Procedure for See 10 CFR 431.445(c)(2). consider at this time their appropriateness as a small electric Polyphase Induction Motors and 1. Average and Nominal Efficiency motors performance metric. Absent Generators;’’ or CSA C747–09, ‘‘Energy In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, standardized nominal values for small Efficiency Test Methods for Small NEMA and Advanced Energy suggested electric motors, DOE is unable to Motors’’ (10 CFR 431.444(b)(2)); that DOE’s test procedure use the NEMA ascertain whether existing energy (2) For polyphase small electric nominal, rather than average, full load conservation standards would require motors of greater than 1 hp and electric efficiency metric for small electric the same level of stringency if based on motors, either Section 6.4 ‘‘Efficiency motors.10 (NEMA, No. 24 at p. 8; nominal values. As a result, this NOPR Test Method B, Input-Output with Loss Segregation’’ of IEEE 112–2004; or CSA 10 Currently, small electric motor efficiency is motor efficiency is based on nominal full load C390–10, ‘‘Test Methods, Marking based on average full load efficiency while electric efficiency. Requirements, and Energy Efficiency

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17011

Levels for Three-Phase Induction determine whether they still represent standards, DOE proposes to modify 10 Motors’’ (10 CFR 431.444(b)(3); 10 CFR the most current procedures accepted CFR 431.15 and 431.443 by 431.16 and Appendix B); and and used by industry. After the July incorporating by reference the latest (3) For single-phase small electric 2017 TP RFI comment period closed version of IEEE 112, while retaining the motors: either IEEE 114–2010, ‘‘IEEE (September 13, 2017), IEEE approved an incorporation by reference of the IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Single- updated edition of the IEEE 112 112–2004 standard. In addition, section Phase Induction Motors;’’ or CSA C747– standard on February 14, 2018. Section III.C.2 of this document addresses DOE’s 09 (10 CFR 431.444(b)(1)). III.C.1 of this document describes DOE’s consideration of incorporating by In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, Advanced Energy commented generally consideration of the updated IEEE 112– reference an additional industry that the existing test procedures for 2017 standard. The other referenced standard also commonly used by the small electric motors do not require any industry standards incorporated into industry. revisions. (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at DOE’s test procedure developed by CSA Table III–3 summarizes the industry p. 9) Comments suggesting revisions to remain current or have been reaffirmed standards DOE proposes to incorporate 11 specific aspects of the current test without changes. All of these by reference to use as the basis for procedure (e.g., scope, metric, and standards remain among the most measuring motor efficiency of currently incorporation of new test methods) are commonly used industry consensus regulated small electric motors and discussed elsewhere in this document standards for determining motor electric motors. The specific industry (see sections III.A.2, III.B, and III.C.2). efficiency. Therefore, as explained later standards that would be referenced are DOE conducted a review of each of in this section, in recognition of the listed in section IV.N of this document. the referenced industry standards to wide acceptance of these testing

TABLE III–3—SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED INDUSTRY TEST METHODS

Equipment Description Industry test methods

Small Electric Motors ...... Single-phase ...... • IEEE 114–2010.* • CSA C747–09.* • IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Test Method 2–1–1A. Polyphase with rated output power less or equal • IEEE 112–2004 Test Method A.* to 1 hp. • IEEE 112–2017 Test Method A. • CSA C747–09.* • IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Test Method 2–1–1A. Polyphase with rated output power greater than 1 • IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B.* hp. • IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B. • CSA C390–10.* • IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Test Method 2–1–1B. Electric Motors ...... Electric Motors—regulated at 10 CFR 431.25 ...... • IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B.* • IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B. • CSA C390–10.* • IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Test Method 2–1–1B. * These IEEE and CSA standards are already incorporated by reference in the current test procedure and would be maintained as part of this proposal.

1. IEEE 112–2017 power measurement, and frequency 2–1–1B approach of IEC 60034–2– measurement. Section 4 also indicates 1:2014. On February 14, 2018, IEEE approved that alcohol thermometers are no longer Previously, when DOE added CSA IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test permitted for measuring temperature in 390–10 as a permissible test method for Procedure for Polyphase Induction the 2017 revision of IEEE 112. small electric motors, DOE concluded Motors and Generators.’’ DOE The method for calculating core loss that the differences between IEEE 112– conducted a full review of the revised used in Section 6.4, ‘‘Efficiency test 2004 and CSA 390–10 are minimal, and standard to identify any changes made method B—Input-output with loss both tests will result in an accurate and relative to the industry test methods that segregation’’ was revised for the 2017 similar measurement of efficiency. 77 are incorporated by reference from IEEE edition of IEEE 112. Core loss at each FR 26608, 26622. IEEE 112–2017 uses 112–2004. load point is now determined directly the same core-loss calculation as CSA Section 4, ‘‘Measurements’’, of IEEE based on the no-load test data at the C390–10. However, DOE has initially 112–2017 includes several updates stator core voltage instead of being determined that the core-loss regarding instrument selection and calculated by subtracting friction, calculation in IEEE 112–2017 may result measurement accuracy. Specifically, the windage, and resistive core losses from in a difference in the measured 2017 revision includes updates to the total no-load losses. This change in efficiency value as compared to the permissible limits of error for general calculation methodology for core losses core-loss calculation under the currently measurement instrumentation, the aligns the IEEE 112–2017 Test Method referenced IEEE 112–2004. In the small limits of error for torque measurement, B with the efficiency test method electric motor and electric motor final and the limits of error for speed specified in CSA C390–10, currently rule published on May 4, 2012, measurement. In addition, the 2017 incorporated by reference at 10 CFR commenters indicated the difference in revision specifies new requirements for 431.444(b)(3). DOE further notes that efficiency outcome between IEEE 112– limits of error in current measurement, this change also aligns with the Method 2004 and CSA C390–10 to be within 0.2

11 Both CSA C747–09 and CSA C390–10 have been reaffirmed in 2014 and 2015, respectively.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17012 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

percent. 77 FR 26608, 26622. As alternative test method for small electric test equipment but with different discussed, the core loss calculation in motors and electric motors. DOE operators and at different times of day; IEEE 112–2017 aligns with the core loss published a notice regarding its receipt and (2) well below the typical variation calculation in CSA C390–10. Based on of these petitions in November 2017. of 10 percent of losses when different this comparison of IEEE 112–2004 and See 82 FR 50844 (November 2, 2017) labs are used to test the same motor. CSA C390–10, the impact of the core- (hereinafter, ‘‘the November 2017 notice (NEMA, No. 28.3 at p. 2) NEMA loss calculation between IEEE 112–2004 of petition’’) (announcing the receipt of commented that incorporating IEC and IEEE 112–2017 should be no greater petitions from UL and NEMA seeking 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B test than 0.2 percent. To avoid any potential the incorporation of certain test method as an alternative to the IEEE need to retest motors that have relied on methods from IEC 60034–2–1:2014 into 112–2004 Test Method B and CSA IEEE 112–2004 for purposes of DOE’s regulations). C390–10 test methods would reduce the compliance, DOE is proposing to Specifically, NEMA’s petition unnecessary burden of performing a incorporate the IEEE 112–2017 test requested that DOE incorporate IEC second test for motors originally tested methods as alternatives to the test 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B 12 as to the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– methods incorporated in the current test an alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test 1B test method. (NEMA, No. 28.3 at pp. procedure, while retaining the currently Method B and CSA C390–10, which are 3–4) NEMA did not specify the number incorporated IEEE 112–2004 methods. currently referenced in Appendix B. of motors that would benefit from such DOE has initially determined that IEEE (NEMA, No. 28.2 at p.1) UL requested burden reduction. 112–2017 will result in an accurate and that (1) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 test method The UL petition included two papers similar measurement of efficiency as 2–1–1B be approved for Appendix B comparing the IEC 60034–2–1 test compared to IEEE 112–2004. Given the and section 431.444 of 10 CFR part 431 methods with the respective IEEE and variable nature of tested efficiency (as an alternative to CSA C390–10) and CSA standards. The first paper was the values for electric motors and small (2) that IEC 60034–2–1:2014 test method Angers et. al. study, that concluded that electric motors due to manufacturing 2–1–1A be approved for section 431.444 the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B and material differences, the variation of 10 CFR part 431 (as an alternative to test method provides results that are in the calculated efficiency is not likely CSA C747–09). (UL, No. 29.1 at p.1) very closely aligned with the IEEE 112– to result in any significant change in The NEMA and UL petitions included 2004 Test Method B and CSA C390–10 overall energy efficiency test results. and referenced papers that compare the test methods. (UL, No 29.2 at pp. 1–8) Since the introduction of the IEEE 112 testing methodologies presented in IEC The second paper, written by IEEE standard in 1964, IEEE has made 60034–2–1:2014 and the IEEE and CSA member Wenping Cao, compared the periodic updates to the standard to keep standards currently referenced in the IEEE 112 and IEC 60034–2–1 standards. the test methods current with small electric motors and electric The study evaluated test results from six improvements to instrumentation and motors test procedures at 10 CFR part induction motors with ratings between test techniques, and incorporating this 431. 5.5 and 150 kW (7.5 to 200 hp) and update would help to align DOE’s test The NEMA petition included a ‘‘work determined that the overall power losses procedures with current industry paper’’ that summarizes an evaluation found using the two standards is practice. Accordingly, DOE proposes to conducted by the NEMA Motor and similar. The resulting efficiency values incorporate by reference IEEE 112–2017 Generator Section technical committee, were found to be equal or otherwise Test Method A and Test Method B as which found that the IEC 60034–2– closely aligned, with respective alternatives to the industry test methods 1:2014 Method 2–1–1B test method was maximum and mean deviations of 0.1 that are currently incorporated by a suitable alternative to the IEEE 112– and 0.03 percentage points. (UL, No. reference from IEEE 112–2004 (see 10 2004 Test Method B and CSA C390–10 29.3 at p. 7) UL requested that DOE CFR 431.15 and 10 CFR 431.443). This test methods. (NEMA, No. 28.3 at p. 1) incorporate IEC 60034–2–1:2014 proposal would further harmonize the This evaluation relied on (1) Method 2–1–1B as an alternative to IEEE permitted test methods under subparts comparison of instrumentation 112–2004 Test Method B and CSA X (for small electric motors) and B (for accuracy, test method, and calculation C390–10 because of an increased use of electric motors) of 10 CFR part 431 and approach among the IEC, IEEE, and CSA the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– align measurement and instrumentation industry standards, (2) analysis of test 1B. (UL, No 29.1 at p.1) In its comments, requirements with industry practice, results from over 500 motors tested at UL did not quantify how broadly the while ensuring that motors that have the Hydro-Quebec Research Institute, IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B is demonstrated compliance under IEEE and (3) reference to one scientific currently being used. 112–2004 methods do not require research paper (the ‘‘Angers et al. Comments in response to the retesting. paper’’) which also concluded that all November 2017 notice of petition are DOE requests comment on its three methods provide results that are discussed in sections III.C.2.a through proposal to incorporate by reference very closely aligned. (NEMA, No. 28.3 at III.C.2.b of this notice of proposed IEEE 112–2017 Test Method A and Test pp. 1–3) NEMA’s work paper claimed rulemaking. Method B as alternatives to the that the results of the Hydro-Quebec DOE also received several anonymous currently incorporated industry test Research Institute testing typically comments in response to the November standards in IEEE 112–2004. In showed a loss deviation of less than ±2 2017 notice of petition. Those particular, DOE requests data comparing percent. The NEMA petition letter also comments, however, raised topics test results of these standards stated a loss difference of 2 percent is unrelated to the test procedures at issue (1) within the variation of two tests and are, consequently, not addressed. 2. IEC 60034–2–1:2014 performed using the same motor and Separate from DOE’s July 2017 TP a. Method 2–1–1A RFI, NEMA and Underwriter 12 IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B (2014), Among multiple testing methods Laboratories (‘‘UL’’) independently ‘‘Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 2–1: Standard provided in IEC 60034–2–1:2014, methods for determining losses and efficiency from submitted written petitions requesting tests (excluding machines for traction vehicles),’’ Method 2–1–1A ‘‘Direct measurement of that certain portions of IEC 60034–2– ‘‘Summation of losses, additional load losses input and output’’ is the standard’s 1:2014 be adopted as a permitted according to the method of residual loss.’’ preferred testing method for single-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17013

phase motors. It is based on direct motors under test should be operated at standards. (NEMA, No. 80 at p. 1) measurement of electrical input power the ‘‘required load’’ until thermal Advanced Energy commented that, of its to the motor and mechanical output equilibrium is achieved. As required analysis of 117 motors, 112 were found power (in the form of torque and speed) under DOE’s test procedure, the motor to have full-load efficiency differences from the motor. This approach is must be rated and tested at rated load. of ±0.2 or fewer percentage points analogous to the methods of the other For clarity and consistency, DOE between their respective IEC 60034–2– industry standards, IEEE 114–2010 and proposes to modify these instructions by 1:2014-measured and IEEE 112 Test CSA C747–09, currently incorporated by replacing the term ‘‘required load’’ with Method B-measured efficiency values. reference for testing single-phase ‘‘rated load.’’ (Advanced Energy, No. 81 at p. 2) motors, and IEEE 112–2004 Test Method DOE tentatively agrees with NEMA Advanced Energy commented that, A, currently incorporated by reference and Advanced Energy that IEC 60034– although the comparison was performed for the purpose of testing polyphase 2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A is likely to using IEC 60034–2–1:2007, the 2014 motors of output power less than or produce accurate and reproducible version is similar enough that results equal to one horsepower. results that are consistent with results should continue to hold.15 (Advanced Regarding equivalency among IEC from the other test methods permitted Energy, No. 81 at p. 5) On that basis, 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A, IEEE under subparts X and B of 10 CFR part Advanced Energy considered the loss 114–2010, and CSA C749–09, Advanced 431. In light of this likely outcome, DOE segregation methods of IEC 60034–2– Energy commented that previous proposes to incorporate by reference IEC 1:2014 and IEEE 112–2004 Test Method comparisons finding equivalence 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A as an B to be in close agreement with each between the latter two still held, but alternative to currently incorporated other. (Advanced Energy, No. 81 at p. 2) that Method 2–1–1A had not been industry testing standards IEEE 112– Advanced Energy also generally formally compared to the others through 2004 Test Method A and CSA C747–09 supported the assessments of variation testing. (Advanced Energy, No. 81 at p. in 10 CFR 431.433. This proposal would between IEC 60034–2–1 and IEEE 112– 4 that IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– further harmonize DOE’s test 2004 Test Method B: 1A is likely to produce results that are procedures with current industry • Regarding UL’s claim that IEEE accurate, reproducible, and consistent practice and reduce manufacturer test 112–2004 Test Method B/IEC 60034–2– with results from the other test methods burden (see section III.F.1 for more 1:2014 Method 2–1–1B alignment is less permitted under subparts X and B of 10 details). than 0.1 percentage points, Advanced CFR part 431. DOE requests comment on its Energy commented that motors of lower To identify ways to resolve the proposal to incorporate by reference IEC rated output power, especially, concern surrounding the torque 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A as an sometimes varied by more. (Advanced correction procedure in IEC 60034–2– alternative to currently incorporated Energy, No. 81 at p. 5) 1:2014 Method 2–1–1A, DOE reviewed industry testing standards IEEE 112– • Regarding differences in IEEE 112– analogous provisions in other industry 2004 Test Method A and CSA C747–09. 2004 Test Method B/IEC 60034–2– standards. IEEE 114–2010 13 and CSA In particular, DOE requests data 1:2014 Method 2–1–1B alignment across C747–09 14 contain more detailed comparing the average full-load motors with respective energy descriptions of torque correction efficiency test results of those standards. conservation standards at Subparts B procedures, but both state that torque DOE requests comments on its proposal and X of 10 CFR part 431, Advanced correction is not required when torque to limit torque measurement, when Energy commented that the results of its is measured using either an inline, using IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– analysis would hold for motors of both rotating torque transducer or stator 1A, to either in-line, shaft-coupled, subparts, but that error may grow as reaction torque transducer. The rotating torque transducers or motor output power falls. (Advanced insufficient specificity of IEC 60034–2– stationary, stator reaction torque Energy, No. 81 at p. 4) 1:2014 Method 2–1–1A regarding transducers. • Regarding a Hydro-Quebec study dynamometer torque correction can be b. Method 2–1–1B finding a characteristic loss estimation ± avoided by using a torque measurement Among multiple testing methods difference of 2 percent of losses method that does not require correction. provided in IEC 60034–2–1:2014, between IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B As a result, DOE proposes to incorporate Method 2–1–1B ‘‘Summation of losses, and IEC 60034–2–1, Advanced Energy by reference the provisions of IEC additional load losses according to the commented that this result 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A as a method of residual loss’’ is the IEC approximately aligned with its own. permitted alternative to IEEE 114–2010 (Advanced Energy, No. 81 at p. 5) 60034–2–1:2014 standard’s preferred • and CSA C747–09, but to limit torque testing method for three-phase motors. It Advanced Energy also commented measurement to methods which do not is based on the indirect calculation of that although the core loss estimation require dynamometer torque correction. motor losses using a combination of method varied somewhat between IEEE Specifically, DOE proposes to limit measured values (e.g., winding 112–2004 Test Method B, IEC 60034–2– torque measurement, when using IEC resistance) and assumptions so that 1:2014, and CSA C390–10, the 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A, to direct measurement of motor torque is difference was modest and, further, that either in-line, shaft-coupled, rotating not needed. This is analogous to the a 2018 update of IEEE 112 was expected torque transducers or stationary, stator methods of the other industry standards, to eliminate it. (Advanced Energy, No. reaction torque transducers, and to IEEE 112–2004 and CSA C390–10, 81 at pp. 3–4) reflect these changes in 10 CFR currently incorporated by reference for In addition to the studies submitted 431.444(b)(1) and 431.444(b)(2). testing polyphase motors of output by the stakeholders, DOE notes that a In addition, the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 power greater than one horsepower. recent comparison of results from a 2–1–1A test method specifies that In response to the November 2017 round robin between 11 participants notice of petition, NEMA encouraged 13 Section 5.2.1.1.1 of IEEE 114–2010 addressees 15 Advanced Energy’s study published in 2011, when torque correction is required. DOE to recognize IEC 60034–2–1:2014 before the 2014 version of IEC 60034–2–1 was 14 Section 6.7.1 of CSA C747–09 addresses when as valid for demonstrating compliance available, but Advanced Energy expects the torque correction is required. with the DOE energy conservation conclusion to extend to 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17014 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

concluded that the same motor tested at manufacturing and material differences, rate and test their equipment at a multiple locations showed a maximum the variation in the calculated efficiency selected load point within an allowable deviation of ±0.4 percentage points, is insignificant and not likely to result range that reflects a manufacturer using the same IEEE 112–2004 Test in any manipulation of energy efficiency preference (e.g., a nominal value, Method B for each test.16 DOE further test results. Therefore, DOE proposes to increasing the service factor, or the load notes that the largest difference reported incorporate by reference the relevant resulting in the highest efficiency) and by stakeholders between measured provisions of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 that more appropriately matches the efficiency values using IEC 60034–2– Method 2–1–1B as a permitted operating conditions likely to be 1:2014 and IEEE 112–2004 Test Method alternative to the current test methods experienced by operators of small B did not exceed ±0.2 percentage points. IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B and CSA electric motors. (Advanced Energy, No. 81 at p. 2). This C390–10 in 10 CFR 431.15 and 10 CFR In the July 2017 TP RFI, DOE difference is comparable to the 431.443. Allowing manufacturers to test described potential methods of difference in efficiency observed when according to IEC 60034–2–1:2014 determining motor output power based testing using CSA 390–10 and IEEE Method 2–1–1B would further on factors other than manufacturer 112–2004 Test Method B. DOE also harmonize DOE’s test procedures with declaration, including deriving motor determined that given the variable current industry practice and reduce output power from either breakdown nature of tested efficiency values for manufacturer test burden (see section torque or service factor load. 82 FR electric motors and small electric III.F.1 for more details). 35468, 35476–77. motors due to manufacturing and DOE requests comment on its Details of the options considered and material differences, the variation in the proposal to incorporate by reference IEC the proposed approach are discussed in calculated efficiency is not likely to 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B as an sections III.D.2 and III.D.3 of this result in any significant change in alternative to the currently incorporated document. overall energy efficiency test results. industry testing standards IEEE 112– 2. NEMA Breakdown Torque Method Regarding variance in the core loss 2004 Test Method B and CSA C390–10 calculation between IEEE 112 Test and to IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B. In DOE investigated whether breakdown Method B and IEC 60034–2–1:2014 particular, DOE requests data comparing torque (a directly measurable quantity) Method 2–1–1B, the proposed test results of those standards. corresponds to rated output power, and incorporation by reference of the if it could be used as a means for updated IEEE 112–2017 test methods is D. Rated Output Power of Small Electric determining rated output power. NEMA expected to resolve this discrepancy and Motors MG 1–2016, section 10.34, specifies that further reduce differences in test results 1. Background the horsepower rating of a small or between the IEEE 112–2017 Test medium single-phase induction motor is Method B and IEC 60034–2–1:2014 The current regulations for small based on breakdown torque. Breakdown Method 2–1–1B. See section III.C.1 for electric motors specify that the metric torque is defined in section 1.50 of details on this aspect of DOE’s proposal. for energy conservation standards, NEMA MG 1–2016 as the maximum When amending a test procedure, average full-load efficiency, is to be torque which the motor will develop DOE must determine the extent to measured at ‘‘full rated load.’’ 10 CFR with rated voltage and frequency which a proposed procedure will alter 431.442. However, the industry testing applied without an abrupt drop in the measured energy efficiency of a standards discussed in section III.C do speed.17 In concept, breakdown torque given type of covered equipment when not provide a method to determine the describes the maximum torque the compared to the current procedure. (See rated load of the tested unit. Rather, the motor can develop without slowing 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(C) (incorporating standards rely on a manufacturer- down and stalling. The maximum the procedural steps of 42 U.S.C. specified output power, which is torque over the entire speed range could 6293(e) for electric motors)) In view of typically listed on a motor’s nameplate. occur at a different condition (e.g., the the comments regarding the comparison Motors subject to the test procedures for motor start-up, zero speed condition) among IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B, small electric motors are capable of than the breakdown condition. CSA 390–10, and IEC 60034–2–1:2014 operating over a continuous range of Therefore, breakdown torque Method 2–1–1B, including the results of loads. For example, a motor that is rated corresponds to a local maximum torque the Hydro Quebec study, the paper at 1 hp is also capable of delivering 0.75 (on a plot of torque versus speed) that written by IEEE member Wenping Cao, hp, but likely with a different speed, is nearest to the rated torque. The and the Advanced Energy study, along torque, and efficiency than those of phrase ‘‘abrupt drop in speed’’ with the additional information when it is delivering its rated load of 1 corresponds to the expectation that the gathered by DOE, DOE initially hp. The output power of the motor motor will slow down or stall if the load concludes that (1) these methods are not depends on the load and the design of increases and indicates that minor identical, but the differences between the motor. Therefore, the load point at reductions in speed observed due to these standards are within the expected which the motor must be tested is not measurement sensitivities are not measurement variation of the existing an intrinsic parameter to the motor, but considered. test procedure; (2) all three tests would rather a parameter that must be defined The breakdown torque for a specific result in measurements of efficiency or specified. The test’s load point is horsepower rating is specified as a range that would yield the same results with relevant to efficiency testing because the as a function of input frequency and respect to motor compliance; and (3) efficiency of small electric motors varies synchronous speed of the motor in two given the variable nature of tested according to load. tables: Table 10–5 of NEMA MG 1–2016, efficiency values for electric motors and To provide for more accurate which applies to induction motors, small electric motors due to comparisons of similar motors from except PSC and shaded-pole motors; different manufacturers, DOE and Table 10–6 of NEMA MG 1–2016, 16 Hydro-Quebec Research Institute, NEMA Motor considered specifying objective rating which applies to shaded-pole and PSC Round Robin, November 2018. Motor Summit 2018 points. However, DOE recognizes that in Proceedings. Available at https:// www.motorsummit.ch/sites/default/files/2018-11/ some instances it may be more 17 NEMA MG 1–2016 does not quantify what MS18_proceedings.pdf. appropriate to allow manufacturers to would constitute ‘‘an abrupt drop in speed.’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17015

motors for fan and pump applications. to 3-digit frame number series ‘‘medium medium motors up to 3 hp for 2-, 4-, For polyphase motors, section 12.37 of motors’’ rather than 2-digit number and 6-pole motors operating at 60 Hz. NEMA MG 1–2016 specifies that the series ‘‘small motors.’’ The energy DOE found that the relationship breakdown torque of a general-purpose conservation standards for small electric between breakdown torque and polyphase squirrel-cage small motor motors at 10 CFR 431.446 apply only to horsepower can be expressed as a power shall not be less than 140 percent of the motors with a two-digit frame number law, with continuity across the breakdown torque of a single-phase series. However, the upper output horsepower ratings at the transition general purpose motor of the same power bound of energy conservation point from motors designated by NEMA horsepower and speed rating. As an standards for single-phase small electric MG 1–2016 as ‘‘small’’ versus example, according to Table 10–5 of motors is 3 hp for 2- and 4-pole motors, ‘‘medium’’. This continuity indicates NEMA MG 1–2016, a 60 hertz (‘‘Hz’’) 18 and 1.5 hp for 6-pole motors. The upper that the breakdown torque to motor rated for 1 hp with a synchronous output power bound of energy horsepower relationship for motors speed of 1,800 revolutions per minute conservation standards for polyphase designated ‘‘medium’’ is no different (‘‘RPM’’) must have a breakdown torque small electric motors is 3 hp for 2-pole than those motors designated ‘‘small.’’ between 5.16 and 6.8 pound-feet. motors, 2 hp for 4-pole motors, and 1 hp DOE tentatively concludes from this Not all small electric motors subject to for 6-pole motors. review that the portions of NEMA MG standards are directly addressed by DOE investigated the possibility of 1–2016 Table 10–5 corresponding to NEMA MG 1–2016. The highest applying the breakdown torque ranges ‘‘medium’’ motors, as that term is horsepower rating for small motors for associated with NEMA medium motors applied in the context of NEMA MG 1– which breakdown torque is provided in in Table 10–5 of NEMA MG 1–2016 to 2016, can be applied to 2-digit frame NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 is 1 hp small electric motors not identified as number series small electric motors of for 2-pole motors, 0.75 hp for 4-pole small motors in NEMA MG 1–2016.19 the same horsepower, and which are motors, and 0.5 hp for 6-pole motors. DOE converted the breakdown torque subject to DOE’s test procedure. Figure Table 10–5 provides breakdown torque values in NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10– III–1 shows breakdown torque plotted values for motors with horsepower 5 to units of oz-ft and plotted the upper against horsepower, with power law ratings greater than these values, but limits of the breakdown torque range relationships fitted to the data from specifies that these ratings correspond versus horsepower for NEMA small and NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10–5.

In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, based on breakdown torque per NEMA torque method is commonly used by NEMA commented that single-phase MG 1 limits. (NEMA, No. 25 at p. 11– industry, DOE compared the values of small electric motors are typically rated 12) To confirm that the breakdown breakdown torque specified in Table

18 Hertz is a unit of measure of frequency—or the 19 These include small electric motors with NEMA small motors and less than or equal to the rate at which current cycles. One hertz equals one horsepower ratings greater than the ratings upper horsepower bound for regulated small cycle per second. provided in NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 for electric motors,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP23AP19.023 17016 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

10–5 of NEMA MG 1–2016 to values corresponds to the small electric motor’s assembly of insulating materials in listed in manufacturer catalogs and breakdown torque as specified in NEMA association with the conductors and the product literature for small electric MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 for single-phase supporting structural parts. An motors. For most single-phase small motors or 140 percent of the breakdown insulation system is composed of coil electric motors, breakdown torque torque values specified in NEMA MG 1– insulation with its accessories, corresponded to the associated NEMA 2016 Table 10–5 for polyphase motors. connection and winding support range in Table 10–5 of NEMA MG 1– For purposes of this definition, NEMA insulation, and associated structural 2016.20 Similarly, for polyphase small MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 can be applied parts. Insulation systems are designated electric motors, nearly all models had a to all small electric motors, regardless of as one of four insulation classes in manufacturer listed breakdown torque whether elements of NEMA MG 1–2016 section 1.66 of NEMA MG 1–2016. The which was not less than 140 percent of Table 10–5 are identified as for small or insulation classes are designated as A, the lower bounds of the NEMA ranges medium motors.’’ DOE also proposes B, F, and H, where each class has an listed in Table 10–5.21 defining ‘‘breakdown torque’’ as associated maximum temperature rise at Also in response to the July 2017 TP referring to the maximum torque that which the insulation system can safely RFI, Advanced Energy commented that the motor will develop with rated operate. Section 1.66 of NEMA MG 1– an approach for determining the full voltage and frequency applied without 2016 describes that these insulation load output power of a motor based on an abrupt drop in speed, determined in classes are determined through breakdown torque is possible, but with accordance with NEMA MG 1–2016. experience or an accepted test.23 potentially inconsistent results due to DOE requests comment on the DOE investigated the motor industry’s the sensitivity of breakdown torque to proposed definitions for ‘‘rated output current use of insulation class markings voltage and temperature. Advanced power’’ and ‘‘breakdown torque. to determine if insulation class is Energy stated that in NEMA MG1–2014, DOE requests comment on how to suitable to be used as a starting point for the ranges of breakdown torque for determine when an ‘‘abrupt drop in determining service factor load. DOE is single-phase motors are likely provided speed’’ (e.g., the local maximum of the aware that service factor load is related as guidance for the user and not torque-speed plot closest to the rated to the temperature rise of a motor, intended to serve as a method for torque) has occurred when testing the according to section 14.37 in NEMA MG determining rated output power. breakdown torque of a small electric 1–2016. Additionally, section 14.37 Advanced Energy commented that the motor. references two sections (i.e., sections 12.43 item a.2 and 12.42.1), which full load or rated output power of a 3. NEMA Service Factor Load Method motor is best declared by the describe temperature rise based on manufacturer. (Advanced Energy, No. DOE also researched a method of insulation class. Insulation class is 25 at p. 13–14) establishing rated output power based defined in NEMA MG 1–2016 section Regarding potentially inconsistent on the service factor load of a motor. 1.66. This information indicates that results when measuring breakdown NEMA MG 1–2016 defines service factor insulation class is fairly well established torque, DOE notes that Section 12.30 of in section 1.42 as a multiplier that, according to industry standards. NEMA MG 1–2016 specifies that the when applied to the rated output power In examining whether insulation class tests to determine performance at full-load, indicates a permissible is commonly used by industry for characteristics, including breakdown horsepower loading that may be carried equipment within the scope of 10 CFR torque, shall be made in accordance under the conditions specified in NEMA 431.444, DOE found that MG 1–2016 with IEEE 114 for single-phase motors MG 1–2016 section 14.37. While it is includes nameplate markings (sections and IEEE 112 for polyphase motors. possible for a motor to operate at the 10.39 and 10.40) and that NEMA These methods include requirements for service factor load, there are advantages requires that small electric motor instrument calibration and when the motor operates at a load less nameplates include insulation class measurement accuracy pertaining to than the service factor load (e.g., longer designations. Additionally, DOE voltage and temperature (see sections 4 motor life and greater ability to reviewed catalog data from various and 5 of IEEE 114 and section 4 of IEEE withstand occasional higher ambient manufacturers, and found that catalog 112). Further, the range of breakdown temperatures). Nonetheless, DOE data usually include the insulation class torque values that correspond to a rated explored the potential use of service of the motor. However, neither DOE nor horsepower value provides flexibility factor load as an intermediate step to industry require including insulation for some variation in test results. determination of rated output power. class information in catalog data. In rare Based on the ability to apply NEMA Section 14.37 of NEMA MG 1–2016 cases 24 where catalog data omit the MG 1–2016 to all small electric motors specifies that when operated at the insulation class of the motor, the subject to standards, and evidence that service factor load, small and medium manufacturer knows the insulation most manufacturers already use this alternating current motors will have a class, as it is part of the design process method as a standard practice, DOE temperature rise as specified in section for selecting materials for the motor proposes to use breakdown torque to 12.42.1 and 12.43 item a.2, with appropriate thermal properties. 22 define rated output power. DOE respectively. The temperature rises in proposes to define rated output power these sections are specified according to 23 In NEMA MG 1–2016, ‘‘experience’’ means successful operation for a ‘‘long time’’ under actual as, ‘‘the mechanical output power that insulation class (i.e., A, B, F, or H). DOE examined sections in NEMA MG operating conditions of machines designated with temperature rise at or near the temperature rating 20 88% of single-phase small electric motor 1–2016 relevant to the insulation class limit; ‘‘accepted test’’ means a test on a system or models collected from major manufacturer’s of a motor, which is a standardized way model system which simulates the electrical, catalogs listed values for breakdown torque that to describe an electrical insulation thermal, and mechanical stresses occurring in corresponded to the associated NEMA range. system. Section 1.65 of NEMA MG 1– service. The test must also be made in accordance 21 DOE reviewed data from five major with IEEE 43, IEEE 117, IEEE 275, and IEEE 304 manufacturer’s catalogs. Of the reviewed catalog 2016 defines an insulation system as an when appropriate for the motor construction. listings, approximately 98% of polyphase small 24 DOE found that only 0.1% of 5,588 motor electric motor models listed values for breakdown 22 DOE notes that NEMA MG 1–2016 section models with data collected from manufacturer torque that were not less than 140 percent of the 14.37 contains a typo and refers to section 12.44 catalogs did not include the insulation class of the associated range in Table 10–5 of NEMA MG 1. item a.2 and 12.43.1. motor.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17017

Based on the information in NEMA MG that manufacturers may design their marketed as capable of operating at two 1–2016 and the prevalence of insulation motors to operate optimally at a ‘‘rated’’ different frequencies and could have class in manufacturer literature, load that is less than the service factor data provided for both (e.g., 60 and 50 standard industry practice is to rate load. Further, DOE recognizes that Hz). In this case, it could be unclear at motors according to NEMA insulation manufacturer performance information which frequency the test should be classes. DOE also notes that since is commonly given at nominal performed. Therefore, DOE proposes, insulation class information is included horsepower ratings,25 which are not through the proposed referenced test with manufacturer literature for nearly always equivalent to the service factor methods, that all tests be performed every motor model, it could be used by load, and that retesting all motors to using a rated frequency of 60 Hz. DOE DOE in a test procedure without any evaluate performance at the service proposes 60 Hz so that the tested input additional testing burden. However, factor load rather than at the current frequency matches the frequency DOE was not able to determine whether nominal values may be burdensome. experienced by the motor when insulation class and temperature rise, Finally, DOE does not have sufficient installed in the field. To implement this even if known, could be reliably used to data to assess the potential impact on proposal, DOE proposes to modify 10 derive a motor’s service factor load. reproducibility given that multiple load CFR 431.442 to define the term ‘‘rated In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, points (i.e., torque and speed) may frequency’’ as ‘‘60 hertz.’’ NEMA opposed the adoption of a generate the same temperature rise, but method to determine full-load or rated the different load points may have 2. Rated Load output power of a motor based on the different measured efficiencies. As a Rated load 26 is used in industry load which results in a temperature rise result, DOE is not proposing to require standards to specify a loading point for associated with the insulation class of determination of rated output power on motor testing (e.g., sections 5.6 and 6.1 the motor. NEMA reasoned that the the basis of service factor load. in IEEE 112–2004, and section 8.2.1 in insulation class for some motors is IEEE 114–2010). Typically, a rated load E. Rated Values Specified for Testing selected based on the potential for represents a power output expected Small Electric Motors operation under harsher conditions than from the motor (e.g., a horsepower value continuous duty in a laboratory setting. DOE is also proposing to clarify on the nameplate). The rated load will NEMA asserted that this additional several values used for testing small have a corresponding rated speed and design consideration would undermine electric motors. DOE notes that the rated torque. DOE proposes to modify a direct relationship between definition of average full-load efficiency 10 CFR 431.442 to define the term temperature rise, insulation class, and at 10 CFR 431.442 specifies that it is ‘‘rated load’’ as ‘‘the rated output power rated output power. NEMA commented determined when the motor operates at of a small electric motor’’ (See section that with respect to insulation classes, the rated frequency, rated load, and III.D.2 for definition of rated output each insulation class is rated for rated voltage. Additionally, industry power). DOE proposes that the rated continuous operation at a specified standards refer to ‘‘rated’’ values which output power (given on the motor temperature limit. While all motors are expected to be known or provided nameplate) be used for any reference to operate within the temperature limits of (e.g., on the nameplate). However, rated load, full rated load, rated full- that insulation class, not all motors ‘‘rated frequency,’’ ‘‘rated load,’’ and load, or full-load in an industry operate continuously at the same ‘‘rated voltage’’ are not defined. To standard used for testing small electric temperature. The insulation class for resolve any ambiguity, DOE is motors. any given motor could be selected based proposing to include additional on continuous use at an elevated instruction on how to derive each of 3. Rated Voltage temperature. Alternatively, it could be these values to allow for more accurate Rated voltage is used in industry selected to protect motors due to spikes comparisons between motors, and better standards to specify the voltage in temperature that cannot be controlled ensure reproducible testing for all supplied to the motor under test (e.g., but are not the typical/normal operating equipment. section 6.1 in IEEE 112–2004, and points. (NEMA, No. 24 at p. 11–12) 1. Rated Frequency section 3 in IEEE 114–2010). DOE is Advanced Energy offered that it is proposing to clarify the permissible test possible to establish the output power Rated frequency is a term commonly voltage options when small electric rating of a motor by determining the used by industry standards developed motors are rated for use at multiple load (i.e., torque and speed) at which for testing small electric motors (e.g., voltages (e.g., 230 and 460 volts) by the motor will achieve a stable section 6.1 in IEEE 112–2004, and defining the term ‘‘rated voltage’’ at 10 temperature that does not exceed the section 3 in IEEE 114–2010). The test CFR 431.442. insulation class temperature. However, procedures and energy conservation NEMA, Baldor, UL, ASAP, ACEEE, it added that there could be several standards established under EPCA NEEA, and CA IOUs commented on this loads that would meet this criterion, apply to motors distributed in issue in response to a prior proposal and therefore the horsepower commerce within the United States. related to certain certification, determined with this method cannot Within the United States, electricity is compliance, labeling, and enforcement necessarily be considered the correct supplied at 60 Hz. However, small issues involving electric and small rating of the motor. Advanced Energy electric motors could be designed to electric motors. NEMA commented that commented that the full load or rated operate at frequencies in addition to 60 with respect to single-phase capacitor output power of a motor is best declared Hz (e.g., motors designed to operate at run motors, DOE currently allows the by the manufacturer. (Advanced Energy, either 60 or 50 Hz). manufacturer to select the voltage for No. 25 at p. 13–14) Small electric motors subject to 10 compliance. NEMA also indicated that DOE recognizes that testing at the CFR 431.444 could potentially be the input voltage setting can affect service factor load may characterize a efficiency, noting that if DOE were to motor’s maximum sustainable output, 25 Nominal horsepower ratings refer to horsepower ratings commonly used by require motors to comply at the lowest but may not be representative of the manufacturers, and ratings for which NEMA typical service conditions that a motor provides specifications for (e.g., 0.5, 0.75, 1, and 1.5 26 Also referred to as full rated load, rated full- experiences. DOE also acknowledges hp). load, or full-load.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17018 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

level of efficiency, manufacturers would the voltage used during the test would characteristics of a given motor (i.e., on be forced to redesign these motors, since address ambiguity and ensure a motor nameplate or product catalog). at least some motors would be out of consistency. (ASAP, ACEEE, NEEA, DOE requests comment on the compliance at voltages not currently EERE–2014–BT–CE–0019, No. 16 at p. proposed definitions, and procedures selected for certification. These redesign 3) The CA IOUs also supported for determining the values of rated efforts would result in larger motors to specifying a voltage for testing, frequency and rated load for small accommodate the additional active reasoning that this would ensure electric motors material required to create a compliant consumers are unlikely to purchase a unit less efficient than advertised. (CA F. Test Procedure Costs, Harmonization, motor and could result in the use of and Other Topics larger frame sizes, which would create IOUs, EERE–2014–BT–CE–0019, No. 13 utility problems for end users of the at p. 4) 1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact In the March 2010 ECS final rule, motors. (NEMA, EERE–2014–BT–CE– EPCA requires that test procedures 0019, No. 10 at p. 10) With respect to DOE indicated the industry test procedures incorporated into DOE’s prescribed by DOE not be unduly the input voltage setting for testing and regulations permit manufacturers to burdensome to conduct. 42 U.S.C. representations, Baldor agreed with select the input voltage for testing. 75 6314(a)(2). DOE proposes to amend (1) NEMA’s comments. (Baldor, EERE– FR 10874, 10892 (‘‘DOE understands the existing test procedure for small 2014–BT–CE–0019, No. 11 at p. 6) UL that it is at the manufacturer’s discretion electric motors (by clarifying the and Advanced Energy also commented under which single voltage condition to existing scope and testing instructions, that the input voltage setting can affect test its motor.’’). After considering the adding an authorized procedure efficiency and that DOE should either regulatory history on this topic and the incorporated by reference from IEEE allow the manufacturer to select the market data supporting the notion that 112–2017, and permitting the use of IEC input voltage for testing or require efficiency can vary with the input 60034–2–1:2014) and (2) the existing testing at all nameplate voltages. (UL, voltage setting, DOE proposes to test procedure for electric motors (by EERE–2014–BT–CE–0019, No. 9 at p. 8– continue to allow small electric motors proposing to permit the use of IEC 9; Advanced Energy, EERE–2014–BT– to be tested at any nameplate voltage 60034–2–1:2014). DOE has tentatively CE–0019, No. 8 at p. 11) UL also value and to specify this flexibility by determined that testing under these commented that, should testing be defining the term ‘‘rated voltage’’ at 10 proposed amendments would not be required at all nameplate voltages, 208 CFR 431.442 as referring to the input unduly burdensome for manufacturers volts should be excluded because it is voltage of a small electric motor selected to conduct and that these proposed typically listed as a ‘‘usable’’ voltage by the motor’s manufacturer to be used amendments would reduce test burden rather than a voltage for which the for testing the motor’s efficiency. In for manufacturers. motor was designed and optimized. (UL, DOE’s view, this change will help DOE’s analyses of this proposal EERE–2014–BT–CE–0019, No. 9 at p. 9) ensure consistency and clarity during indicate that, if finalized, the proposal ASAP, ACEEE, and NEEA, in a joint testing and when making would result in a net cost savings to comment, indicated that clarification on representations of the performance manufacturers.

TABLE III–4—SUMMARY OF COST IMPACTS FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS AND ELECTRIC MOTORS

Present value Discount rate Category (million 2016$) (percent)

Cost savings: Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Small Electric Motors ...... 0.3 3 0.1 7 Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Electric Motors ...... 4.0 3 1.6 7 Total Net Cost Impact:

Total Net Cost Impact ...... (4.2) 3 (1.7) 7

TABLE III–5—SUMMARY OF ANNUALIZED COST IMPACTS FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS AND ELECTRIC MOTORS

Annualized value Discount rate Category (thousand (percent) 2016$)

Annualized Cost Savings: Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Small Electric Motors ...... 8 3 7 7 Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Electric Motors ...... 119 3 111 7 Total Net Annualized Cost Impact:

Total Net Cost Impact ...... (127) 3 (118) 7

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17019

Further discussion of the analyses of electric motor models sold in the U.S. facility.29 DOE requires at least five the cost impact of the proposed test that are tested with either the CSA or units to be tested per basic model. 10 procedure amendments is presented in IEEE methods referenced in the Federal CFR 431.455(c)(2) To estimate in-house the following paragraphs. test procedure are also tested with the testing costs, DOE assumed testing a IEC 60034–2–1 method. The savings single motor unit requires (a) Cost Impacts for Small Electric approximately nine hours of a Motors calculated in this notice could be higher if a larger fraction of U.S.-market motor mechanical engineer technician time Regarding small electric motors, the models are currently already tested to and three hours from a mechanical proposed clarifications of the existing IEC 60034–2–1 (i.e., greater than 10 engineer. The mean hourly wage for a scope and test instructions would not percent). mechanical engineer technician is impose any new requirements on To calculate the testing cost reduction $27.97 and the total hourly manufacturers of regulated small associated with allowing the IEC 60034– compensation paid by the employer electric motors. Instead, DOE’s proposal, 2–1:2014 method for testing small (including all fringe benefits) is $36.21. if adopted, would provide The mean hourly wage for a mechanical manufacturers with greater certainty in electric motors, DOE estimated the number of motor models that would be engineer is $43.99 and the total hourly the conduct of the test procedures, offer compensation paid by the employer additional testing options, and would tested each year for compliance. First, DOE reviewed the product catalogs of (including all fringe benefits) is not increase test burden. The proposed $56.95.30 In addition, DOE assumed that addition of IEEE 112–2017 is not four major small electric motor manufacturers published over a seven- 50 percent of tests are conducted at expected to increase test burden or third-party facilities and 50 percent of require new testing. Manufacturers year period between 2009 and 2016. DOE compared the current product tests are conducted at in-house would be able to rely on data generated facilities. Based on these estimates, DOE offerings to the historical catalogs to under the current test procedure, should anticipates annual cost savings of identify the total number of new models the proposed amendments for small approximately $8,000 for the small listed over that period of time. DOE then electric motors be adopted, because the electric motors industry. proposal would retain the existing test annualized that total number of new method options at 10 CFR 431.444, and models. Next, DOE scaled up that (b) Cost Impacts for Electric Motors none of the proposed changes would annualized value based on the estimated Regarding electric motors, DOE is not result in a change in measured market share of the manufacturers proposing to amend the scope of efficiency under the existing test whose catalogs were reviewed. This applicability of the test procedure at method options. Additionally, the scaled-up annualized value estimated Appendix B. Consistent with the small proposed incorporation of IEC 60034–2– the total number of new models listed electric motors analysis, the proposed 1:2014 would further harmonize DOE’s for sale each year for the entire U.S. incorporation of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 in test procedures with current industry market. Then, DOE estimated that only this test procedure would provide practice and international standards by 10 percent of new models would be manufacturers additional flexibility by providing manufacturers with an tested each year. DOE made this permitting an alternative test procedure additional testing option. This change estimate based on (1) knowledge that for measuring energy loss and would would enable manufacturers who use many motor models are grouped under further harmonize DOE’s test IEC 60034–2–1:2014 for everyday a single basic model classification (and procedures with current industry business purposes (for international therefore each individual model would practice and international standards. markets) or to comply with regulatory not need to be tested), (2) observations DOE expects that, for those requirements in other countries to that only a fraction of electric motor manufacturers who are already using significantly reduce the number of tests basic models are tested (the remainder IEC 60034–2–1:2014, this proposed that they must perform by removing the have efficiency determined through an change would reduce the number of need to conduct a test according to the alternative efficiency determination tests that manufacturers perform by CSA or IEEE methods 27 currently method [‘‘AEDM’’]), and (3) recognition avoiding the need to conduct a test 31 referenced in DOE’s test procedure for that many motor models may have been according to the CSA or IEEE methods small electric motors. As described in relabeled or rebranded but not currently referenced in DOE’s test section III.C.2, NEMA and UL petitioned redesigned (and therefore no new procedure. that certain portions of IEC test testing is needed). Based on these To calculate the testing cost reduction procedure 60034–2–1:2014 be adopted calculations, DOE tentatively associated with allowing the IEC 60034– as a permitted alternative test method determined that approximately 1 new 2–1:2014 method for testing electric for small electric motors and electric small electric motor basic model per motors, DOE employed a similar motors. UL further noted in its petition year would not require testing according methodology to the small electric the increasing use of the IEC test to the existing test methods and motors analysis and estimated the procedure 60034–2–1:2014 by the therefore would realize costs savings number of electric motor models that industry worldwide. due to the proposed test procedure. would be tested each year for Recognizing that some, but not all, DOE estimated the cost of testing a compliance. First, DOE reviewed the manufacturers already test their motors single small electric motor unit to be $2,000 at a third-party facility and 29 Estimate based on standard rates charged by using IEC 60034–2–1:2014, DOE third party laboratories. 28 assumed that 10 percent of small approximately $500 at an in-house 30 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wages, 17–3027 Mechanical 27 CSA 747–09, CSA 390–10, IEEE 112–2004, or Based on a review of the market, only some motors Engineer Technician; 17–2141 Mechanical IEEE 114–2010 depending on the category of small appear suitable for sale in both the U.S. and foreign Engineer, May 2017. Last accessed January 30, electric motor. markets. A small fraction of motors are designed for 2019, United States Census Bureau, Annual Survey 28 NEMA and UL did not provide quantitative operation on 50 Hz and 60 Hz power, or use NEMA of Manufacturers, 2016 for NAICS Code 335312 information regarding the number of small electric and IEC units of measure (hp vs. kW) and other ‘‘Motor and Generator Manufacturing’’. Last motors that are tested with either the CSA method designators. The U.S. electrical grid is operated at accessed January 30, 2019. or the IEEE method, and the IEC method, although 60 Hz, while many other countries and regions (e.g., 31 CSA 390–10 or IEEE 112–2004 depending on NEMA commented that this is an increasing trend. Europe) operate at 50 Hz. the category of electric motor.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17020 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

product catalogs of four major electric document. DOE also seeks comment and public to provide input on measures motor manufacturers published over a any additional data relevant to its DOE could take to lower the cost of its six-year period between 2010 and 2016. assumptions in calculating these regulations applicable to small electric DOE compared the current product impacts motors consistent with the requirements offerings to the historical catalogs to of EPCA. 2. Harmonization With Industry identify the total number of new models Standards listed over that period of time. DOE then G. Compliance Date annualized that total number of new DOE’s current test procedures for EPCA prescribes that all models. Next, DOE scaled up that electric and small electric motors are representations made in writing or annualized value based on the estimated based on the industry standards that broadcast advertisements of energy market share of the manufacturers have been incorporated by reference. efficiency and energy use, including whose catalogs were reviewed. This The current test procedures for small those made on marketing materials and scaled-up annualized value estimated electric motors at 10 CFR 431.444 product labels, must be made in the total number of new models listed incorporate by reference certain accordance with an amended test for sale each year for the entire U.S. provisions of IEEE 114–2010, IEEE 112– procedure, beginning 180 days after market. Then, DOE estimated that only 2004, CSA C747–09, CSA C390–10, all publication of such a test procedure 10 percent of new models would be of which contain methods for measuring final rule in the Federal Register. (See tested each year. DOE made this the energy efficiency of small electric 42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) If DOE were to estimate based on (1) knowledge that motors. The current test procedures for publish an amended test procedure, many motor models are grouped under electric motors in Appendix B EPCA allows individual manufacturers a single basic model classification (and incorporate by reference certain to petition DOE for an extension of the therefore each individual model would provisions of IEEE 112–2004 and CSA 180-day period if the manufacturer may not need to be tested), (2) observations C390–10. DOE proposes to also allow experience undue hardship in meeting that only a fraction of electric motor the use of IEEE 112–2017, to further the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2)) To basic models are tested (the remainder harmonize IEEE 112 Test Method B with receive such an extension, petitions have efficiency determined through an the other permitted industry test must be filed with DOE no later than 60 AEDM), and (3) recognition that many methods. This NOPR also proposes to days before the end of the 180-day motor models that may have been incorporate by reference certain period and must detail how the relabeled or rebranded but not provisions of the IEC test procedure manufacturer will experience undue redesigned (and therefore no new 60034–2–1:2014 for measuring the hardship. (Id.) By statute, any extension testing is needed). Similar to what was performance of small electric motors granted by DOE under this provision done for small electric motors, DOE and electric motors. may not exceed 180 days in duration. assumed that 10 percent of electric DOE requests comment on the (Id.) motor models sold in the U.S. that are benefits and burdens of adopting any tested with either the CSA or IEEE industry/voluntary consensus-based or IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory methods referenced in the Federal test other appropriate test procedure, Review procedure are also tested with the IEC without modification A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 60034–2–1 method. The savings 3. Other Test Procedure Topics calculated in this notice could be higher The Office of Management and Budget if a larger fraction of U.S.-market motor In addition to the issues identified (OMB) has determined that this test models are currently already tested to earlier in this document, DOE welcomes procedure rulemaking is not a IEC 60034–2–1. Based on these comment on any other aspect of the ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under calculations, DOE tentatively existing test procedure for small electric section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, determined that approximately 20 new motors and electric motors. DOE Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR electric motor basic models per year particularly seeks information that 51735 (October 4, 1993). Accordingly, would not require testing according to would ensure that the test procedure this action was not subject to review the existing test methods and therefore measures energy efficiency during a under the Executive Order by the Office would realize costs savings due to the representative average use cycle or of Information and Regulatory Affairs proposed test procedure. period of use, as well as information (OIRA) in the OMB. that would help DOE create a procedure DOE estimated the cost of testing a B. Review Under Executive Orders that would limit manufacturer test single electric motor unit to be $2,000 13771 and 13777 at a third-party facility and burden. Comments regarding approximately $500 at an in-house repeatability and reproducibility are On January 30, 2017, the President facility. DOE requires at least five units also welcome. issued Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 13771, to be tested per basic model. 10 CFR DOE also requests information that ‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling 431.17(b)(2) In addition, based on DOE’s would help it create procedures that Regulatory Costs.’’ E.O. 13771 stated the understanding that this equipment is would limit manufacturer test burden policy of the executive branch is to be tested both in-house and at third-party through streamlining or simplifying prudent and financially responsible in testing labs, DOE assumed an even split testing requirements without impacting the expenditure of funds, from both in testing between the two venues. testing accuracy. In particular, DOE public and private sources. E.O. 13771 Based on these estimates, DOE notes that under Executive Order 13771, stated it is essential to manage the costs anticipates annual industry cost savings ‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling associated with the governmental of approximately $127,000 for electric Regulatory Costs,’’ Executive Branch imposition of private expenditures motors that are currently subject to the agencies such as DOE must manage the required to comply with Federal standards at 10 CFR 431.25. costs associated with the imposition of regulations. DOE seeks input on the testing cost expenditures required to comply with Additionally, on February 24, 2017, impacts and manufacturer burden Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 the President issued E.O. 13777, associated with the test procedure (February 3, 2017). Consistent with that ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform amendments described in this Executive Order, DOE encourages the Agenda.’’ E.O. 13777 required the head

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17021

of each agency designate an agency properly considered during the DOE Energy commented that a properly official as its Regulatory Reform Officer rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE conducted test could take a full working (‘‘RRO’’). Each RRO oversees the has made its procedures and policies day for a large motor, excluding setup, implementation of regulatory reform available on the Office of the General or a minimum of half a day for a small initiatives and policies to ensure that Counsel’s website at http://energy.gov/ motor. (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at p. agencies effectively carry out regulatory gc/office-general-counsel. 13) Advanced Energy commented that reforms, consistent with applicable law. DOE reviewed the test procedures relative to the motors already subject to Further, E.O. 13777 requires the considered in this proposed rule to energy conservation standards and test establishment of a regulatory task force amend the test procedure for small procedure, no significant burden is at each agency. The regulatory task force electric motors and electric motors expected in testing the motors categories is required to make recommendations to under the provisions of the Regulatory identified by DOE in the July 2017 TP the agency head regarding the repeal, Flexibility Act and the procedures and RFI. (Advanced Energy, No. 25 at p. 3) replacement, or modification of existing policies published on February 19, Advanced Energy noted one exception regulations, consistent with applicable 2003. in the case of fractional horsepower law. At a minimum, each regulatory The Small Business Administration motors. 82 FR 35468, 35471. Advanced reform task force must attempt to (‘‘SBA’’) considers a business entity to Energy believes that the cost of testing identify regulations that: be a small business, if, together with its these motors may far exceed the cost of (i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job affiliates, it employs less than a the motors, themselves. (Advanced creation; threshold number of workers specified Energy, No. 25 at p. 3) (ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or in 13 CFR part 121. The size standards This proposal would neither expand ineffective; and codes are established by the 2017 the scope of test procedure applicability (iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits; North American Industry Classification to small electric motors beyond those (iv) Create a serious inconsistency or System (‘‘NAICS’’). currently subject to test procedures, nor otherwise interfere with regulatory Small electric motor and electric would it place additional requirements reform initiatives and policies; motor manufacturers are classified on those small electric motors currently (v) Are inconsistent with the under NAICS code 335312, motor and subject to DOE’s test procedures. requirements of Information Quality generator manufacturing. The SBA sets Furthermore, this proposal would not Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to a threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer place any additional requirements on that Act, in particular those regulations for an entity to be considered as a small those electric motors that are already that rely in whole or in part on data, business. DOE conducted a focused subject to DOE’s test procedures, nor information, or methods that are not inquiry into small business would it require manufacturers to retest publicly available or that are manufacturers of equipment covered by existing electric motors. Accordingly, insufficiently transparent to meet the this rulemaking. DOE used available manufacturers would not be required standard for reproducibility; or public information to identify potential under this proposal to retest any (vi) Derive from or implement small manufacturers. DOE accessed the existing small electric motors or electric Executive Orders or other Presidential membership directories of NEMA and motors already subject to DOE’s test directives that have been subsequently The Motor Control and Motor procedures. rescinded or substantially modified. Association (MCMA) to create a list of This proposal, if adopted, would also DOE initially concludes that this companies that import or otherwise not increase testing costs nor would it rulemaking is consistent with the manufacture small electric motors and impose any additional testing burden on directives set forth in these executive electric motors covered by this manufacturers. Therefore, DOE orders. This proposed rule is estimated rulemaking. Using these sources, DOE concludes that the impacts of this to result in cost savings. This proposed identified a total of 56 distinct proposal would not have a ‘‘significant rule would yield annualized cost manufacturers of small electric motors economic impact on a substantial savings of approximately $118,000 and electric motors. number of small entities,’’ and the (2016$) using a perpetual time horizon DOE then reviewed the data to preparation of an IRFA is not warranted. discounted to 2016 at a 7 percent determine whether the entities met the DOE will transmit the certification and discount rate. Therefore, if finalized as SBA’s definition of ‘‘small business’’ as supporting statement of factual basis to proposed, this rule is expected to be an it relates to NAICS code 335312 and to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. screen out companies that do not offer Small Business Administration for equipment covered by this rulemaking, C. Review Under the Regulatory review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). do not meet the definition of a ‘‘small DOE seeks comments on whether the Flexibility Act business,’’ or are foreign owned and proposed test procedure would place The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 operated. Based on this review, DOE has new and significant burdens on a U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation identified 21 manufacturers that are substantial number of small entities of an initial regulatory flexibility potential small businesses. Through this analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) for any rule that by analysis, DOE has determined the D. Review Under the Paperwork law must be proposed for public expected effects of the rule on these Reduction Act of 1995 comment, unless the agency certifies covered small businesses. Manufacturers of electric motors must that the rule, if promulgated, will not In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, certify to DOE that their equipment have a significant economic impact on NEMA provided input on the costs and comply with any applicable energy a substantial number of small entities. time required for testing motors of conservation standards. To certify As required by Executive Order 13272, different configurations. NEMA compliance, manufacturers must first ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities indicated that testing a motor can take obtain test data for their equipment in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 as little as 8 hours and as long as 32 according to the DOE test procedures, (August 16, 2002), DOE published hours, depending on the size of the including any amendments adopted for procedures and policies on February 19, motor. NEMA noted that the teardown those test procedures. DOE has 2003, to ensure that the potential process also takes several hours. established regulations for the impacts of its rules on small entities are (NEMA, No. 24 at pp. 10–11) Advanced certification and recordkeeping

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17022 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

requirements for covered consumer G. Review Under Executive Order 13132 defines key terms, and (6) addresses products and commercial equipment, Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ other important issues affecting clarity including electric motors. (See subpart 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999) imposes and general draftsmanship under any B of 10 CFR part 431) The collection-of- certain requirements on agencies guidelines issued by the Attorney information requirement for the formulating and implementing policies General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order certification and recordkeeping is or regulations that preempt State law or 12988 requires Executive agencies to subject to review and approval by OMB that have Federalism implications. The review regulations in light of applicable under the Paperwork Reduction Act Executive Order requires agencies to standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to (PRA). This requirement has been examine the constitutional and statutory determine whether they are met or it is approved by OMB under OMB control authority supporting any action that unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required number 1910–1400. Public reporting would limit the policymaking discretion review and determined that, to the burden for the certification is estimated of the States and to carefully assess the extent permitted by law, this proposed to average 35 hours per response, necessity for such actions. The rule meets the relevant standards of including the time for reviewing Executive Order also requires agencies Executive Order 12988. instructions, searching existing data to have an accountable process to sources, gathering and maintaining the ensure meaningful and timely input by I. Review Under the Unfunded data needed, and completing and State and local officials in the Mandates Reform Act of 1995 reviewing the collection of information. development of regulatory policies that Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Notwithstanding any other provision have Federalism implications. On Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘UMRA’’) requires March 14, 2000, DOE published a of the law, no person is required to each Federal agency to assess the effects statement of policy describing the respond to, nor shall any person be of Federal regulatory actions on State, intergovernmental consultation process subject to a penalty for failure to comply local, and Tribal governments and the it will follow in the development of with, a collection of information subject private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has to the requirements of the PRA, unless 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a examined this proposed rule and has proposed regulatory action likely to that collection of information displays a determined that it would not have a currently valid OMB Control Number. result in a rule that may cause the substantial direct effect on the States, on expenditure by State, local, and Tribal E. Review Under the Treasury and the relationship between the national governments, in the aggregate, or by the General Government Appropriations government and the States, or on the private sector of $100 million or more Act, 1999 distribution of power and in any one year (adjusted annually for responsibilities among the various inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires Section 654 of the Treasury and levels of government. EPCA governs and a Federal agency to publish a written General Government Appropriations prescribes Federal preemption of State statement that estimates the resulting Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires regulations as to energy conservation for costs, benefits, and other effects on the Federal agencies to issue a Family the products that are the subject of this national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) Policymaking Assessment for any rule proposed rule. States can petition DOE The UMRA also requires a Federal that may affect family well-being. This for exemption from such preemption to agency to develop an effective process proposed rule, if adopted, would not the extent, and based on criteria, set to permit timely input by elected have any impact on the autonomy or forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 officers of State, local, and Tribal integrity of the family as an institution. U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is governments on a proposed ‘‘significant Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it required by Executive Order 13132. intergovernmental mandate,’’ and is not necessary to prepare a Family H. Review Under Executive Order 12988 requires an agency plan for giving notice Policymaking Assessment. and opportunity for timely input to Regarding the review of existing potentially affected small governments F. Review Under the National regulations and the promulgation of before establishing any requirements Environmental Policy Act of 1969 new regulations, section 3(a) of that might significantly or uniquely Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice affect small governments. On March 18, DOE is analyzing this proposed Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), regulation in accordance with the 1997, DOE published a statement of imposes on Federal agencies the general policy on its process for National Environmental Policy Act duty to adhere to the following intergovernmental consultation under (NEPA) and DOE’s NEPA implementing requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE’s errors and ambiguity, (2) write http://energy.gov/gc/office-general- regulations include a categorical regulations to minimize litigation, (3) counsel. DOE examined this proposed exclusion for rulemakings interpreting provide a clear legal standard for rule according to UMRA and its or amending an existing rule or affected conduct rather than a general statement of policy and determined that regulation that does not change the standard, and (4) promote simplification the proposal contains neither an environmental effect of the rule or and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of intergovernmental mandate, nor a regulation being amended. 10 CFR part Executive Order 12988 specifically mandate that may result in the 1021, subpart D, Appendix A5. DOE requires that Executive agencies make expenditure of $100 million or more in anticipates that this rulemaking every reasonable effort to ensure that the any year, so these requirements do not qualifies for categorical exclusion A5 regulation (1) clearly specifies the apply. because it is an interpretive rulemaking preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly that does not change the environmental specifies any effect on existing Federal J. Review Under Executive Order 12630 effect of the rule and otherwise meets law or regulation, (3) provides a clear DOE has determined, under Executive the requirements for application of a legal standard for affected conduct Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR while promoting simplification and and Interference with Constitutionally 1021.410. DOE will complete its NEPA burden reduction, (4) specifies the Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 review before issuing the final rule. retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately (March 18, 1988), that this proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17023

regulation would not result in any M. Review Under Section 32 of the incorporate by reference two additional takings that might require compensation Federal Energy Administration Act of IEC standards, titled ‘‘IEC 60034– under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 1974 1:2010, Rotating electrical machines— Constitution. Under section 301 of the Department Part 1: Rating and performance’’ and of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– ‘‘IEC 60051–1:2016, Direct acting K. Review Under Treasury and General indicating analogue measuring Government Appropriations Act, 2001 91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the Federal Energy instruments and their accessories—Part 1: Definitions and general requirements Section 515 of the Treasury and Administration Act of 1974, as amended common to all parts.’’ IEC 60034–1:2001 General Government Appropriations by the Federal Energy Administration and IEC 60051–1:2016 specify test Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. conditions and procedures that are for agencies to review most 788; FEAA) Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a required for application of the test disseminations of information to the methods for measurement of energy public under guidelines established by proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of efficiency established in IEC 60034–2– each agency pursuant to general 1:2014. The IEEE standard, titled ‘‘IEEE guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of 112–2017, Test Procedure for Polyphase guidelines were published at 67 FR Induction Motors and Generators’’ 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE’s such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with the establishes additional methods of guidelines were published at 67 FR Attorney General and the Chairman of measurement for current and frequency 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has the Federal Trade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) for both small electric motors and reviewed this proposed rule under the concerning the impact of the electric motors. Further, DOE proposes OMB and DOE guidelines and has commercial or industry standards on to additionally incorporate IEEE 112– concluded that it is consistent with competition. 2017 Test Method A and Test Method applicable policies in those guidelines. The proposed modifications to the B as alternatives to the industry test methods that are currently incorporated L. Review Under Executive Order 13211 test procedures for small electric motors and electric motors adopted in this by reference from IEEE 112–2004 (See Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions NOPR incorporate testing methods section III.C.1 for more details). These Concerning Regulations That contained in certain sections of the proposals will harmonize the permitted Significantly Affect Energy Supply, following commercial standard: ‘‘IEC test methods under subparts X (for small electric motors) and B (for electric Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 60034–2–1:2014 Rotating electrical motors) of 10 CFR part 431 and align 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to machines—Part 2–1: Standard methods for determining losses and efficiency measurement and instrumentation prepare and submit to OMB, a requirements with industry practice. Statement of Energy Effects for any from tests (excluding machines for traction vehicles).’’ DOE has evaluated The NEMA standard, titled ‘‘NEMA MG proposed significant energy action. A 1–2016 Motors and Generators’’ ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as this standard and is unable to conclude whether it fully complies with the establishes industry definitions for any action by an agency that breakdown torque of small electric promulgated or is expected to lead to requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA (i.e., whether it was developed in motors (See section III.D.2 for more promulgation of a final rule, and that (1) a manner that fully provides for public details). is a significant regulatory action under participation, comment, and review.) In summary, DOE proposes to Executive Order 12866, or any successor DOE will consult with both the Attorney incorporate by reference the following order; and (2) is likely to have a General and the Chairman of the FTC standards: significant adverse effect on the supply, concerning the impact of these test (1) IEC 60034–1:2010, ‘‘Rotating distribution, or use of energy; or (3) is procedures on competition, prior to electric machines—Part 1: Rating and designated by the Administrator of prescribing a final rule. performance’’. OIRA as a significant energy action. For (2) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, ‘‘Rotating any proposed significant energy action, N. Description of Materials Incorporated electrical machines—Part 2–1: Standard the agency must give a detailed by Reference methods for determining losses and statement of any adverse effects on In this NOPR, DOE proposes to efficiency from tests (excluding energy supply, distribution, or use incorporate by reference standards machines for traction vehicles)’’. should the proposal be implemented, published by IEEE, IEC, and NEMA. The (3) IEC 60051–1:2016, ‘‘Direct acting and of reasonable alternatives to the IEC standard, titled ‘‘IEC 60034–2– indicating analogue electrical measuring action and their expected benefits on 1:2014 Rotating electrical machines— instruments and their accessories—Part energy supply, distribution, and use. Part 2–1: Standard methods for 1: Definitions and general requirements determining losses and efficiency from common to all parts’’. The proposed regulatory action to tests (excluding machines for traction (4) IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard amend the test procedure for measuring vehicles)’’ is a proposed alternative Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction the energy efficiency of small electric industry standard to those currently Motors and Generators’’. motors is not a significant regulatory incorporated by reference (IEEE 112– (5) National Electrical Manufacturers action under Executive Order 12866. 2004, IEEE 114–2010, CSA C747–09, Association (NEMA) MG 1–2016, Moreover, it would not have a and CSA C390–10) for measurement of ‘‘Motors and Generators’’. significant adverse effect on the supply, small electric motor efficiency and Copies of these standards can be distribution, or use of energy, nor has it electric motor efficiency (See section obtained from the organizations directly been designated as a significant energy III.C.1 for more details). IEC 60034–2– at the following addresses: action by the Administrator of OIRA. 1:2014 establishes methods of • International Electrotechnical Therefore, it is not a significant energy determining efficiencies from tests and Commission, 3 rue de Varembe´, 1st action, and, accordingly, DOE has not to specify methods of obtaining specific floor, P.O. Box 131, CH—1211 Geneva prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. losses. In addition, DOE proposed to 20—Switzerland, +41 22 919 02 11, or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17024 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

by visiting https://webstore.iec.ch/ Confidential Business Information and one copy of the document marked home. section. non-confidential with the information • IEEE, 445 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box DOE processes submissions made believed to be confidential deleted. 1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855–1331, (732) through http://www.regulations.gov Submit these documents via email or on 981–0060, or by visiting http:// before posting. Normally, comments a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own www.ieee.org. will be posted within a few days of determination about the confidential • NEMA, 1300 North 17th Street, being submitted. However, if large status of the information and treat it Suite 900, Arlington, Virginia 22209, +1 volumes of comments are being according to its determination. 703 841 3200, or by visiting https:// processed simultaneously, your Factors of interest to DOE when www.nema.org. comment may not be viewable for up to evaluating requests to treat submitted several weeks. Please keep the comment information as confidential include (1) a V. Public Participation tracking number that http:// description of the items, (2) whether www.regulations.gov provides after you and why such items are customarily A. Submission of Comments have successfully uploaded your treated as confidential within the DOE will accept comments, data, and comment. industry, (3) whether the information is information regarding this proposed Submitting comments via email, hand generally known by or available from rule no later than the date provided in delivery, or postal mail. Comments and other sources, (4) whether the the DATES section at the beginning of documents submitted via email, hand information has previously been made this proposed rule. Interested parties delivery, or mail also will be posted to available to others without obligation may submit comments using any of the http://www.regulations.gov. If you do concerning its confidentiality, (5) an methods described in the ADDRESSES not want your personal contact explanation of the competitive injury to section at the beginning of this proposed information to be publicly viewable, do the submitting person which would rulemaking. not include it in your comment or any result from public disclosure, (6) when Submitting comments via http:// accompanying documents. Instead, such information might lose its www.regulations.gov. The http:// provide your contact information on a confidential character due to the www.regulations.gov web page will cover letter. Include your first and last passage of time, and (7) why disclosure require you to provide your name and names, email address, telephone of the information would be contrary to contact information. Your contact number, and optional mailing address. the public interest. information will be viewable to DOE The cover letter will not be publicly It is DOE’s policy that all comments Building Technologies staff only. Your viewable as long as it does not include may be included in the public docket, contact information will not be publicly any comments. without change and as received, Include contact information each time viewable except for your first and last including any personal information you submit comments, data, documents, names, organization name (if any), and provided in the comments (except and other information to DOE. If you submitter representative name (if any). information deemed to be exempt from submit via mail or hand delivery, please If your comment is not processed public disclosure). provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It properly because of technical DOE considers public participation to is not necessary to submit printed difficulties, DOE will use this be a very important part of the process copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be information to contact you. If DOE for developing test procedures and accepted. energy conservation standards. DOE cannot read your comment due to Comments, data, and other technical difficulties and cannot contact actively encourages the participation information submitted to DOE and interaction of the public during the you for clarification, DOE may not be electronically should be provided in able to consider your comment. comment period in each stage of this PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or process. Interactions with and between However, your contact information Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file members of the public provide a will be publicly viewable if you include format. Provide documents that are not balanced discussion of the issues and it in the comment or in any documents secured, written in English and free of assist DOE in the process. Anyone who attached to your comment. Any any defects or viruses. Documents wishes to be added to the DOE mailing information that you do not want to be should not contain special characters or list to receive future notices and publicly viewable should not be any form of encryption and, if possible, information about this process should included in your comment, nor in any they should carry the electronic contact Appliance and Equipment document attached to your comment. signature of the author. Standards Program staff at (202) 586– Persons viewing comments will see only Campaign form letters. Please submit 6636 or via email at first and last names, organization campaign form letters by the originating ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ names, correspondence containing organization in batches of between 50 to ee.doe.gov. comments, and any documents 500 form letters per PDF or as one form submitted with the comments. letter with a list of supporters’ names B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment Do not submit to http:// compiled into one or more PDFs. This Although DOE welcomes comments www.regulations.gov information for reduces comment processing and on any aspect of this proposal, DOE is which disclosure is restricted by statute, posting time. particularly interested in receiving such as trade secrets and commercial or Confidential Business Information. comments and views of interested financial information (hereinafter According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any parties concerning the following issues: referred to as Confidential Business person submitting information that he (1) DOE requests comments on its Information (CBI)). Comments or she believes to be confidential and proposal to maintain the current scope submitted through http:// exempt by law from public disclosure of applicability, with respect to www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed should submit via email, postal mail, or horsepower ratings, of the small electric as CBI. Comments received through the hand delivery two well-marked copies: motors test procedure. website will waive any CBI claims for one copy of the document marked (2) DOE requests comment on its the information submitted. For confidential including all the proposal to incorporate by reference information on submitting CBI, see the information believed to be confidential, IEEE 112–2017 Test Method A and Test

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17025

Method B as alternatives to the place new and significant burdens on a material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or currently incorporated industry test substantial number of small entities. go to www.archives.gov/federal-register/ standards in IEEE 112–2004. In cfr/ibr-locations.html. VI. Approval of the Office of the particular, DOE requests data comparing Secretary * * * * * test results of these standards. (c) * * * The Secretary of Energy has approved (3) DOE requests comment on its (2) IEC 60034–1:2010, ‘‘Rotating publication of this proposed rule. proposal to incorporate by reference IEC electrical machines—Part 1: Rating and 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A as an List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431 performance’’, IBR approved for alternative to currently incorporated appendix B to subpart B of this part. industry testing standards IEEE 112– Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business (3) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, ‘‘Rotating 2004 Test Method A and CSA C747–09. electrical machines—Part 2–1: Standard In particular, DOE requests data information, Energy conservation test procedures, Incorporation by reference, methods for determining losses and comparing the average full-load efficiency from tests (excluding efficiency test results of those standards. Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. machines for traction vehicles)’’, IBR DOE requests comments on its proposal approved for appendix B to subpart B of to limit torque measurement, when Signed in Washington, DC, on March 20, this part. using IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 2019. 1A, to either in-line, shaft-coupled, Steven Chalk, * * * * * rotating torque transducers or Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy (6) IEC 60051–1:2016, ‘‘Direct acting stationary, stator reaction torque Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable indicating analogue electrical measuring transducers. Energy. instruments and their accessories—Part 1: Definitions and general requirements (4) DOE requests comment on its For the reasons stated in the proposal to incorporate by reference IEC common to all parts’’, IBR approved for preamble, DOE is proposing to amend appendix B to subpart B of this part. 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B as an part 431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code alternative to the currently incorporated of Federal Regulations as set forth * * * * * industry testing standards IEEE 112– below: (d) * * * 2004 Test Method B and CSA C390–10 (2) IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard and to IEEE 112–2017-Test Method B. In PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction particular, DOE requests data comparing PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN Motors and Generators’’, approved test results of those standards. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL February 14, 2018, IBR approved for (5) DOE requests comment on the EQUIPMENT §§ 431.12, 431.19, 431.20, and appendix proposed definitions for ‘‘rated output B to subpart B of this part. ■ power’’ and ‘‘breakdown torque.’’ 1. The authority citation for part 431 * * * * * (6) DOE requests comment on how to continues to read as follows: ■ 3. Appendix B to subpart B of part 431 determine when an ‘‘abrupt drop in Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C. is amended by revising the introductory speed’’ (e.g., the local maximum of the 2461 note. note and Sections 2 and 4 to read as torque-speed plot closest to the rated ■ 2. Section 431.15 is amended by: follows: torque) has occurred when testing the ■ a. Revising paragraph (a); Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 431— breakdown torque of a small electric ■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as Uniform Test Method for Measuring motor. paragraph (c)(7) and paragraphs (c)(2) (7) DOE requests comment on the Nominal Full Load Efficiency of and (3) as paragraphs (c)(4) and (5), Electric Motors proposed definitions, and procedures respectively; for determining the values of rated ■ c. Adding new paragraphs (c)(2), (3), Note: For any electric motor type that is frequency and rated load for small and (6); and not currently covered by the energy electric motors. ■ d. Adding paragraph (d)(2). conservation standards at 10 CFR 431.25, (8) DOE seeks input on the testing The revision and additions read as manufacturers of this equipment will need to cost impacts and manufacturer burden follows: use Appendix B 180 days after the effective associated with the test procedure date of the final rule adopting energy amendments described in this § 431.15 Materials incorporated by conservation standards for these motors. reference. document. DOE also seeks comment and Incorporation by Reference any additional data relevant to its (a) Certain material is incorporated by assumptions in calculating these In § 431.15, DOE incorporated by reference, reference into subpart B of part 431 with the entire standard for CSA C390–10, IEC impacts. the approval of the Director of the 60034–2–1:2014, IEC 60034–1:2010, IEC (9) DOE seeks comment on the degree Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) 60051–1:2016, and IEEE 112–2017 into this to which the DOE test procedure should and 1 CFR part 51. All approved appendix; however, only the provisions of consider, and be harmonized further material is available for inspection at those documents specified in section 2 of this with, the most recent relevant industry U.S. Department of Energy, Office of appendix are applicable to this appendix. standards for small electric motors and Energy Efficiency and Renewable In cases where there is a conflict, the whether there are any changes to the Energy, Building Technologies Program, language of this appendix takes precedence Federal test method that would provide Sixth Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW, over those documents. Any subsequent additional benefits to the public. DOE amendment to a referenced document by the Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–2945, standard-setting organization will not affect also requests comment on the benefits or go to http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ _ the test procedure in this appendix, unless and burdens of adopting any industry/ buildings/appliance standards/, and is and until the test procedure is amended by voluntary consensus-based or other available from the sources listed below. DOE. Material is incorporated as it exists on appropriate test procedure, without It is also available for inspection at the the date of the approval, and a notification modification. National Archives and Records of any change in the material will be (10) DOE seeks comments on whether Administration (NARA). For published in the Federal Register. the proposed test procedure would information on the availability of this * * * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17026 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

2. Test Procedures grease-lubricated double-shielded, single- or go to http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ Efficiency and losses must be determined row, deep groove, radial ball bearing. buildings/appliance_standards/, and is in accordance with NEMA MG 1–2009, * * * * * available from the sources listed below. paragraph 12.58.1, ‘‘Determination of Motor ■ 4. Section 431.442 is amended by It is also available for inspection at the Efficiency and Losses,’’ (incorporated by National Archives and Records reference, see § 431.15) and one of the adding in alphabetical order definitions for ‘‘breakdown torque’’, ‘‘rated Administration (NARA). For following testing methods: information on the availability of this (1) CSA C390–10 (incorporated by frequency’’, ‘‘rated load’’, ‘‘rated output power’’, and ‘‘rated voltage’’, to read as material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or reference, see § 431.15), Section 1.3 ‘‘Scope’’, go to www.archives.gov/federal-register/ Section 3.1 ‘‘Definitions’’, Section 5 ‘‘General follows: test requirements—Measurements’’, Section 7 cfr/ibr-locations.html. ‘‘Test method’’, Table 1 ‘‘Resistance § 431.442 Definitions. * * * * * measurement time delay’’, Annex B ‘‘Linear * * * * * (c) IEC. International Electrotechnical regression analysis’’ and Annex C ‘‘Procedure Breakdown torque means the Commission, 3 rue de Varembe´, 1st for correction of dynamometer torque maximum torque that the motor will Floor, P.O. Box 131, CH—1211 Geneva readings.’’ develop with rated voltage and 20—Switzerland, +41 22 919 02 11, or (2) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B frequency applied without an abrupt go to https://webstore.iec.ch/home. (incorporated by reference, see § 431.15), drop in speed, determined in (1) IEC 60034–1:2010, ‘‘Rotating Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, Section 4 accordance with NEMA MG 1–2016 electrical machines—Part 1: Rating and ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, Section 5 (incorporated by reference, see performance’’, IBR approved for ‘‘Basic requirements’’, Section 6.1.3 ‘‘Method §§ 431.444, 431.447.(2) IEC 60034–2– 2–1–1B—Summation of losses, additional § 431.443). load losses according to the method of * * * * * 1:2014 (‘‘IEC 60034–2–1’’), ‘‘Rotating residual losses.’’ The supply voltage shall be Rated frequency means 60 hertz. electrical machines—Part 2–1: Standard in accordance with section 7.2 of IEC 60034– Rated load means the rated output methods for determining losses and 1:2010 (incorporated by reference, see power of a small electric motor. efficiency from tests (excluding § 431.15). The measured resistance at the end Rated output power means the machines for traction vehicles)’’, of the thermal test shall be determined in a mechanical output power that approved June 2014, IBR approved for similar way to the extrapolation procedure corresponds to the small electric motor’s §§ 431.444, 431.447. described in section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034– breakdown torque as specified in NEMA (3) IEC 60051–1:2016, ‘‘Direct acting 1:2010 (incorporated by reference, see MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 (incorporated by indicating analogue electrical measuring § 431.15), using the shortest possible time instruments and their accessories—Part instead of the time interval specified in Table reference, see § 431.443) for single- phase motors or 140 percent of the 1: Definitions and general requirements 5 therein, and extrapolating to zero. The common to all parts’’, IBR approved for measuring instruments for electrical breakdown torque values specified in NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 for §§ 431.444, 431.447. quantities shall have the equivalent of an (d) * * * accuracy class of 0,2 in case of a direct test polyphase motors. For purposes of this (2) IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard and 0,5 in case of an indirect test in definition, NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10– accordance with IEC 60051–1:2016 Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction 5 is applied regardless of whether Motors and Generators’’, approved (incorporated by reference, see § 431.15). elements of NEMA MG 1–2016 Table (3) IEEE 112–2004, Section 6.4 ‘‘Efficiency February 14, 2018, IBR approved for 10–5 are identified as for small or §§ 431.444, 431.447. test method B—Input-output with loss medium motors. segregation (incorporated by reference, see * * * * * § 431.15), or Rated voltage means the input voltage of a small electric motor selected by the (e) NEMA. National Electrical (4) IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B, Input- Manufacturers Association, 1300 North Output With Loss Segregation, (incorporated motor’s manufacturer to be used for testing the motor’s efficiency. 17th Street, Suite 900, Arlington, by reference, see § 431.15), Section 3 Virginia 22209, +1 703 841 3200, or go ‘‘General’’, Section 4 ‘‘Measurements’’, * * * * * to https://www.nema.org. Section 5 ‘‘Machine losses and tests for ■ 5. Section 431.443 is amended by: (1) NEMA MG 1–2016, ‘‘Motors and losses’’, Section 6.1 ‘‘General’’, Section 6.4 ■ a. Revising paragraph (a); ‘‘Efficiency test method B—Input-output Generators’’, approved March 2017, IBR ■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c) as (d); approved for §§ 431.442. with loss segregation’’, Section 7 ‘‘Other ■ c. Adding new paragraph (c); performance tests’’, Section 9.2 ‘‘Form A— (2) [Reserved]. ■ d. Redesignating newly designated ■ Method A’’, Section 9.3 ‘‘Form A2—Method 6. Section 431.444 is revised to read A calculations’’, Section 9.4 ‘‘Form B— paragraph (d)(2) as paragraph (d)(3), and as follows: Method B’’, and Section 9.5 ‘‘Form B2— adding new paragraph (d)(2); and § 431.444 Test Procedures for the Method B calculations. ■ e. Adding paragraph (e). measurement of energy efficiency of small * * * * * The revisions and additions read as follows: electric motors. 4. Procedures for the Testing of Certain Prior to [DATE 180 days after Electric Motor Types § 431.443 Materials incorporated by publication of a final rule in the Federal Prior to testing according to CSA C390–10, reference. Register], representations with respect IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B, IEEE (a) Certain material is incorporated by to the energy use or efficiency of small 112–2004 (Test Method B), or IEEE 112–2017 reference into subpart X of part 431 with electric motors must be based on testing (Test Method B) (incorporated by reference, the approval of the Director of the conducted in accordance with § 431.444 see § 431.15), each basic model of the electric Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) as it appeared in 10 CFR part 431 motor types listed below must be set up in and 1 CFR part 51. All approved subpart X in the 10 CFR parts 200 accordance with the instructions of this material is available for inspection at through 499 edition revised as of section to ensure consistent test results. These steps are designed to enable a motor U.S. Department of Energy, Office of January 1, 2019. Starting on [Date 180 to be attached to a dynamometer and run Energy Efficiency and Renewable days after publication of a final rule in continuously for testing purposes. For the Energy, Building Technologies Program, the Federal Register] representations purposes of this appendix, a ‘‘standard Sixth Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW, with respect to energy use or efficiency bearing’’ is a 6000 series, either open or Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–2945, of small electric motors must be based

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules 17027

on testing conducted in accordance with Section 6.1.2 ‘‘Method 2–1–1A—Direct (incorporated by reference, see the results of testing pursuant to this measurement of input and output’’ § 431.443). The measured resistance at section. (except Section 6.1.2.2, ‘‘Test the end of the thermal test shall be (a) Scope. Pursuant to section Procedure’’). The supply voltage shall determined in a similar way to the 346(b)(1) of EPCA, this section provides be in accordance with section 7.2 of IEC extrapolation procedure described in the test procedures for measuring the 60034–1:2010 (incorporated by section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1:2010 full-load efficiency of small electric reference, see § 431.443). The measured (incorporated by reference, see motors pursuant to EPCA. (42 U.S.C. resistance at the end of the thermal test § 431.443), using the shortest possible 6317(b)(1)) For purposes of this part 431 shall be determined in a similar way to time instead of the time interval and EPCA, the test procedures for the extrapolation procedure described specified in Table 5 therein, and measuring the efficiency of small in section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1:2010 extrapolating to zero. The measuring electric motors shall be the test (incorporated by reference, see instruments for electrical quantities procedures specified in paragraph (b) of § 431.443), using the shortest possible shall have the equivalent of an accuracy this section. time instead of the time interval class of 0,2 in case of a direct test and (b) Testing and Calculations. specified in Table 5 therein, and 0,5 in case of an indirect test in Determine the full-load efficiency of a extrapolating to zero. The measuring accordance with IEC 60051–1:2016 small electric motor using one of the test instruments for electrical quantities (incorporated by reference, see methods listed in paragraphs (b)(2) shall have the equivalent of an accuracy § 431.443). through (4) of this section. Where the class of 0,2 in case of a direct test and (A) Additional IEC 60034–2–1:2014 terms ‘‘rated frequency,’’ ‘‘rated load,’’ 0,5 in case of an indirect test in Method 2–1–1A Torque Measurement and ‘‘rated voltage’’ appear in the accordance with IEC 60051–1:2016 Instructions. If using IEC 60034–2– standards incorporated by reference, use (incorporated by reference, see 1:2014 Method 2–1–1A to measure the corresponding definitions provided § 431.443). motor performance, follow the at § 431.442. (A) Additional IEC 60034–2–1:2014 instructions in paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(B) of (1) Incorporation by reference. (i) In Method 2–1–1A Torque Measurement this section, instead of section 6.1.2.2 of § 431.443, DOE incorporated by Instructions. If using IEC 60034–2– IEC 60034–2–1:2014; reference the entire standard for CSA 1:2014 Method 2–1–1A to measure (B) Couple the machine under test to C747–09, CSA C390–10, IEC 60034–2– motor performance, follow the load machine. Measure torque using an 1:2014, IEC 60034–1:2010, IEC 60051– instructions in paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of in-line shaft-coupled, rotating torque 1:2016, and IEEE 112–2017 into this this section, instead of section 6.1.2.2 of transducer or stationary, stator reaction section; however, only the provisions of IEC 60034–2–1:2014; torque transducer. Operate the machine those documents specified in (B) Couple the machine under test to under test at the rated load until thermal paragraphs (b)(2) through (4) of this a load machine. Measure torque using equilibrium is achieved (rate of change section are applicable to this section. an in-line, shaft-coupled, rotating torque 1 K or less per half hour). Record U, I, (ii) In cases where there is a conflict, transducer or stationary, stator reaction Pel, n, T, qc. the language of this appendix takes torque transducer. Operate the machine (4) Polyphase small electric motors of precedence over those documents. Any under test at the rated load until thermal greater than 1 horsepower (0.75 kW). subsequent amendment to a referenced equilibrium is achieved (rate of change For polyphase small electric motors document by the standard-setting 1 K or less per half hour). Record U, I, exceeding 1 horsepower, use one of the organization will not affect the test Pel, n, T, qc. following methods: procedure in this appendix, unless and (3) Polyphase small electric motors of (i) IEEE 112–2004, Section 6.4, until the test procedure is amended by less than or equal to 1 horsepower (0.75 ‘‘Efficiency test method B—Input-output DOE. Material is incorporated as it kW). For polyphase small electric with loss segregation’’; or exists on the date of the approval, and motors with 1 horsepower or less, use (ii) IEEE 112–2017, Section 3, a notification of any change in the one of the following methods: ‘‘General’’; Section 4, ‘‘Measurements’’; material will be published in the (i) IEEE 112–2004, Section 6.3, Section 5, ‘‘Machine losses and tests for Federal Register. ‘‘Efficiency test method A—Input- losses’’, Section 6.1, ‘‘General’’, Section (2) Single-phase small electric motors. output’’; 6.4, ‘‘Efficiency test method B—Input- For single-phase small electric motors, (ii) IEEE 112–2017, Section 3, output with loss segregation’’, Section use one of the following methods: ‘‘General’’, Section 4, ‘‘Measurements’’, 9.4, ‘‘Form B—Method B’’, and Section (i) IEEE 114–2010,, Section 3.2, ‘‘Test Section 5, ‘‘Machine losses and tests for 9.5, ‘‘Form B2—Method B calculations’’; with load’’, Section 4, ‘‘Testing losses’’, Section 6.1, ‘‘General’’, Section or Facilities, Section 5, ‘‘Measurements’’, 6.3, ‘‘Efficiency test method A—Input- (iii) CSA C390–10, Section 1.3, Section 6, ‘‘General’’, Section 7, ‘‘Type output’’, Section 9.2, ‘‘Form A—Method ‘‘Scope’’, Section 3.1, ‘‘Definitions’’, of loss’’, Section 8, ‘‘Efficiency and A’’, and Section 9.3, ‘‘Form A2— Section 5, ‘‘General test requirements— Power Factor’’; Section 10 Method A calculations’’; Measurements’’, Section 7, ‘‘Test ‘‘Temperature Tests’’, Annex A, Section (iii) CSA C747–09,, Section 1.6 method’’, Table 1, ‘‘Resistance A.3 ‘‘Determination of Motor ‘‘Scope’’, Section 3 ‘‘Definitions’’, measurement time delay, Annex B, Efficiency’’, Annex A, Section A.4 Section 5, ‘‘General test requirements’’, ‘‘Linear regression analysis’’, and Annex ‘‘Explanatory notes for form 3, test and Section 6 ‘‘Test method’’; C, ‘‘Procedure for correction of data’’; (iv) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, Section 3 dynamometer torque readings’’; or (ii) CSA C747–09, Section 1.6 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, Section 4 (iv) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, Section 3 ‘‘Scope’’, Section 3 ‘‘Definitions’’, ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, Section 5 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, Section 4 Section 5, ‘‘General test requirements’’, ‘‘Basic requirements’’, and Section 6.1.2 ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, Section 5 and Section 6 ‘‘Test method’’; ‘‘Method 2–1–1A—Direct measurement ‘‘Basic requirements’’, Section 6.1.3 (iii) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– of input and output’’ (except Section ‘‘Method 2–1–1B—Summation of losses, 1A., Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, 6.1.2.2, ‘‘Test Procedure’’). The supply additional load losses according to the Section 4 ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, voltage shall be in accordance with method of residual losses.’’, and Annex Section 5 ‘‘Basic requirements’’, and section 7.2 of IEC 60034–1:2010 D, ‘‘Test report template for 2–1–1B’’.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 17028 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules

The supply voltage shall be in § 431.447 Department of Energy IEEE Std 112–2004, IEEE Std 112–2017, accordance with section 7.2 of IEC recognition of nationally recognized IEEE Std 114–2010, IEC 60034–2–1, 60034–1:2010 (incorporated by certification programs. CSA C390–10, and CSA C747 reference, see § 431.443). The measured * * * * * (incorporated by reference, see resistance at the end of the thermal test (b) * * * § 431.443) and with similar procedures shall be determined in a similar way to (4) It must be expert in the content and methodologies. This part of the the extrapolation procedure described and application of the test procedures petition should include items such as, and methodologies in IEEE 112–2004, in section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1:2010 but not limited to, a description of prior IEEE 112–2017, IEEE Std 114–2010, IEC (incorporated by reference, see projects and qualifications of staff § 431.443), using the shortest possible 60034–2–1, CSA C390–10, and CSA members. Of particular relevance would time instead of the time interval C747 (incorporated by reference, see be documentary evidence that specified in Table 5 therein, and § 431.443) or similar procedures and extrapolating to zero. The measuring methodologies for determining the establishes experience in applying instruments for electrical quantities energy efficiency of small electric guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC shall have the equivalent of an accuracy motors. It must have satisfactory criteria Guide 25, General Requirements for the class of 0,2 in case of a direct test and and procedures for the selection and Competence of Calibration and Testing 0,5 in case of an indirect test in sampling of electric motors tested for Laboratories to energy efficiency testing accordance with IEC 60051–1:2016 energy efficiency. for electric motors. (incorporated by reference, see (c) * * * * * * * * § 431.443). (4) Expertise in small electric motor [FR Doc. 2019–06868 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] ■ 7. Section 431.447 is amended by test procedures. The petition should set BILLING CODE 6450–01–P revising paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4), to forth the program’s experience with the read as follows: test procedures and methodologies in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APP3.SGM 23APP3 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS3 Vol. 84 Tuesday, No. 78 April 23, 2019

Part IV

General Services Administration

48 CFR Parts 501, 515, 538, et al. General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); Federal Supply Schedule Contracting (Administrative Changes); Final Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17030 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

GENERAL SERVICES approach—opening cases with a more Code, GSA is authorized to establish ADMINISTRATION limited scope to allow stakeholders to procedures for the Federal Supply focus on specific issues that allowed for Schedules (FSS) program. FSS 48 CFR Parts 501, 515, 538, and 552 robust analysis and discussion as well procedures meet the Competition in [Change 100; GSAR Case 2013–G502; as increased transparency—while Contracting Act (CICA) requirement of Docket No. GSA–GSAR–2019–0008; expediting the rulemaking process as full and open competition as long as Sequence No.1] much as possible. participation has been open to all GSAR Case 2013–G502 Federal responsible sources; and orders and RIN 3090–AJ41 Supply Schedule Contracting contracts under those procedures result (Administrative Changes) 1 was opened General Services Administration in the lowest overall cost alternative to as one of several cases to reform the Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); meet the needs of the Federal Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Program Federal Supply Schedule Contracting and address outstanding issues. This Government. (Administrative Changes) case is focused on incorporating non- II. Discussion of the Final Rule AGENCY: Office of Acquisition Policy, complex provisions and clauses, General Services Administration. updating administrative matters, and GSA published a proposed rule with ACTION: Final rule. restructuring the GSAR to be more a request for public comments in the consistent with the FAR in terms of the Federal Register at 79 FR 54126 on SUMMARY: The General Services FSS program. September 10, 2014 to clarify and Administration (GSA) is issuing a final GSA’s FSS program, commonly update the contracting by negotiations rule amending the General Services known as the GSA Schedules program GSAR section and incorporate existing Administration Acquisition Regulation or Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) Federal Supply Schedule Contracting (GSAR) Part 515, Contracting by program, is the Government’s most used policies and procedures, and Negotiation, Part 538, Federal Supply commercial-item purchasing channel, corresponding provisions and clauses. Schedule Contracting, and GSAR Part accounting for approximately $34.2 This final rule amends the GSAR at 552, Solicitation Provisions and billion of Federal contract awards in GSAR part 515, Contracting by Contract Clauses, to clarify, update, and fiscal year 2018 (not including the VA Negotiation, GSAR part 538, Federal Schedules). incorporate existing Federal Supply Supply Schedule Contracting, and GSA Schedules provide a convenient Schedule contract administration corresponding provisions and clauses in policies and procedures. and effective option for both ordering activities and Schedule contractors. GSAR part 552, Solicitation Provisions DATES: Effective: May 23, 2019. Ordering activities enjoy simplified and Contract Clauses. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. ordering procedures and reduced prices, Specifically, the GSAR amendments Dana Bowman, General Services while Schedule contractors connect included in this final rule are as follows: Acquisition Policy Division, GSA, 202– with federal business quickly and 1. Solicitation and Contract 357–9652 or email Dana.Bowman@ easily. Additional features of the gsa.gov, for clarification of content. For Structuring: GSAR 538.273 is Schedules program, including Blanket restructured to be more consistent with information pertaining to status or Purchase Agreements (BPAs) and the formation of Federal Supply publication schedules, contact the Contractor Team Arrangements (CTAs), Schedule (FSS) solicitations and Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202– greatly enhance the flexibility of the 501–4755. Please cite GSAR Case 2013– program. These features offer: contracts. The previous structure of G502. • Additional price discounts for GSAR 538.273 was based upon whether SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ordering activities; the FSS was single-award or multiple- • Expanded opportunities for award. A more practical structure I. Background contractors; outlines where each provision or clause In 2006, GSA initiated a rewrite of the • Elimination of redundant effort, shall be located in FSS solicitations and GSAM to consolidate, update, and with a single contracting vehicle contracts (e.g., as an addendum to FAR revise policy to fulfill statutory and fulfilling complex or ongoing needs; clause 52.212–1 or 52.212–4). • Reductions in administrative time executive order requirements, meet the 2. New Clauses and Provisions: Thirty needs of evolving acquisition programs and paperwork; • Expanded business opportunities (30) new FSS-specific clauses and within GSA’s Federal Acquisition provisions, previously implemented Service (FAS), Public Building Service for socioeconomic groups; and • Help for ordering activities wishing through internal GSA policy and (PBS), and other staff procurement currently in FSS solicitations and offices, and ensure consistency with the to reach socio-economic goals. contracts are incorporated into GSAR FAR. The Schedules Program supports parts 538 and 552. Bringing these GSAR Case 2006–G507 was created to Federal Agencies’ missions by providing clauses and provisions into the GSAR rewrite GSAR Part 538, Federal Supply access from simple commodities such as Schedule Contracting. The proposed pens and pencils to complex services allows for greater transparency, and rule, published in the Federal Register such as IT Modernization. consolidates all regulations into one at 74 FR 4596, on January 26, 2009, Authority for This Rulemaking area, while updating administrative received well over 100 public comments information to ensure currency and Pursuant to paragraph (3) of section consistency within the FSS program. and received considerable stakeholder 152 of Title 41 of the United States opposition. Therefore, GSA withdrew The thirty (30) new provisions/clauses, prescriptions, and brief descriptions are this case (i.e., the complete rewrite of 1 See 79 FR 54126, dated September 10, 2014; GSAM Part 538) in favor of an iterative Extension 79 FR 64356, dated October 29, 2014. as follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17031

No. Name Prescription Description

552.238–70 ...... Cover Page for Worldwide Use in all FSS solicitations. This provision notifies the Offeror of the industry and types Federal Supply Schedules. Use Alternate I for single- of products/services being solicited. award Federal Supply Schedules. 552.238–71 ...... Notice of Total Small Busi- Use in FSS solicitations con- This provision notifies small business Offerors which Spe- ness Set-Aside. taining Special Item Num- cial Item Numbers (SINs) are set aside. bers (SINs) that are set aside for small business. 552.238–72 ...... Information Collection Re- Use in all FSS solicitations. This provision informs Offerors that only required regula- quirements. tions are contained in the solicitation. 552.238–74 ...... Introduction of New Supplies/ Use only in FSS solicitations This provision notifies Offerors of the method to propose Services (INSS). allowing the introduction of new services or supplies not covered by the Schedule. new supplies/services. Note: GSA Form 1649, No- tification of Federal Supply Schedule Improvement, may be required if revising a Special Item Number (SIN). 552.238–76 ...... Use of Non-Government Em- Use only in FSS solicitations This provision provides notification to Offerors that non-Gov- ployees to Review Offers. when non-Government em- ernment employees may be utilized to review their solici- ployees may be utilized to tation response. review solicitation re- sponses. 552.238–87 ...... Delivery Prices ...... Use in all FSS solicitations This clause ensures all parties are aware of the delivery and contracts. terms of the contract. 552.238–88 ...... GSA Advantage! ...... Use in all FSS solicitations This clause outlines to the Contractor that it must participate and contracts except the in the GSA Advantage!® online shopping service. This Department of Veterans Af- clause is not applicable to the Department of Veterans Af- fairs Federal Supply Sched- fairs. ules. 552.238–89 ...... Deliveries to the U.S. Postal Use only in FSS solicitations This clause provides requirements for the delivery of mail- Service. and contracts for mailable able articles delivered direct to a USPS facility. The articles when delivery to a clause ensures the use of the USPS to reduce unneces- U.S. Postal Service (USPS) sary costs of shipping. facility is contemplated. 552.238–90 ...... Characteristics of Electric Use only in FSS solicitations This clause requires the Contractor to provide equipment Current. and contracts when the with electrical currents suitable for the location in which supply of equipment that the equipment is to be used, as specified on the order. uses electrical current is contemplated. 552.238–91 ...... Marking and Documentation Use only in FSS solicitations This clause defines the responsibility of Ordering Activities Requirements for Shipping. and contracts for supplies and Contractors for the marking and documentation of when the need for outlining shipping information. the minimum information and documentation required for shipping is con- templated. 552.238–92 ...... Vendor Managed Inventory Use only in FSS solicitations This clause allows Contractors that commercially provide a (VMI) Program. and contracts for supplies VMI type system to enter into similar partnerships with when a VMI Program is customers under a Blanket Purchase Agreements. contemplated. 552.238–93 ...... Order Acknowledgement ...... Use only in FSS solicitations This clause requires Contractors to acknowledge orders and contracts for supplies. which state ‘‘Order Acknowledgement Required’’ within 10 calendar days after receipt to the Ordering Activity placing the order and contain information pertinent to the order, including the anticipated delivery date. 552.238–94 ...... Accelerated Delivery Require- Use only in FSS solicitations This clause assists with the request of accelerated delivery ments. and contracts for supplies. when the FSS contract delivery period does not meet the bona fide urgent delivery requirements of an Ordering Ac- tivity. 552.238–95 ...... Separate Charge for Perform- Use only in FSS solicitations This clause ensures both parties, Contractors and Ordering ance Oriented Packaging and contracts for items de- Activities, are aware of a separate charge for preserva- (POP). fined as hazardous under tion, packaging, packing and marking and labeling of do- Federal Standard No. 313. mestic and overseas HAZMAT surface shipments. 552.238–96 ...... Separate Charge for Delivery Use only in FSS solicitations This clause ensures both parties, Contractors and Ordering Within Consignee’s Prem- and contracts for supplies Activities, are aware of a separate charges for deliveries ises. when allowing Offerors to within the consignee’s premises. propose separate charges for deliveries within the consignee’s premises.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17032 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

No. Name Prescription Description

552.238–97 ...... Parts and Service ...... Use in all FSS solicitations This clause is used to ensure that the parts and services and contracts. (including the performance of warranty or guarantee serv- ice) submitted by Offerors (dealers/distributors) is good for the entire contract period. 552.238–98 ...... Clauses for Overseas Cov- Use only in FSS solicitations This clause ensures all applicable overseas clauses are in- erage. and contracts when over- cluded in the solicitation and contract. seas acquisition is con- templated. The following clauses and provisions shall also be in- serted in full text, when ap- plicable. (a) 52.214–34 Submission of Offers in the English Language. (b) 52.214–35 Submission of Offers in U.S. Currency. (c) 552.238–90 Characteris- tics of Electric Current. (d) 552.238–91 Marking and Documentation Require- ments Per Shipment. (e) 552.238–97 Parts and Service. (f) 552.238–99 Delivery Prices Overseas. (g) 552.238–100 Trans- shipments. (h) 552.238–101 Foreign Taxes and Duties. (i) 52.247–34 FOB Destina- tion. (j) 52.247–38 FOB Inland Carrier, Point of Expor- tation. (k) 52.247–39 FOB Inland Point, Country of Importa- tion. 552.238–99 ...... Delivery Prices Overseas ...... Use only in FSS solicitations This clause is for use for f.o.b. destination in overseas deliv- and contracts when over- eries to ensure that all parties are aware of delivery seas acquisition is con- terms. templated. 552.238–100 ...... Transshipments ...... Use in FSS solicitations and This clause states the terms and conditions for trans- contracts when overseas shipments, and provides information to Contractors with acquisition is contemplated. the necessary Department of Defense forms. 552.238–101 ...... Foreign Taxes and Duties ..... Use only in FSS solicitations This clause delineates which fees, taxes and other foreign and contracts when over- Governmental costs are exempt/non-exempt by the U.S. seas acquisition is con- Government. templated. 552.238–102 ...... English Language and U.S. Use in all FSS solicitations This clause is used to instruct Contractors that all docu- Dollar Requirements. and contracts. ments shall be produced in the English language, includ- ing, but not limited to, price lists and catalogs. 552.238–103 ...... Electronic Commerce ...... Use in all FSS solicitations This clause outlines the use of electronic commerce/data and contracts except the interchange to conduct contract processes and proce- Department of Veterans Af- dures. fairs Federal Supply Sched- ules. 552.238–104 ...... Dissemination of Information Use in all FSS solicitations This clause provides to the Contractor the responsibility of by Contractor. and contracts. distributing Authorized Federal Supply Schedule Price Lists to all authorized sales outlets. 552.238–105 ...... Deliveries Beyond the Con- Use only in FSS solicitations This clause allows orders to be processed if they were re- tractual Period—Placing of and contracts for supplies. ceived prior to the expiration of the contract. Orders. 552.238–106 ...... Interpretation of Contract Re- Use in all FSS solicitations This indicates that only written clarifications regarding inter- quirements. and contracts. pretation of contract clauses may only be made by the Contracting Officer or his/her designated representative. 552.238–107 ...... Export Traffic Release (Sup- Use in FSS solicitations and This clause informs Contractors of the requirements for ex- plies). contracts for supplies, ex- porting items under the contract. cept vehicles. 552.238–108 ...... Spare Parts Kit ...... Use only in FSS solicitations This clause ensures requirements for spare part kits are un- and contracts for items re- derstood by all parties. quiring spare part kits.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17033

No. Name Prescription Description

552.238–109 ...... Authentication Supplies and Use in Federal Supply Sched- This clause outlines requirements for the Homeland Secu- Services. ule 70 solicitations only, rity Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD–12). and only contracts awarded Special Item Numbers (SINs) associated with the Homeland Security Presi- dential Directive 12 (HSPD–12). 552.238–110 ...... Commercial Satellite Commu- Use only in FSS solicitations This clause provides minimum requirements for nication (COMSATCOM) and contracts for COMSATCOM services. Services. COMSATCOM services. 552.238–111 ...... Environmental Protection Use only in FSS solicitations This clause ensures items in FSC Group 68 items (insecti- Agency Registration Re- and contracts for supplies cides, etc.) are properly registered with EPA. quirement. when items may require registration with the Envi- ronmental Protection Agen- cy.

3. Reinstated Clauses and Provisions: Manual (GSAM) rewrite and retained by consistency and transparency. The four Four (4) FSS-specific clauses and internal GSA policy are reinstated and (4) reinstated clauses/provisions, provisions that were removed from the given new clause numbers. The clauses prescriptions, and a brief description are GSAR as part of a previous General and provisions are reinstated into GSAR as follows: Services Administration Acquisition Parts 538 and 552 in order to ensure

New No. Previous No. Name Prescription Description

552.238–75 ...... 552.212–73 Evaluation—Commercial Use in FSS standing so- This provision informs Offerors that multiple awards Items (Federal Supply licitations. for commercial items offered may be made, re- Schedules). sulting in a binding contract between parties. 552.238–84 ...... 552.232–8 Discounts for Prompt Use in all FSS solicita- This clause provides the rules governing early pay- Payment. tions and contracts. ment under the FSS contract (and resulting or- ders). 552.238–85 ...... 552.232–83 Contractor’s Billing Re- Use in all FSS solicita- This clause provides to the Contractor the require- sponsibilities. tions and contracts. ments of billing responsibilities, particularly those associated with participating dealers. 552.238–86 ...... 552.211–78 Delivery Schedule ...... Use only in FSS solicita- This clause provides to the Offeror the requirement tions and contracts for to address normal commercial delivery times in supplies. its offer.

4. Revised Existing Clauses and updated to reflect current references and description of the changes are as Provisions: Ten (10) existing FSS- practices. The ten (10) updated existing follows: specific clauses and provisions are clauses/provisions and a brief

No. Name Description of change

552.212–71 ...... Contract Terms and Conditions Applicable to GSA Acquisi- Updated to remove unnecessary clauses and outdated FSS tion Commercial Items. clauses. 552.238–73 ...... Identification of Electronic Office Equipment Providing Acces- Prescription update to use only in FSS solicitations for elec- sibility for the Handicapped. tronic office equipment. 552.238–74 ...... Submission and Distribution of Authorized Federal Supply Prescription updated to use in all FSS solicitations and con- Schedule (FSS) Price Lists. tracts. 552.238–75 ...... Identification of Products that have Environmental Attributes Prescription updated to use only in FSS solicitations and contracts that contemplate items with environmental at- tributes. 552.238–76 ...... Cancellation ...... Prescription updated to use in all FSS solicitations and con- tracts. 552.238–77 ...... Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting ...... Prescription updated to use in all FSS solicitations and con- tracts. 552.238–78 ...... Price Reductions ...... Prescription updated to use in all FSS solicitations and con- tracts. 552.238–79 ...... Scope of Contract (Eligible Ordering Activities) ...... Updated to reference the correct payment clause, FAR 52.232–36, Payment by Third Party. 552.238–80 ...... Modifications ...... Prescription updated to use in all FSS solicitations and con- tracts. (i) Use Alternate I for Federal Supply Schedules that only ac- cept eMod. 552.238–81 ...... Examination of Records by GSA (Federal Supply Schedules) Relocated and retitled from 552.215–71, Examination of Records by GSA (Multiple Award Schedule) as this is an FSS-specific clause.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17034 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

5. Technical Amendments: Æ 552.238–107 Restriction on the Æ 552.212–71 Contract Terms and Typographical errors are corrected and Acceptance of Orders Conditions Applicable to GSA minor administrative changes are made Æ 552.238–110 Shipping Points Acquisition of Commercial Items to GSAR parts 538 and 552 (e.g., Æ 552.238–111 Contact for Contract B. Analysis of Public Comments renumbers existing provisions and Administration clauses, changes ‘‘MAS’’ to ‘‘FSS’’ to be Æ 552.238–119 Federal Excise Tax GSA received numerous comments more consistent with the FAR). Æ 552.238–120 Guarantee from three respondents in response to 3 Æ 552.238–122 Imprest Funds the proposed rule. All comments filed A. Summary of Significant Changes were considered. A discussion of the From the Proposed Rule Æ 552.238–127 Export Traffic Release (Vehicles) comments and the changes made to the final rule as a result of those comments Three respondents submitted Æ 552.238–128 Carload Shipments is provided as follows: numerous comments in response to the • proposed rule. The General Services Reinstated Clauses and Provisions: The comments received covered Administration has reviewed the Seven (7) FSS-specific clauses and several points and topics. In order to comments in the development of the provisions were contemplated for provide clarification and to better final rule. A discussion of the comments reinstatement in the proposed rule for respond to the issues raised, the and the changes made to the rule as a public comment. The proposed rule respondents’ comments are organized result of these comments are addressed published incorrectly identified this into the following categories: (1) General in the Analysis of Public Comments number as six (6), because 552.238–82 comments regarding the overall rule; (2) Section. (P.R.), now 552.238–90 (F.R.) Delivery Comments on specific provisions and This final rule makes the following Schedule was incorrectly included in clauses in the rule; (3) Comments changes from the proposed rule: the list of ‘‘new’’ FSS-specific clauses regarding the Paperwork Reduction Act • New Clauses and Provisions: Forty- rather than the ‘‘reinstated’’ clauses. and Regulatory Flexibility Act; and (4) three (43) new FSS-specific clauses and After taking into consideration public Comments outside the scope of the rule. comments received from the proposed provisions were contemplated in the 1. General Comments proposed rule for public comment.2 The rule, four (4) FSS-specific clauses and proposed rule published incorrectly provisions are reinstated into GSAR The following general comments were stated this number as thirty-five (35) parts 538 and 552 in the final rule. The received in response to the proposed and listed forty-five (45) clauses. following three (3) clauses from the rule: However, 552.238–82 (Proposed Rule), proposed rule are removed from the Respondent: There is value in GSA now 552.238–89 (Final Rule), Delivery GSAR final rule: maintaining a system of Acquisition and Schedule was incorrectly included in Æ 552.238–89 Contractor’s Remittance Instruction Letters to the GSAR as this the ‘‘new’’ clause list rather than the (Payment) Address is a mechanism to provide transparency. ‘‘reinstated’’ clause list. In addition, Æ 552.238–97 Payment by Credit Card GSA Response: GSA will continue to 552.238–92 Examination of Records by Æ 552.238–98 Warranty maintain a system of Acquisition Letters GSA (Federal Supply Schedules) was • and Instructional Letters to supplement Revised Existing Clauses and the GSAR. However, the goal is to incorrectly included in the ‘‘new’’ Provisions: Nine (9) existing clauses and clause list rather than the ‘‘revised implement such policy letters into the provisions were contemplated for GSAM/GSAR for transparency and existing’’ clause list. So, the correct revision in the proposed rule for public number was forty-three (43) ‘‘new’’ FSS- policy guidance. No changes were made comment. The proposed rule published to the final rule as a result of this specific clauses in the proposed rule. incorrectly identified this number as After taking into consideration public comment. seven (7) clauses. However, GSAR Respondent: GSA should initiate a comments received from the proposed clause 552.238–94 Examination of rule, thirty (30) new FSS-specific Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Records by GSA (Federal Supply case to delete all references to ‘‘Federal clauses and provisions are incorporated Schedules) was incorrectly included in into GSAR parts 538 and 552 in the final Supply Schedule (FSS)’’ and replace the list of ‘‘new’’ FSS-specific clauses with the term ‘‘GSA Multiple Award rule. The following thirteen (13) clauses rather than the ‘‘revised existing’’ from the proposed rule are removed Schedule (MAS)’’ or ‘‘GSA Schedule.’’ clauses. In addition, GSAR clause GSA Response: ‘‘Federal Supply from the GSAR final rule: 552.238–78 Scope of Contract (Eligible Schedule’’ is being incorporated in the Æ 552.238–85 Significant Changes Ordering Activities) is revised to replace GSAR to achieve consistency with the Æ 552.238–88 Notice: Requests for the reference to GSAR clause 552.232– FAR, which does not frequently use the Explanation or Information and 79 Payment by Credit Card, which is term ‘‘Multiple Award Schedule Hours of Operation redundant to FAR clause 52.232–36 (MAS).’’ Until MAS is changed in the Æ 552.238–91 Authorized Negotiators Payment by Third Party, and is now FAR, the GSAR will use the term Æ 552.238–102 Inspection at included in the list of ‘‘revised existing’’ Federal Supply Schedule. Destination clauses. So, the correct number is nine Respondent: GSA has not performed a Æ 552.238–106 Post-Award Samples (9) ‘‘revised existing’’ FSS-specific detailed analysis of nor obtained a clauses from the proposed rule. After baseline understanding of how the 2 The proposed rule at 79 FR 54126 notes thirty- reviewing the public comments and proposed policies were historically five (35) new clauses and provisions in the text at reflecting on the content, ten (10) administered and implemented across Paragraph I.2, but lists forty-five (45) new clauses revised existing FSS-specific provisions and provisions in the table. One (1) of the clauses all Schedules and the GSA FSS listed in the proposed rule table, ‘‘Delivery and clauses are incorporated into GSAR contracting officer community. Schedule’’, was actually previously part of the parts 538 and 552 in the final rule. The GSA Response: GSA has performed an GSAR and is now reinstated; this is now reflected following one (1) GSAR clause is added in-depth analysis of the clauses in Paragraph II.3 of the final rule. One (1) of the to the GSAR final rule because it clauses listed in the proposed rule table, proposed in this rule and has ‘‘Examination of Records by GSA’’, actually existed includes references to GSAR clauses in the GSAR and is moved; this is now reflected in affected by this case and is amended to 3 See GSAR Case 2013–G502; Docket 2014–0009; Paragraph II.4 of the final rule. reflect such. Sequence 1 [79 FR 54125 (September 10, 2014)].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17035

determined that the clauses are still GSA Response: Concur. The alternate address be addressed in Block 18B of used in FSS contracts. Adding them to version of the provision is removed SF1449. the GSAR increases clarity for FSS from the GSAR text final rule. GSA Response: Concur. This clause is contracting officers and contractors to Additionally, instructions for a single- deleted from the GSAR text of the final understand when each clause should be award Federal Supply Schedule which rule. used. However, based on comments has a beginning and end date, and also Respondent: Recommend GSA review received in response to the proposed known as a non-standing solicitation, FAR 32.1108 as it applies to GSA’s rule, some clauses are revised to address are included in the new GSAR provision proposed GSAR clause Payment by the specific comments related to Cover Page for Worldwide Federal Credit Card and the ‘‘third party’’ outdated policies. No changes were Supply Schedules, which instructs payment clause to ensure the proposed made to the final rule as a result of this contracting officers to insert a beginning clause is not inconsistent with or in comment. and end date for non-standing conflict with FAR. Respondent: GSA should reissue the solicitations. GSA Response: Concur. The proposed proposed rule, covering only clauses Respondent: GSAR clause Notice GSAR clause Payment by Credit Card is currently included in all GSA Schedule Request for Explanations or Information redundant to FAR clause 52.232–36 and contracts and which are being and Hours of Operation appears is removed from the GSAR text final incorporated into the GSAR without duplicative and/or unnecessary. rule. Additionally, GSAR clause Scope change. Information for offerors to submit of Contract (Eligible Ordering Activities) GSA Response: This rule only questions is already included in the SF is amended as a result of this comment. incorporates clauses currently in use by 1449. Respondent: GSAR clauses the FSS program through internal GSA Response: Concur. This clause is Performance Oriented Packaging; Parts agency policy (e.g., acquisition letters). duplicative of the Standard Form 1449 and Service; and Spare Parts, seem With the exception of minor and is therefore deleted from the GSAR impracticable to negotiate at the administrative edits, different numbers, text of the final rule. schedule contract level. GSA should and slightly different names to improve Respondent: What is the purpose of consider deleting these clauses from the clarity, the substances of the clauses are including a unique inspection clause, GSAR or including instructions for the same as those currently in FSS such as the proposed GSAR clause implementing the provisions at the task contracts and are being incorporated Inspection, in MAS contracts? The order level. into the GSAR without change. commercial item clause has an GSA Response: Concur. The clauses Respondent: Additional time should inspection provision and an alternate be allocated to interested parties to are maintained at the contract level, but for use in service contracts. are revised to require submission of the comment on the proposed language, GSA Response: Concur. This clause discuss specific issues with each of the required information at the task order was previously used specifically for level. GSAR text is amended as a result legacy policies, and the implications on stock and special order contracts and current operations. of this comment. does not belong in GSAR part 538. The Respondent: GSAR clause Authorized GSA Response: GSA extended the clause is deleted from the GSAR text comment period to provide additional Negotiators appears to be duplicative of final rule. FAR 52.203–2 provision which is time for interested parties to provide Respondent: The following GSAR mandatory for all FSS contracts. This comments (See 79 FR 64356). clauses are unique to an individual clause and GSAR clause Contact for Respondent: The respondent procurement. GSA should consider Contract Administration should use a requested clarity on the number of new removing them from the GSAR and designated URL to revise POC FSS-specific clauses currently in FSS including them in a document or information and feed this information to solicitations that will be incorporated database that is easier to change to keep associated contract systems. into the GSAR. pace with federal and industry changes. GSA Response: The final rule A. Post-award Samples prescribes a GSA Response: Both clauses are incorporates 33 new FSS-specific samples clause applicable only to removed from the GSAR text final rule. clauses. carpet. The agency will take this suggestion into consideration when updating 2. Comments on Specific Provisions and B. Export Traffic Release (Vehicles) applicable policy in the future. Clauses prescribes a clause applicable only to vehicles. Respondent: Vendors frequently use GSAR Text Amended as a Result of C. Restriction on the Acceptance of multiple carriers for shipments. It is Public Comments Orders prescribes a clause restricting the therefore not feasible to specify a Respondent: The proposed rule adds receipt of orders from Navy ships that specific carrier at the Schedule contract GSAR clause Evaluation—Commercial is only applicable to copiers, supplies level as required in GSAR clause Items including an alternate. and services. Shipping Points. A clause entitled Evaluation— D. Federal Excise Taxes prescribes an GSA Response: Concur. This clause is Commercial Items (Multiple Award Excise Tax applicable only to tires and removed from the GSAR text final rule. Schedule (552.212–73) has been in the tubes. Respondent: GSA should insert a MAS contract since 1997. E. Carload Shipments prescribes a statement at the end of GSAR clause Alternate I, however, is new and a clause applicable only in contracts for Significant Changes that prior to significant change to the way resellers’ vehicles. refreshing a solicitation to incorporate offers are now evaluated. Further, the GSA Response: Concur. The significant changes, existing contractors provisions of the clause are inconsistent prescriptions and associated clauses are should be given no less than 60 days to with MAS contracting policy and deleted from the GSAR text final rule. review and comment or implement the procedures. Alternate I is prescribed for Respondent: GSA’s proposed clause provision. use in non-standing Schedules. At a Contractor’s Remittance (Payment) GSA Response: This clause is minimum the rule should explain what Address provision appears to be removed from the GSAR text final rule. a non-standing schedule is. It is not a duplicative or in conflict with FAR FAS provides offerors with a 30-day concept currently in use. 12.303 which requires the remittance notice when a solicitation is amended

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17036 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

from a previous version to a new applies only in Schedule 51V and language’’ and U.S. ‘‘dollar’’ version. perhaps Schedule 75. requirements. Respondent: The GSAR clause GSA Response: This clause is not GSA Response: The ‘‘English Guarantee is applicable only to major prescribed for all solicitations. It is only language’’ and U.S. ‘‘dollar’’ appliances. GSA should consider going included in solicitations and contracts requirements are included in the to standard commercial warranty in all for supplies when a VMI Program is instructions for competitive acquisitions MAS schedules as provided for in the contemplated. (FAR clause 52.215–1). FSS uses proposed Warranty clause and FAR Respondent: Delivery prices and commercial item acquisition clause 52.212–4 Contract Terms and terms are a matter of FSS contract instructions (52.212–1) and therefore Conditions—Commercial Items. negotiations, which should be based on must specify this requirement as a GSA Response: Concur. This clause is a contractor’s commercial practices. separate clause. removed from the GSAR text final rule. Mandating specific delivery terms and Respondent: GSA’s proposed GSAR The standard commercial warranty pricing, such as GSAR clauses Delivery clause Contractor’s Billing applies to all FSS contracts. Prices Overseas and Delivery Prices, will Responsibilities appears to be in conflict Respondent: GSA’s proposed clause result in schedule contractors having to with FAR. How are dealers permitted to Warranty appears to be duplicative or in deviate from their standard commercial bill ordering activities if payments are conflict with FAR 52.212–4(o) clause. practices. Customization of these terms tied to the contractor’s EFT in SAM? Also, COs are required to make a to meet GSA specific requirements GSA Response: The FAR does not currently provide coverage for the determination (D&F) in the Acquisition could necessitate wholesale changes to contractor’s relationship with their Plan IAW FAR 46.703 prior to including contractor shipping and delivery participating dealers. The terms of EFT, a warranty clause. processes. as it relates to the SAM registration, are GSA Response: Concur. This clause is GSA Response: GSAR clauses covered by FAR clause 52.204–7 and removed from the GSAR text final rule. Delivery Prices Overseas and Delivery only apply to the prime contractor The standard commercial warranty Prices do not state specific delivery relationship. applies to all FSS contracts. terms or pricing. The clauses require Respondent: Recommend GSA delete Respondent: GSA’s proposed clause contractors to notify the Government if proposed GSAR clause Imprest Funds Deliveries Beyond the Contractual they cannot deliver within the specified (Petty Cash) since the use of imprest Period—Placing of Orders appears to be locations agreed to up-front. Also, the funds are established by individual duplicative or inconsistent with FAR clauses are essential to FSS contracts agencies. Also FAR 13.305–3 establishes 52.216–22(d). The prescription calls for and will ensure a consistent basis for Conditions for Use of Imprest Funds use in all FSS solicitations and contracts delivery terms across the FSS program. including a limit of $500. for supplies. However, the clause itself GSA Response: Concur. This clause is Respondent: The respondent listed a says in accordance with clause Scope of removed from the GSAR text final rule. number of provisions and clauses that Contract (Eligible Ordering Activities) were not included in the proposed rule, which only applies to ‘‘solicitations and GSAR Text not Amended as a Result of asking if the clauses not included in this contracts which contain products and Public Comments rule would be deleted entirely or services determined by the Secretary of Respondent: GSAR clause published for comments and an IRFA Homeland Security to facilitate recovery Evaluation—Commercial Items (Federal analysis conducted to determine the from major disasters, terrorism, or Supply Schedules) appears to be costs and economic impact on small nuclear, biological, chemical, or duplicative and/or in conflict with FAR. businesses. radiological attack.’’ So there appears to ‘‘Multiple awards’’ and basis of awards GSA Response: The absence of be inconsistency here. Also which are already addressed under FAR existing provisions and clauses in the products/services has DHS determined 52.212–1(g) and (h). Also the phrase ‘‘at final rule does not necessarily mean are approved for used by ’eligible the lowest overall cost’’ implies that they are being deleted from FSS ordering activities’’? In other words, there is a head-to-head price solicitations. Any attempt to incorporate which solicitations are COs supposed to competition that is not applicable to new provisions and clauses will be include the Scope of Contract (Eligible schedule offers. Also paragraph (b) addressed in a separate GSAR case and Ordering Activities) clause? How or appears to duplicate FAR 52.212–2(c). an IRFA analysis will be conducted at when is that determination to be made? Withdrawals are addressed under FAR such time. GSA performed an in-depth GSA Response: GSAR clause 52.212–1. analysis of all FSS provisions and Deliveries Beyond the Contractual GSA Response: As stated above, clauses and after careful consideration Period—Placing Orders is not Alternate I of GSAR provision decided to only include the most-used, inconsistent or duplicative of FAR Evaluation—Commercial Items (Federal non-complex clauses in this GSAR case. 52.216–22(d). This clause supplements Supply Schedules) is deleted from the Respondent: Is there any plan by FAS the FAR by providing Contracting GSAR text of the final rule. However, to ensure streamlined solicitations are Officers with specific instructions for the purpose of the basic provision is not in compliance with FAR 12.603 for such situations. duplicative and does not conflict with Commercial Items? Subpart 538.7004 is revised in GSAR the FAR provision. The FAR provision GSA Response: This case streamlines case 2010–G511 Purchasing by Non- the respondent cites, 52.212–1, is the solicitation process and ensures the Federal Entities, 81 FR 36425 effective intended to provide instructions to appropriate terms of the FAR July 6, 2016, to state ‘‘The contracting offerors, whereas GSAR provision commercial items requirements are officer shall insert the clause, Scope of Evaluation—Commercial Items is incorporated into FSS solicitations and Contract (Eligible Ordering Activities), intended to supplement FAR provision contracts. Also, FSS contracts already in solicitations and contracts for all 52.212–2. include FAR clause 52.212–5 and Federal Supply Schedules.’’ Respondent: Should the proposed designate the appropriate clauses and In December 2006, DHS Memo 06– GSAR clause Vendor Managed provisions. 11884, stipulated that all goods and Inventory be included in all Respondent: There are already FAR services available on GSA Federal solicitations? This clause typically provisions/clauses to address ‘‘English Supply Schedules qualified as goods

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17037

and services to be used to facilitate 514.201–1); FAR Part 15, Contracting by Schedules) was previously included in recovery from a major disaster declared Negotiation (see GSAR 515.204–1); and the GSAR at 552.232–8. The clause is by the President under the Robert T solicitations under FAR Part 12, unchanged from the previous version Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Acquisition of Commercial Items, when and is now reinstated under 538.273 Act, or to facilitate recovery from issued in accordance with the policy and 552.238–84. No changes were made terrorism or nuclear, biological, and procedures of FAR Part 14 and FAR to the rule as a result of this comment. chemical, or radiological attack. The Part 15 (see GSAR 512.301). This Respondent: Proposed GSAR memo was signed by the then Secretary includes information collection prescription 538.273(d) directs use of of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff. requirements found in GSA Federal the clause Submission and Distribution Supply Schedule (FSS) solicitations.’’ 3. Comments on Paperwork Reduction of Authorized Federal Supply Schedule Act and Regulatory Flexibility Act 4. Comments Outside the Scope of the (FSS) Price Lists, which requires Rule distribution of a paper price list. This is Respondent: Please address several an opportunity for GSA to eliminate a collections of information, mandated for Respondent: There is no GSAR clause requirement in light of the extensive submittal in all FSS solicitations, which that mandates contractors be subjected electronic reporting required of do not appear to be listed in OMB’s routinely to Contractor Assistance Visits contractors. current Inventory of Approved (CAV). I recommend GSA create a GSA Response: GSAR clause Information Collections on reginfo.gov clause to indicate it is mandatory, Submission and Distribution of as part of the IRFA analysis. conduct the IRFA analysis of cost Authorized Federal Supply Schedule GSA Response: The IRFA describes burden and impact on small businesses, (FSS) Price Lists is not being revised by the impact of the proposed rule on small and the CAV requirements. this rule; therefore, this comment is entities. It does not break the clauses GSA Response: This suggestion is outside the scope of this case. No down individually. GSAR case 2013– outside the scope of the current rule as changes were made to the rule as a G502, which incorporates a number of this rule focuses on publishing non- result of this comment. provisions and clauses currently in use complex provisions and clauses, in FSS solicitations and contracts, updating administrative matters, and Respondent: The text of GSAR clause includes an IRFA that took into restructuring the GSAR to be more Cancellation, which ‘‘provides consideration all of the applicable consistent with the FAR in terms of the instructions to the Offeror on canceling clauses and provisions that may impact FSS program. Contractor Assessments its FSS contracts,’’ should be corrected small entities. The requirements are conducted under GSAR clause to reflect that the clause is intended for described in this comment are not part Examination of Records by GSA use by contractors only. Additional text of the provisions and clauses on which (Federal Supply Schedules). GSA in the clause, which indicates that the this rule seeks feedback. The collection examines the cost burden and impact of Government will not reimburse the requirements included in this comment CAVs on vendors in the PRA of the minimum guarantee if the contractor are included in OMB Control 3090– GSAR Examination of Records clause. elects to cancel the contract, violates 0163. No changes were made to the rule Respondent: There are significant FAR 16.501–2(b)(3) that the as a result of this comment. clauses covered by the rule that should Government’s ‘‘obligation’’ in IDIQ Respondent: The methodology for be the subject of a separate rule-making, contracts is ‘‘to the minimum quantity estimating Paperwork Burdens is flawed such as the Price Reduction clause. specified in the contract’’. resulting in a significant Including such provisions in this GSA Response: The text of the clause underestimation of the burden imposed massive collection of clauses does not questioned is not being revised; by the rule. offer the opportunity to propose changes therefore, the comments are not within GSA Response: GSA has outlined its in this important area. the scope of this case. However, GSA methodology for calculating the burden GSA Response: The Price Reductions will take the comments into estimates in the information collection clause is not being changed as a result consideration for potentially addressing supporting statement. Since no specific of this rule. Comments on the substance in a separate case. No changes were information on how the methodology is of this clause are considered outside the made to the rule as a result of this flawed was provided, no changes were scope of this rule. No changes were comment. made to the rule as a result of this made to the rule as a result of this Respondent: GSA’s Examination of comment. comment. Records by GSA (Federal Supply Respondent: Clarify what information Respondent: The current GSAR does Schedules) clause, appears to be in collection requirements are being not contain the proposed GSAR Clause conflict with FAR 52.212–4 Alternate I’s referred to in GSAR clause Information Discounts for Prompt Payment ‘‘access to records,’’ which is limited to Collection Requirements and comment referenced in the proposed rule. The service contracts and restricts access to on whether this provision would be proposed clause should be included for timecards to verify labor hours charged accurate in all FSS solicitations as public comment in a subsequent and, in the case of a cost-reimbursable proposed. rulemaking. The clause appears T&M contract, invoices to certify GSA Response: The information complicated, and its purpose is not material costs. Also, recommend collection associated with this clause, clear. Prompt payment discounts should addressing the ‘‘Report Card’’ by COs OMB control number 3090–0163, is for be disclosed in the CSPF. Whether the into CPARs and the cost to the information specific to a contract or contractor offers them to the Government for the IOAs travel to and contracting action, not required by government, or the contracting officer preparation for visits with contractors. regulation. The supporting statement for accepts them, should be subject to GSA Response: The text of the clause this information collection notes it is negotiation. The Government can advise questioned is not being revised; ‘‘associated with GSA’s information its contracting staff of factors to consider therefore, the comments are not within collection requirements contained in without adding another clause to the the scope of this case. However, GSA solicitations issued in accordance with contract. will take the comments into the Uniform Contract Format under FAR GSA Response: Clause Discounts for consideration for potentially addressing Part 14, Sealed Bidding (see GSAR Prompt Payment (Federal Supply in a separate case. No changes were

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17038 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

made to the rule as a result of this contract, and other FSS vendors to conduct 36.25% (OMB Memo M–08–13). The comment. market research when submitting proposals. estimated burden to the public for the Therefore, this rule does not pose any new below clauses are as follows: III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 projected reporting, recordkeeping, or The reinstated GSAR clause 552.238– Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and additional compliance requirements. Bringing these regulations into the GSAR 84 Discounts for Prompt Payment 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs consolidates all regulations into one area, requires the offeror to provide the and benefits of available regulatory allowing for any future changes to receive Government a discount for early alternatives and, if regulation is public comment. payment, if applicable. necessary, to select regulatory There are a total of 31 Schedules, with 14 Respondents: 14,674. possessing an array of Special Item Numbers approaches that maximize net benefits Responses per respondent: 1. (SINs) set-aside for small businesses. Overall, (including potential economic, Total annual responses: 14,674. small businesses have benefited from GSA environmental, public health and safety Preparation hours per response: 1.0 (1 hr.). providing access to the Federal marketplace Total response burden hours: 14,674. effects, distributive impacts, and via the Pre-award phase (Pathway to Cost per hour: $47.06 equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the Success), the Post-award phase (New Estimated cost burden to the public: importance of quantifying both costs Contractor Orientation), and Contractor $690,558.44 and benefits, of reducing costs, of Assessments. FSS contracts are negotiated as The new GSAR clause 552.238–87 harmonizing rules, and of promoting volume purchase agreements, with generally flexibility. This is not a significant very favorable pricing. The ability of small Delivery Prices requires the offeror to regulatory action and, therefore, was not businesses to receive awards under the FSS identify the intended geographic area(s)/ subject to review under section 6(b) of Program has enabled them to grow in the countries/zones that are to be covered. Federal marketplace as well as realize Respondents: 8,000. E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and significant cost savings. Responses per respondent: 1. Review, dated September 30, 1993. This There were no comments filed by the Total annual responses: 8,000. rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. Preparation hours per response: .50 (30 804. Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small minutes). Business Administration in response to Total response burden hours: 4,000. IV. Executive Order 13771 the rule. The Regulatory Secretariat will Cost per hour: $47.06 This final rule is not subject to E.O. submit a copy of the FRFA to the Chief Estimated cost burden to the public: 13771, because this rule is not a Counsel for Advocacy of the Small $188,240.00 significant regulatory action under E.O. Business Administration. A copy of the The new GSAR clause 552.238–95 12866. FRFA may be obtained from the Separate Charge for Performance Regulatory Secretariat. V. Regulatory Flexibility Act Oriented Packaging requires the offeror VI. Paperwork Reduction Act to list any separate charge for This final rule will not have a preservation, packaging, packing and significant economic impact on a The Paperwork Reduction Act marking, and labeling of domestic and substantial number of small entities (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) applies. The rule overseas HAZMAT surface shipments. within the meaning of the Regulatory implements a number of provisions and Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., clauses currently in use in FSS Respondents: 8,000. solicitations and contracts that contain Responses per respondent: 1. because the rule will incorporate a Total annual responses: 8,000. number of provisions and clauses that information collection requirements. Preparation hours per response: .50 (30 are currently in use in FSS solicitations The requirements are not new, but have minutes). and contracts and most contractors are not previously been approved by OMB. Total response burden hours: 4,000. familiar with and are currently The information collected is used by Cost per hour: $47.06. complying with these practices. FAS to evaluate vendors’ offers, Estimated cost burden to the public: Although this rule does not have a ordering activities when placing orders $188,240.00. significant impact on a substantial against the contract, and other FSS The new GSAR clause 552.238–96 number of small entities, GSA prepared vendors to conduct market research Separate Charge for Delivery within an Initial Regulatory Flexibility when submitting proposals. Consignee’s Premises requires the Analysis (IRFA) in conjunction with the The annual total public reporting offeror to list any separate cost for proposed rule. As a result, GSA has also burden for this collection of information shipping when the delivery is within prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility is estimated to be 38,674 total hours the consignee’s premises (inclusive of Analysis (FRFA) consistent with the ($1,819,998.44), including the time for items that are comparable in size and Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, reviewing instructions, searching weight). existing data sources, gathering and et seq. Respondents: 8,000. The FRFA is summarized as follows: maintaining the data needed, and Responses per respondent: 1. completing and reviewing the collection This FRFA has been prepared consistent Total annual responses: 8,000. with the criteria of 5 U.S.C. 604. of information. Annual reporting Preparation hours per response: .50(30 There are approximately 14,674 4 FSS burdens include the estimated minutes). contracts that are affected by this change. Of respondents with one (1) submission Total response burden hours: 4,000. these, approximately eighty percent (11,739) per respondent multiplied by Cost per hour: $47.06. of FSS contracts are held by small preparation hours per response to get Estimated cost burden to the public: businesses. The rule is unlikely to affect the total response burden hours. The $188,240.00. small businesses awarded GSA FSS contracts estimated cost of $47.06 ($34.54 + The new GSAR clause 552.238–97 as it implements a number of provisions and $12.52) per hour is applied to the Parts and Service requires the offeror to clauses currently in use in FSS solicitations and contracts, yet not vetted via public burden hours based on the task being include in the price list, the names and comment. The information collected is used accomplished by mid-level contractor addresses of all supply and service by FAS to evaluate vendors’ offers, ordering personnel equivalent to a GS–12, Step 5 points maintained in the geographic activities when placing orders against the salary (Base Pay and Rest of U.S. area in which the offeror will perform, Locality Pay) (Salary Table 2018–GS, whether or not a complete stock of 4 FY18 Active Schedule contract holders. Effective January 2018), with fringe of repair parts for items offered is carried

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17039

at that point, and whether or not mail at 1800 F Street NW, Washington, OMB control mechanical service is available. DC 20405, or by phone at 202–501– GSAR reference No. 4755. Please cite OMB Control Number Respondents: 8,000. 552.238–87 ...... 3090–0303 Responses per respondent: 1. 3090–0303, (GSAR) Administrative Changes; GSAR Case 2013–G502, in all 552.238–95 ...... 3090–0303 Total annual responses: 8,000. 552.238–96 ...... 3090–0303 Preparation hours per response: .50 (30 correspondence. 552.238–97 ...... 3090–0303 minutes). List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 501, 552.238–99 ...... 3090–0303 Total response burden hours: 4,000. 552.238–111 ...... 3090–0303 Cost per hour: $47.06. 515, 538, and 552 Estimated cost burden to the public: Government procurement. ***** $188,240.00. The new GSAR clause 552.238–99 Jeffrey Birch, Acting Senior Procurement Executive, Office PART 515—CONTRACTING BY Delivery Prices Overseas requires the NEGOTIATION offeror to identify the intended of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government- wide Policy. geographic area(s)/countries/zones 515.209–70 [Amended] which are to be covered. For the reasons described in the ■ 3. Amend section 515.209–70 by Respondents: 8,000. preamble, GSA amends 48 CFR parts removing the subheading ‘‘Clause for Responses per respondent: 1. 501, 515, 538, and 552 as set forth Multiple Award Schedules’’ and Total annual responses: 8,000. below: paragraphs (c) and (d). Preparation hours per response: .50 (30 ■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR minutes). parts 501, 515, 538, and 552 continues 515.408 [Amended] Total response burden hours: 4,000. ■ Cost per hour: $47.06. to read as follows: 4. Amend section 515.408 by— ■ Estimated cost burden to the public: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c). a. Removing from paragraphs (a)(2), $188,240.00. (b) introductory text, and (c) introductory text ‘‘basic clause 552.238– The new GSAR clause 552.238–111 PART 501—GENERAL SERVICES 74’’ and adding ‘‘basic clause 552.238– Environmental Protection Agency ADMINISTRATION ACQUISITION REGULATION SYSTEM 80’’ in its place; Registration Requirement requires the ■ b. Removing from paragraph (c) Figure offeror to list the manufacturer’s and/or ■ 2. Amend section 501.106 in the table 515.4 ‘‘clause at 552.238–75’’ and distributor’s name and EPA Registration by— adding ‘‘clause at 552.238–81’’ in its Number for each item requiring ■ a. Revising the entry for place; and registration with the EPA. ‘‘538.273(a)(1)’’ to read ‘‘538.273’’ and ■ c. Removing from paragraph (d) ‘‘basic Respondents: 8,000. revising the OMB control number; clause 552.238–74’’ and adding ‘‘basic Responses per respondent: 1. ■ b. Removing the entries for clause 552.238–80’’ in its place. Total annual responses: 8,000. ‘‘538.273(a)(3)’’ and ‘‘538.273(b)(1)’’; Preparation hours per response: .50 (30 ■ c. Revising the GSAR references PART 538—FEDERAL SUPPLY minutes). SCHEDULE CONTRACTING Total response burden hours: 4,000. ‘‘552.238–70’’, ‘‘552.238–72’’, 552.238– Cost per hour: $47.06. 74’’, and ‘‘552.238–81’’ to read ■ 5. Amend section 538.270 by revising Estimated cost burden to the public: ‘‘552.238–73’’, ‘‘552.238–78’’, ‘‘552.238– the section heading to read as follows: $188,240.00. 80’’, and ‘‘552.238–82’’, respectively; ■ d. Adding in numerical sequence 538.270 Evaluation of Federal Supply The reinstated GSAR clause 552.238– Schedule (FSS) offers. 85 Contractor’s Billing Responsibilities entries for ‘‘552.238–84’’, ‘‘552.238–85’’, contains a recordkeeping requirement ‘‘552.238–87’’, ‘‘552.238–95’’, ‘‘552.238– * * * * * that is subject to the Paperwork 95’’, ‘‘552.238–97’’, ‘‘552.238–99’’, and ■ 6. Amend section 538.271 by— Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). ‘‘552.238–111’’. ■ a. Revising the section heading; ■ The clause provides for the contractor to The revision and additions read as b. Removing from paragraph (a) ‘‘MAS require all dealers participating in the follows: awards’’ and adding ‘‘FSS awards’’ in its performance of the contract to agree to place; and 501.106 OMB approval under the ■ c. Removing from paragraph (b) ‘‘MAS maintain certain records on sales made Paperwork Reduction Act. contract’’ and adding ‘‘FSS contract’’ in under the contract on behalf of the OMB control its place. contractor. However, it does not add GSAR reference The revision reads as follows: burden to what is already estimated for No. GSAR clause 552.238–80 Industrial 538.271 FSS contract awards. Funding Fee and Sales Reporting under ***** * * * * * OMB Control Number 3090–0121 538.273 ...... 3090–0250 ■ 7. Amend 538.272 by— Industrial Funding Fee and Sales 3090–0262 ■ a. Revising the section heading; Reporting. 3090–0121 ■ b. Removing from paragraph (a) ‘‘basic GSA solicited public comments on 3090–0303 clause 552.238–74’’ and adding ‘‘basic this information collection requirement 3090–0306 clause 552.238–80’’ in its place; and at the proposed rule stage. In response, ■ c. Removing from paragraph (b) three public comments were received ***** ‘‘Alternate I of 552.238–75’’ and adding 552.238–73 ...... 3090–0250 and are addressed in Section B. Analysis ‘‘Alternate I of 552.238–81’’ in its place. of Public Comments. GSA will submit to 552.238–78 ...... 3090–0262 552.238–80 ...... 3090–0121 The revision reads as follows: OMB a request to review and approve 3090–0306 538.272 FSS price reductions. this new information collection 552.238–82 ...... 3090–0302 requirement. For a copy of the 552.238–84 ...... 3090–0303 * * * * * information collection documents, 552.238–85 ...... 3090–0121 ■ 8. Revise section 538.273 to read as contact the Regulatory Secretariat by 3090–0306 follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17040 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

538.273 FSS solicitation provisions and Transactional Data Reporting (13) 552.238–89, Deliveries to the U.S. contract clauses. requirements. Clause 552.238–75 Postal Service. Use only in FSS (a) As prescribed in this paragraph, Alternate I should also be used when solicitations and contracts for mailable insert the following provisions in the vendors agree to include clause articles when delivery to a U.S. Postal beginning of FSS solicitations: 552.238–74 Alternate I in the contract. Service (USPS) facility is contemplated. (1) 552.238–70, Cover Page for (5) 552.238–81, Price Reductions. Use (14) 552.238–90, Characteristics of Worldwide Federal Supply Schedules. Alternate I for Federal Supply Electric Current. Use only in FSS Use in all FSS solicitations. Use Schedules with Transactional Data solicitations and contracts when the Alternate I for single award Federal Reporting requirements. This alternate supply of equipment which uses Supply Schedules. clause is used when vendors agree to electrical current is contemplated. (2) 552.238–71, Notice of Total Small include clause 552.238–74 Alternate I in (15) 552.238–91, Marking and Business Set-Aside. Use in FSS the contract. Documentation Requirements for solicitations containing special item (6) 552.238–82, Modifications Shipping. Use only in FSS solicitations numbers (SINs) that are set aside for (Federal Supply Schedules). Use in all and contracts for supplies when the small business. FSS solicitations and contracts. need for outlining the minimum (3) 552.238–72, Information (i) Use Alternate I for Federal Supply information and documentation Collection Requirements. Use in all FSS Schedules that only accept eMod. required for shipping is contemplated. solicitations. (ii) Use Alternate II for Federal (16) 552.238–92, Vendor Managed (b) As prescribed in this paragraph, Supply Schedules with Transactional Inventory (VMI) Program. Use only in insert the following clause and Data Reporting requirements. This FSS solicitations and contracts for provision as an addendum to 52.212–1, alternate clause is used when vendors supplies when a VMI Program is Instructions to Offerors—Commercial agree to include clause 552.238–74 contemplated. Items: Alternate I in the contract. (17) 552.238–93, Order (1) 552.238–73, Identification of (7) 552.238–83, Examination of Acknowledgement. Use only in FSS Electronic Office Equipment Providing Records by GSA (Federal Supply solicitations and contracts for supplies. Accessibility for the Handicapped. Use Schedules). Use in all FSS solicitations (18) 552.238–94, Accelerated Delivery only in FSS solicitations for electronic and contracts. With the Senior Requirements. Use only in FSS office equipment. Procurement’s Executive approval, the solicitations and contracts for supplies. (2) 552.238–74, Introduction of New contracting officer may modify this (19) 552.238–95, Separate Charge for Supplies/Services (INSS). Use only in clause to provide for post-award access Performance Oriented Packaging (POP). FSS solicitations allowing the to and the right to examine records to Use only in FSS solicitations and introduction of new supplies/services. verify that the pre-award/modification contracts for items defined as hazardous Note: GSA Form 1649, Notification of pricing, sales or other data related to the under Federal Standard No. 313. Federal Supply Schedule Improvement, supplies or services offered under the (20) 552.238–96, Separate Charge for may be required if revising a Special contract which formed the basis for the Delivery within Consignee’s Premises. Item Number (SIN). award/modification was accurate, Use only in FSS solicitations and (c) As prescribed in this paragraph, current, and complete. The following contracts for supplies when allowing insert the following provisions as an procedures apply: offerors to propose separate charges for addendum to 52.212–2, Evaluation— deliveries within the consignee’s Commercial Items: (i) Such a modification of the clause must provide for the right of access to premises. (1) 552.238–75, Evaluation— (21) 552.238–97, Parts and Service. Commercial Items (Federal Supply expire 2 years after award or modification. Use in all FSS solicitations and Schedules). Use in FSS standing contracts. (ii) Before modifying the clause, the solicitations. (22) 552.238–98, Clauses for Overseas contracting officer must make a (2) 552.238–76, Use of Non- Coverage. Use only in FSS solicitations determination that absent such access Government Employees to Review and contracts when overseas acquisition there is a likelihood of significant harm Offers. Use only in FSS solicitations is contemplated. The following clauses to the Government and submit it to the when non-government employees may and provisions shall also be inserted in Senior Procurement Executive for be utilized to review solicitation full text, when applicable. approval. responses. (i) 52.214–34 Submission of Offers (iii) The determinations under (d) As prescribed in this paragraph, in the English Language. insert the following clauses as an paragraph (9)(ii) must be made on a (ii) 52.214–35 Submission of Offers addendum to Clause 52.212–4, Contract schedule-by-schedule basis. in U.S. Currency. Terms and Conditions–Commercial (8) 552.238–84, Discounts for Prompt (iii) 552.238–90 Characteristics of Items: Payment. Use in all FSS solicitations Electric Current. (1) 552.238–77, Submission and and contracts. (iv) 552.238–91 Marking and Distribution of Authorized FSS Price (9) 552.238–85, Contractor’s Billing Documentation Requirements Per Lists. Use in all FSS solicitations and Responsibilities. Use in all FSS Shipment. contracts. solicitations and contracts. (v) 552.238–97 Parts and Service. (2) 552.238–78, Identification of (10) 552.238–86, Delivery Schedule. (vi) 552.238–99 Delivery Prices Products that have Environmental Use only in FSS solicitations and Overseas. Attributes. Use only in FSS solicitations contracts for supplies. (vii) 552.238–100 Transshipments. and contracts that contemplate items (11) 552.238–87, Delivery Prices. Use (viii) 552.238–101 Foreign Taxes with environmental attributes. in all FSS solicitations and contracts. and Duties. (3) 552.238–79, Cancellation. Use in (12) 552.238–88, GSA Advantage!®. (ix) 52.247–34 FOB Destination. all FSS solicitations and contracts. Use in all FSS solicitations and (x) 52.247–38 FOB Inland Carrier, (4) 552.238–80, Industrial Funding contracts except the Department of Country of Exportation. Fee and Sales Reporting. Use Alternate Veterans Affairs Federal Supply (xi) 52.247–39 FOB Inland Point, I for Federal Supply Schedules with Schedules. Country of Importation.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17041

(23) 552.238–99, Delivery Prices ■ a. Removing from paragraph (a) ‘‘the l552.238–78 Identification of Products Overseas. Use only in FSS solicitations clause at 552.238–77’’ and adding ‘‘the That Have Environmental Attributes. and contracts when overseas acquisition clause at 552.238–112’’ in its place; * * * * * is contemplated. ■ b. Removing from paragraph (b) ‘‘the 552.215–71 [Removed and Reserved] (24) 552.238–100, Transshipments. clause at 552.238–78’’ and adding ‘‘the Use only in FSS solicitations and clause at 552.238–113’’ in its place; and ■ 13. Remove and reserve section contracts when overseas acquisition is ■ c. Removing from paragraph (c) ‘‘the 552.215–71. contemplated. clause at 552.238–79’’ and adding ‘‘the ■ 14. Revise sections 552.238–70 (25) 552.238–101, Foreign Taxes and clause at 552.238–114’’ in its place. through 552.238–75 to read as follows: Duties. Use only in FSS solicitations Sec. PART 552–SOLICITATION and contracts when overseas acquisition * * * * * is contemplated. PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 552.238–70 Cover Page for Worldwide (26) 552.238–102, English Language CLAUSES Federal Supply Schedules. and U.S. Dollar Requirements. Use in all 552.238–71 Notice of Total Small Business FSS solicitations and contracts. ■ 11. Amend section 552.212–71 by Set-Aside. (27) 552.238–103, Electronic revising the date of the clause and 552.238–72 Information Collection Commerce. Use in all FSS solicitations paragraph (b) to read as follows: Requirements. 552.238–73 Identification of Electronic and contracts except the Department of 552.212–71 Contract Terms and Office Equipment Providing Veterans Affairs Federal Supply Conditions Applicable to GSA Acquisition Accessibility for the Handicapped. Schedules. of Commercial Items. 552.238–74 Introduction of New Supplies/ (28) 552.238–104, Dissemination of * * * * * Services (INSS). 552.238–75 Evaluation—Commercial Items Information by Contractor. Use in all Contract Terms and Conditions Applicable to (Federal Supply Schedule). FSS solicitations and contracts. GSA Acquisition of Commercial Items (May (29) 552.238–105, Deliveries Beyond 2019) * * * * * the Contractual Period—Placing of * * * * * 552.238–70 Cover Page for Worldwide Orders. Use only in FSS solicitations (b) Clauses. Federal Supply Schedules. and contracts for supplies. 552.203–71 Restriction on Advertising As prescribed in 538.273(a)(1), insert (30) 552.238–106, Interpretation of 552.211–73 Marking the following provision: Contract Requirements. Use in all FSS 552.215–70 Examination of Records by GSA solicitations and contracts. 552.215–72 Price Adjustment-Failure to Cover Page for Worldwide Federal Supply Schedules (May 2019) (31) 552.238–107, Export Traffic Provide Accurate Information Release (Supplies). Use in FSS 552.219–70 Allocation of Orders-Partially For All Geographic Areas solicitations and contracts for supplies, Set-Aside Items 552.228–70 Workers’ Compensation Laws Solicitation No. [The contracting officer except vehicles. 552.229–70 Federal, State, and Local Taxes should insert the solicitation number (32) 552.238–108, Spare Parts Kit. Use 552.232–23 Assignment of Claims here]*ll* only in FSS solicitations and contracts 552.232–71 Adjusting Payments Federal Supply Schedule Contract for All for items requiring spare part kits. This 552.232–72 Final Payment Geographic Areas [For supplies, the Contracting Officer should complete the information is to be specified at the 552.232–73 Availability of Funds 552.232–78 Payment Information information required by paragraph (a) and order level. delete paragraph (b) in its entirety. For (33) 552.238–109, Authentication 552.237–71 Qualifications of Employees 552.242–70 Status Report of Orders and services, the Contracting Officer should Supplies and Services. Use in Federal Shipments complete the information required by Supply Schedule 70 solicitations only, 552.246–76 Warranty of Pesticides paragraph (b) and delete (a) in its entirety. and only contracts awarded Special For solicitations containing both supplies * * * * * Item Numbers (SINs) associated with and services, the Contracting Officer should the Homeland Security Presidential ■ 12. Amend section 552.212–72 by complete paragraphs (a) and (b).] Directive 12 (HSPD–12). revising the date of the clause and (a) Federal Supply Classification (FSC) paragraph (b) to read as follows: GROUP *ll* PART *ll* SECTION *ll (34) 552.238–110, Commercial * Satellite Communication 552.212–72 Contract Terms and SUPPLY: *ll* FSC CLASS(ES)/ (COMSATCOM) Services. Use only in Conditions Required To Implement Statutes PRODUCT CODE(S)/NAICS: *ll* FSS solicitations and contracts for or Executive Orders Applicable to GSA (b) STANDARD INDUSTRY GROUP: *ll COMSATCOM services. Acquisition of Commercial Items. * SERVICE: *ll* SERVICE CODE(S)/ NAICS: *ll* (35) 552.238–111, Environmental * * * * * Protection Agency Registration Contract Terms and Conditions Required To (End of provision) Requirement. Use only in FSS Implement Statutes or Executive Orders Alternate I (May 2019): As prescribed solicitations and contracts for supplies Applicable to GSA Acquisition of at 538.273(a)(1)(i), add the following when items may require registration Commercial Items (May 2019) paragraph (c) to the basic provision. with the Environmental Protection * * * * * (c) PERIOD: *ll* THROUGH *ll Agency. (b) Clauses. * l552.223–70 Hazardous Substances. 538.7001 [Amended] l552.223–71 Nonconforming Hazardous 552.238–71 Notice of Total Small Business ■ 9. Amend section 538.7001 by Material. Set-Aside. removing from the definition ‘‘Ordering l552.223–73 Preservation, Packaging, As prescribed in 538.273(a)(2), insert activity’’ ‘‘(see 552.238–78)’’ and adding Packing, Marking and Labeling of the following provision: Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) for ‘‘(see 552.238–113)’’ in its place. Shipments. Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside (May 2019) 538.7004 [Amended] l552.238–73 Identification of Electronic Office Equipment Providing FAR clause 52.219–6, Notice of Total Small ■ 10. Amend section 538.7004 by— Accessibility for the Handicapped. Business Set-Aside applies to the following:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17042 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

[The contracting officer should insert the attribute that may provide a more economical 552.238–76 Use of Non-Government special item numbers (SINs) set aside for or efficient means for ordering activities to Employees to Review Offers. small businesses] *ll*. accomplish their missions. It may As prescribed in 538.273(c)(2), insert significantly improve an existing supply or the following provision: (End of provision) service. It may be a supply or service existing in the commercial market, but not yet Use of Non-Government Employees to 552.238–72 Information Collection Review Offers (May 2019) Requirements. introduced to the Federal Government. (b) Offerors are encouraged to introduce (a) The Government may employ As prescribed in 538.273(a)(3), insert new or improved supplies or services via individual technical consultants/advisors/ the following provision: INSS SIN at any time by clearly identify the contractors from the below listed Information Collection Requirements (May INSS SIN item in the offer. organizations to review limited portions of 2019) (c) The Contracting Officer has the sole the technical, management and price proposals to assist the government in both The information collection requirements discretion to determine whether a supply or pre-award and post-award functions. [The contained in this solicitation/contract are service will be accepted as an INSS SIN item. contracting officer should insert a list of either required by regulation or approved by The Contracting Officer will evaluate and organizations used to review solicitation the Office of Management and Budget process the offer and may perform a technical responses and execute a non-disclosure and pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act review. The INSS SIN provides temporary organizational conflict of interest statement and assigned OMB Control No. 3090–0163. placement until the Contracting Officer formally categorizes the new supply or for all individuals conducting reviews.] (End of provision) service. *ll* (d) If the Contractor has an existing (b) These representatives will be used to 552.238–73 Identification of Electronic schedule contract, the Government may, at advise on specific technical, management, Office Equipment Providing Accessibility the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer, and price matters and shall not, under any for the Handicapped. modify the existing contract to include the circumstances, be used as voting evaluators. As prescribed in 538.273(b)(1), insert INSS SIN item in accordance with 552.238– However, the Government may consider the the following clause: 81, Modifications (Federal Supply advice provided in its evaluation process. In addition, Contractor personnel may be used Identification of Electronic Office Equipment Schedules). in specific contract administration tasks (e.g., Providing Accessibility for the Handicapped administrative filing, review of deliverables, (May 2019) (End of provision) etc.). (a) Definitions. ‘‘Electronic office 552.238–75 Evaluation—Commercial Items (c) If individual technical consultants/ equipment accessibility’’ means the (Federal Supply Schedule). advisors/contractors are utilized as described application/configuration of electronic office in (b) above, they will be required to execute equipment (includes hardware, software and As prescribed in 538.273(c)(1), insert a non-disclosure and organizational conflict firmware) in a manner that accommodates the following provision: of interest statements. the functional limitations of individuals with Evaluation—Commercial Items (Federal disabilities (i.e., handicapped individuals) so (End of provision) Supply Schedule) (May 2019) as to promote productivity and provide ■ 16. Revise sections 552.238–77 access to work related and/or public (a) The Government may make multiple information resources. awards for the supplies or services offered in through 552.238–79 to read as follows: ‘‘Handicapped individuals’’ mean qualified response to this solicitation that meet the Sec. individuals with impairments as cited in 29 definition of a ‘‘commercial item’’ in FAR * * * * * 52.202 1. Awards may be made to those CFR 1613.702(f) who can benefit from 552.238–77 Submission and Distribution of electronic office equipment accessibility. responsible offerors that offer reasonable Authorized Federal Supply Schedule ‘‘Special peripheral’’ means a special needs pricing, conforming to the solicitation, and (FSS) Price Lists. aid that provides access to electronic will be most advantageous to the 552.238–78 Identification of Products that equipment that is otherwise inaccessible to a Government, taking into consideration the Have Environmental Attributes. handicapped individual. multiplicity and complexity of items of 552.238–79 Cancellation. (b) The offeror is encouraged to identify in various manufacturers and the differences in its offer, and include in any commercial performance required to accomplish or * * * * * catalogs and pricelists accepted by the produce required end results, production and 552.238–77 Submission and Distribution Contracting Officer, office equipment, distribution facilities, price, compliance with of Authorized Federal Supply Schedule including any special peripheral, that will delivery requirements, and other pertinent (FSS) Price Lists. facilitate electronic office equipment factors. By providing a selection of accessibility for handicapped individuals. comparable supplies or services, ordering As prescribed in 538.273(d)(1), insert Identification should include the type of activities are afforded the opportunity to the following clause: disability accommodated and how the users fulfill their requirements with the item(s) that Submission and Distribution of Authorized with that disability would be helped. constitute the best value and that meet their Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Price Lists (End of clause) needs at the lowest overall cost. (May 2019) (b) A written notice of award or acceptance (a) Definition. For the purposes of this 552.238–74 Introduction of New Supplies/ of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to clause, the Mailing List is [Contracting officer Services (INSS). the offeror within the time for acceptance shall insert either: ‘‘the list of addressees As prescribed in 538.273(b)(2), insert specified in the offer, shall result in a binding provided to the Contractor by the Contracting contract without further action by either the following provision: Officer’’ or ‘‘the Contractor’s listing of its party. Before the offer’s specified expiration Federal Government customers’’]. Introduction of New Supplies/Services time, the Government may accept an offer (or (b) The Contracting Officer will return one (INSS) (May 2019) part of an offer), whether or not there are copy of the Authorized FSS Schedule (a) Definition. negotiations after its receipt, unless a written Pricelist to the Contractor with the Introduction of New Supplies/Services notice of withdrawal is received before notification of contract award. Special Item Number (INSS SIN) means a award. (1) The Contractor shall provide to the GSA new or improved supply or service—within Contracting Officer: the scope of the Federal Supply Schedule (End of provision) (i) Two paper copies of Authorized FSS (FSS), but not currently available under any Schedule Pricelist; and Federal Supply Schedule contract—that ■ 15. Add section 552.238.76 to read as (ii) The Authorized FSS Schedule Pricelist provides a new service, function, task, or follows: on a common-use electronic medium. The

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17043

Contracting Officer will provide detailed customers with access to products and (i) The offer itself. instructions for the electronic submission services under GSA contracts. (ii) Printed commercial catalogs, brochures, with the award notification. Some structured Other environmental attributes refers to and pricelists. data entry in a prescribed format may be product characteristics that provide (iii) Online product website. required. environmental benefits, excluding recovered (iv) Electronic data submission for GSA (2) The Contractor shall provide to each materials and energy and water efficiency. Advantage! submitted via GSA’s Schedules addressee on the mailing list either; Several examples of these characteristics are Input Program (SIP) software or the (i) One paper copy of the Authorized FSS biodegradable, recyclable, reduced Electronic Data Inter-change (EDI). Offerors Schedule Price List; or pollutants, ozone safe, and low volatile can use the SIP or EDI methods to indicate (ii) A self-addressed, postage-paid organic compounds (VOCs). environmental and other attributes for each envelope or postcard to be returned by Post-consumer material means a material product that are translated into respective addressees that want to receive a paper copy or finished product that has served its icons in GSA Advantage!. of the pricelist. The Contractor shall intended use and has been discarded for (d) An offeror, in identifying an item with distribute price lists within 20 calendar days disposal or recovery, having completed its an environmental attribute, must possess after receipt of returned requests. life as a consumer item. Post-consumer evidence or rely on a reasonable basis to (3) The Contractor shall advise each material is part of the broader category of substantiate the claim (see 16 CFR part 260, addressee of the availability of pricelist ‘‘recovered material.’’ The Environmental Guides for the Use of Environmental information through the online Multiple Protection Agency (EPA) has developed a list Marketing Claims). The Government will Award Schedule electronic data base. of EPA-designated products in their accept an offeror’s claim of an item’s (c) The Contractor shall make all of the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines environmental attribute on the basis of— distributions required in this paragraph (c) at (CPGs) to provide Federal agencies with (1) Participation in a Federal agency least 15 calendar days before the beginning purchasing recommendations on specific sponsored program (e.g., the EPA and DOE of the contract period, or within 30 calendar products in a Recovered Materials Advisory ENERGY STAR® product labeling program); days after receipt of the Contracting Officer’s Notice (RMAN). The RMAN contains (2) Verification by an independent approval for printing, whichever is later. recommended recovered and post-consumer organization that specializes in certifying (d) During the period of the contract, the material content levels for the specific such claims; or Contractor shall provide one copy of its products designated by EPA (40 CFR part 247 (3) Possession of competent and reliable Authorized FSS Schedule Pricelist to any and http://www.epa.gov/cpg/). evidence. For any test, analysis, research, authorized schedule user, upon request. Use Recovered materials means waste materials study, or other evidence to be ‘‘competent of the mailing list for any other purpose is and by-products recovered or diverted from and reliable,’’ it must have been conducted not authorized. solid waste, but the term does not include and evaluated in an objective manner by those materials and by-products generated persons qualified to do so, using procedures (End of clause) from, and commonly reused within, an generally accepted in the profession to yield Alternate I (May 2019). As prescribed original manufacturing process (Executive accurate and reliable results. in 538.273(a)(2), substitute the following Order 13101 and 42 U.S.C. 6903(19) and http://www.epa.gov/cpg/). For paper and (End of clause) paragraph (a) for paragraph (a) of the paper products, see the definition at FAR basic clause: 11.301 (42 U.S.C. 6962(h)). 552.238–79 Cancellation. (a) Definition. For the purposes of this Remanufactured means factory rebuilt to As prescribed in 538.273(d)(3), insert clause, the Mailing List is [Contracting officer original specifications. the following clause: Renewable energy means energy produced shall insert either: ‘‘the list of addressees Cancellation (May 2019) provided to the Contractor by the Contracting by solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass Officer’’ or ‘‘the Contractor’s listing of its power. Either party may cancel this contract in ordering activity customers’’]. Renewable energy technology means— whole or in part by providing written notice. (1) Technologies that use renewable energy The cancellation will take effect 30 calendar 552.238–78 Identification of Products that to provide light, heat, cooling, or mechanical days after the other party receives the notice Have Environmental Attributes. or electrical energy for use in facilities or of cancellation. If the Contractor elects to As prescribed in 538.273(d)(2), insert other activities; or cancel this contract, the Government will not reimburse the minimum guarantee. the following clause: (2) The use of integrated whole-building designs that rely upon renewable energy Identification of Products That Have resources, including passive solar design. (End of clause) Environmental Attributes (May 2019) (c) Identification requirements. (1) The ■ 17. Add section 552.238–80 to read as (a) Several laws, Executive orders, and offeror must identify products that— follows: Agency directives require Federal buyers to (i) Are compliant with the recovered and purchase products that are less harmful to post-consumer material content levels 552.238–80 Industrial Funding Fee and the environment, when they are life cycle recommended in the Recovered Materials Sales Reporting. cost-effective (see FAR Subpart 23.7). The Advisory Notices (RMANs) for EPA- As prescribed in 538.273(d)(4) insert U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) designated products in the CPG program the following clause: requires contractors to highlight (http://www.epa.gov/cpg/); environmental products under Federal (ii) Contain recovered materials that either Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting Supply Service schedule contracts in various do not meet the recommended levels in the (May 2019) communications media (e.g., publications RMANs or are not EPA-designated products (a) Reporting of Federal Supply Schedule and electronic formats). in the CPG program (see FAR 23.401 and Sales. The Contractor shall report all contract (b) Definitions. As used in this clause— http://www.epa.gov/cpg/); sales under this contract as follows: Energy-efficient product means a product (iii) Are energy-efficient, as defined by (1) The Contractor shall accurately report that— either ENERGY STAR® and/or FEMP’s the dollar value, in U.S. dollars and rounded (1) Meets Department of Energy and designated top 25th percentile levels (see to the nearest whole dollar, of all sales under Environmental Protection Agency criteria for ENERGY STAR® at http:// this contract by calendar quarter (January 1– use of the ENERGY STAR® trademark label; www.energystar.gov/ and FEMP at http:// March 31, April 1–June 30, July 1–September or www.eere.energy.gov/femp/procurement/); 30, and October 1–December 31). The dollar (2) Is in the upper 25 percent of efficiency (iv) Are water-efficient; value of a sale is the price paid by the for all similar products as designated by the (v) Use renewable energy technology; Schedule user for products and services on Department of Energy’s Federal Energy (vi) Are remanufactured; and a Schedule task or delivery order. The Management Program. (vii) Have other environmental attributes. reported contract sales value shall include GSA Advantage! is an on-line shopping (2) These identifications must be made in the Industrial Funding Fee (IFF). The mall and ordering system that provides each of the offeror’s following mediums: Contractor shall maintain a consistent

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17044 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

accounting method of sales reporting, based Program. FAS recoups its operating costs (vi) Manufacturer Part Number. on the Contractor’s established commercial from ordering activities as set forth in 40 (vii) Unit Measure (each, hour, case, lot). accounting practice. The acceptable points at U.S.C. 321: Acquisition Services Fund. Net (viii) Quantity of Item Sold. which sales may be reported include— operating revenues generated by the IFF are (ix) Universal Product Code. (i) Receipt of order; also applied to fund initiatives benefitting (x) Price Paid per Unit. (ii) Shipment or delivery, as applicable; other authorized FAS programs, in (xi) Total Price. (iii) Issuance of an invoice; or accordance with 40 U.S.C. 321. Offerors must Note to paragraph (b)(2): The Contracting (iv) Payment. include the IFF in their prices. The fee is Officer may add data elements to the (2) Contract sales shall be reported to included in the award price(s) and reflected standard elements listed in paragraph (b)(2) Federal Acquisition Services (FAS) within 30 in the total amount charged to ordering of this section with the approvals listed in calendar days following the completion of activities. FAS will post notice of the current GSAM 507.105(c)(3). each reporting quarter. The Contractor shall IFF at https://72a.gsa.gov/ or successor (3) The contractor must report continue to furnish quarterly reports, website as appropriate. transactional data within 30 calendar days including ‘‘zero’’ sales, through physical (c) Within 60 days of award, an FAS from the last calendar day of the month. If completion of the last outstanding task order representative will provide the Contractor there was no contract activity during the or delivery order of the contract. with specific written procedural instructions month, the Contractor must submit a (3) Reportable sales under the contract are on remitting the IFF. FAS reserves the confirmation of no reportable transactional those resulting from sales of contract items to unilateral right to change such instructions data within 30 calendar days of the last authorized users unless the purchase was from time to time, following notification to calendar day of the month. conducted pursuant to a separate contracting the Contractor. (4) The Contractor must report the price authority such as a Governmentwide (d) Failure to remit the full amount of the paid per unit, total price, or any other data Acquisition Contract (GWAC); a separately IFF within 30 calendar days after the end of elements with an associated monetary value awarded FAR Part 12, FAR Part 13, FAR Part the applicable reporting period constitutes a listed in (b)(2) of this section, in U.S. dollars. 14, or FAR Part 15 procurement; or a non- contract debt to the United States (5) The reported price paid per unit and FAR contract. Sales made to state and local Government under the terms of FAR Subpart total price must include the Industrial governments under Cooperative Purchasing 32.6. The Government may exercise all rights Funding Fee (IFF). authority shall be counted as reportable sales under the Debt Collection Improvement Act (6) The Contractor must maintain a for IFF purposes. of 1996, including withholding or setting off consistent accounting method of (4) The Contractor shall electronically payments and interest on the debt (see FAR transactional data reporting, based on the report the quarterly dollar value of sales, clause 52.232–17, Interest). Should the Contractor’s established commercial including ‘‘zero’’ sales, by utilizing the Contractor fail to submit the required sales accounting practice. automated reporting system at an internet reports, falsify them, or fail to timely pay the (7) Reporting Points. website designated by the General Services IFF, this is sufficient cause for the (i) The acceptable points at which Administration (GSA)’s Federal Acquisition Government to terminate the contract for transactional data may be reported include— Service (FAS). Prior to using this automated cause. (A) Issuance of an invoice; or system, the Contractor shall complete (B) Receipt of payment. contract registration with the FAS Vendor (End of clause) (ii) The Contractor must determine Support Center (VSC). The website address, Alternate I (May 2019). As prescribed whether to report transactional data on the as well as registration instructions and in 538.273(d)(4), substitute the basis of invoices issued or payments reporting procedures, will be provided at the following paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) received. time of award. The Contractor shall report for paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of the (8) The Contractor must continue to sales separately for each National Stock basic clause: furnish reports, including confirmation of no Number (NSN), Special Item Number (SIN), transactional data, through physical or sub-item. (a) Definition. ‘‘Transactional data’’ completion of the last outstanding task or (5) The Contractor shall convert the total encompasses the historical details of the delivery order of the contract. value of sales made in foreign currency to products or services delivered by the (9) Unless otherwise expressly stated by U.S. dollars using the ‘‘Treasury Reporting Contractor during the performance of task or the ordering activity, orders that contain Rates of Exchange’’ issued by the U.S. delivery orders issued against this contract. classified information or other or information Department of Treasury, Financial (b) Reporting of Transactional Data. The that would compromise national security are Management Service. The Contractor shall Contractor must report all transactional data exempt from this reporting requirement. use the issue of the Treasury report in effect under this contract as follows: (10) This clause does not exempt the on the last day of the calendar quarter. The (1) The Contractor must electronically Contractor from fulfilling existing reporting report is available from Financial report transactional data by utilizing the requirements contained elsewhere in the Management Service, International Funds automated reporting system at an internet contract. Branch, Telephone: (202) 874–7994, internet: website designated by the General Services (11) GSA reserves the unilateral right to http://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/ Administration (GSA) or by uploading the change reporting instructions following 60 treasRptRateExch/treasRptRateExch_ data according to GSA instructions. GSA will calendar days’ advance notification to the home.htm. post registration instructions and reporting Contractor. (b) The Contractor shall remit the IFF at the procedures on the Vendor Support Center (c) Industrial Funding Fee (IFF). rate set by GSA’s FAS. website, https://vsc.gsa.gov. The reporting (1) This contract includes an IFF charged (1) The Contractor shall remit the IFF to system website address, as well as on orders placed against this contract. The FAS in U.S. dollars within 30 calendar days registration instructions and reporting IFF is paid by the authorized ordering after the end of the reporting quarter; final procedures, will be provided at the time of activity but remitted to GSA by the payment shall be remitted within 30 days award or inclusion of this clause in the Contractor. The IFF reimburses GSA for the after physical completion of the last contract. costs of operating the Federal Supply outstanding task order or delivery order of (2) The Contractor must provide, at no Schedule program, as set forth in 40 U.S.C. the contract. additional cost to the Government, the 321: Acquisition Services Fund. Net (2) The IFF represents a percentage of the following transactional data elements, as operating revenues generated by the IFF are total quarterly sales reported. This percentage applicable: also applied to fund initiatives benefitting is set at the discretion of GSA’s FAS. GSA’s (i) Contract or Blanket Purchase Agreement other authorized GSA programs, in FAS has the unilateral right to change the (BPA) Number. accordance with 40 U.S.C. 321. percentage at any time, but not more than (ii) Delivery/Task Order Number/ (2) GSA has the unilateral right to change once per year. FAS will provide reasonable Procurement Instrument Identifier (PIID). the fee amount at any time, but not more than notice prior to the effective date of the (iii) Non Federal Entity. once per year; GSA will provide reasonable change. The IFF reimburses FAS for the costs (iv) Description of Deliverable. notice prior to the effective date of any of operating the Federal Supply Schedules (v) Manufacturer Name. change. GSA will post notice of the current

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17045

IFF on the Vendor Support Center website at which contract award was predicated to except as noted in paragraph (d) of this https://vsc.gsa.gov. reduce prices; clause. At a minimum, every request shall (3) Offerors must include the IFF in their (ii) Grants more favorable discounts or describe the proposed change(s) and provide prices. The fee is included in the awarded terms and conditions than those contained in the rationale for the requested change(s). price(s) and reflected in the total amount the commercial catalog, pricelist, schedule or (b) Types of modifications—(1) Additional charged to ordering activities. The fee will other documents upon which contract award items/additional SINs. When requesting not be included in the price of non-contract was predicated; or additions, the following information must be items purchased pursuant to a separate (iii) Grants special discounts to the submitted: contracting authority, such as a customer (or category of customers) that (i) Information requested in paragraphs (1) Governmentwide Acquisition Contract formed the basis of award, and the change and (2) of the Commercial Sales Practice (GWAC); a separately awarded Federal disturbs the price/discount relationship of Format to add SINs. Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 12, FAR the Government to the customer (or category (ii) Discount information for the new Part 13, FAR Part 14, or FAR Part 15 of customers) that was the basis of award. items(s) or new SIN(s). Specifically, submit procurement; or a non-FAR contract. (2) The Contractor shall offer the price the information requested in paragraphs 3 (4) The Contractor must remit the IFF to reduction to the eligible ordering activity through 5 of the Commercial Sales Practice GSA in U.S. dollars within 30 calendar days with the same effective date, and for the same Format. If this information is the same as the after the last calendar day of the reporting time period, as extended to the commercial initial award, a statement to that effect may quarter; final payment must be remitted customer (or category of customers). be submitted instead. within 30 calendar days after physical (d) There shall be no price reduction for (iii) Information about the new item(s) or completion of the last outstanding task order sales— the item(s) under the new SIN(s) must be or delivery order issued against the contract. (1) To commercial customers under firm, submitted in accordance with the request for (5) GSA reserves the unilateral right to fixed-price definite quantity contracts with proposal. change remittance instructions following 60 specified delivery in excess of the maximum (iv) Delivery time(s) for the new item(s) or calendar days’ advance notification to the order threshold specified in this contract; the item(s) under the new SIN(s) must be Contractor. (2) To Federal agencies; submitted in accordance with the request for (d) The Contractor’s failure to remit the full (3) Made to Eligible Ordering Activities proposal. amount of the IFF within 30 calendar days identified in GSAR Clause 552.238–113 (v) Production point(s) for the new item(s) after the end of the applicable reporting when the order is placed under this contract or the item(s) under the new SIN(s) must be period constitutes a contract debt to the (and the Eligible Ordering Activities submitted if required by FAR 52.215–6, Place United States Government under the terms of identified in GSAR Clause 552.238–113 is the of Performance. FAR Subpart 32.6. The Government may agreed upon customer or category of (vi) Hazardous Material information (if exercise all rights under the Debt Collection customer that is the basis of award); or applicable) must be submitted as required by Improvement Act of 1996, including (4) Caused by an error in quotation or FAR 52.223–3 (Alternate I), Hazardous withholding or offsetting payments and billing, provided adequate documentation is Material Identification and Material Safety interest on the debt (see FAR clause 52.232– furnished by the Contractor to the Data. 17, Interest). If the Contractor fails to submit Contracting Officer. (vii) Any information requested by FAR the required transactional data reports, (e) The Contractor may offer the 52.212–3(f), Offeror Representations and falsifies them, or fails to timely pay the IFF, Contracting Officer a voluntary Certifications—Commercial Items, that may these reasons constitute sufficient cause for Governmentwide price reduction at any time be necessary to assure compliance with FAR the Government to terminate the contract for during the contract period. 52.225–1, Buy American Act—Balance of cause. (f) The Contractor shall notify the Payments Programs—Supplies. Contracting Officer of any price reduction ■ (2) Deletions. The Contractors shall provide 18. Revise sections 552.238–81 and subject to this clause as soon as possible, but an explanation for the deletion. The 552.238–82 to read as follows: not later than 15 calendar days after its Government reserves the right to reject any effective date. 552.238–81 Price Reductions. subsequent offer of the same item or a (g) The contract will be modified to reflect substantially equal item at a higher price As prescribed in 538.273(d)(5) insert any price reduction which becomes during the same contract period, if the the following clause: applicable in accordance with this clause. contracting officer finds the higher price to be unreasonable when compared with the Price Reductions (May 2019) (End of clause) deleted item. (a) Before award of a contract, the Alternate I (May 2019). As prescribed (3) Price reduction. The Contractor shall Contracting Officer and the Offeror will agree in 538.273(d)(5), substitute the indicate whether the price reduction falls upon (1) the customer (or category of following paragraph (a) and (b) for under the item (i), (ii), or (iii) of paragraph customers) which will be the basis of award, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) (c)(1) of the Price Reductions clause at and (2) the Government’s price or discount of the basic clause: 552.238–81. If the Price reduction falls under relationship to the identified customer (or item (i), the Contractor shall submit a copy category of customers). This relationship (a) The Government may request from the of the dated commercial price list. If the price shall be maintained throughout the contract Contractor, and the Contractor may provide reduction falls under item (ii) or (iii), the period. Any change in the Contractor’s to the Government, a temporary or Contractor shall submit a copy of the commercial pricing or discount arrangement permanent price reduction at any time during applicable price list(s), bulletins or letters or applicable to the identified customer (or the contract period. customer agreements which outline the category of customers) which disturbs this (b) The Contractor may offer the effective date, duration, terms and conditions relationship shall constitute a price Contracting Officer a voluntary price of the price reduction. reduction. reduction at any time during the contract (c) Effective dates. The effective date of any (b) During the contract period, the period. modification is the date specified in the Contractor shall report to the Contracting modification, except as otherwise provided 552.238–82 Modifications (Federal Supply Officer all price reductions to the customer in the Price Reductions clause at 552.238–81. Schedules). (or category of customers) that was the basis (d) Electronic file updates. The Contractor of award. The Contractor’s report shall As prescribed in 538.273(d)(6), insert shall update electronic file submissions to include an explanation of the conditions the following clause: reflect all modifications. For additional items under which the reductions were made. or SINs, the Contractor shall obtain the (c)(1) A price reduction shall apply to Modifications (Federal Supply Schedules) Contracting Officer’s approval before purchases under this contract if, after the (May 2019) transmitting changes. Contract modifications date negotiations conclude, the Contractor— (a) General. The Contractor may request a will not be made effective until the (i) Revises the commercial catalog, contract modification by submitting a request Government receives the electronic file pricelist, schedule or other document upon to the Contracting Officer for approval, updates. The Contractor may transmit price

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17046 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

reductions, item deletions, and corrections (v) Any information requested by FAR 552.238–115 Special Ordering Procedures without prior approval. However, the 52.212–3(f), Offeror Representations and for the Acquisition of Order-Level Contractor shall notify the Contracting Certifications—Commercial Items, that may Materials. Officer as set forth in the Price Reductions be necessary to assure compliance with FAR * * * * * clause at 552.238–81. 52.225–1, Buy American Act—Balance of (e) Amendments to paper Federal Supply Payments Programs—Supplies. 552.238–83 Examination of Records by Schedule Price Lists. (1) The Contractor must (2) Deletions. The Contractor must provide GSA (Federal Supply Schedules). provide supplements to its paper price lists, an explanation for the deletion. The As prescribed in 538.273(d)(7) insert reflecting the most current changes. The Government reserves the right to reject any the following clause: Contractor may either: subsequent offer of the same item or a (i) Distribute a supplemental paper Federal substantially equal item at a higher price Examination of Records by GSA (Federal Supply Schedule Price List within 15 during the same contract period, if the Supply Schedules) (May 2019) workdays after the effective date of each Contracting Officer determines that the modification. The Contractor agrees that the higher price is unreasonable compared to the Administrator of General Services or any (ii) Distribute quarterly cumulative price of the deleted item. supplements. The period covered by a duly authorized representative shall have cumulative supplement is at the discretion of ■ 19. Add sections 552.238–83 through access to and the right to examine any books, the Contractor, but may not exceed three 552.238–115 to read as follows: documents, papers and records of the calendar months from the effective date of contractor involving transactions related to the earliest modification. For example, if the Sec. this contract for overbillings, billing errors, first modification occurs in February, the * * * * * compliance with contract clauses 552.238– quarterly supplement must cover February- 552.238–83 Examination of Records by GSA 75, Price Reductions and 552.238–74, April, and every three month period after. (Federal Supply Schedules). Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting. The Contractor must distribute each quarterly 552.238–84 Discounts for Prompt Payment. This authority shall expire 3 years after final cumulative supplement within 15 workdays 552.238–85 Contractor’s Billing payment. The basic contract and each option from the last day of the calendar quarter. Responsibilities. shall be treated as separate contracts for (2) At a minimum, the Contractor shall 552.238–86 Delivery Schedule. purposes of applying this clause. distribute each supplement to those ordering 552.238–87 Delivery Prices. (End of clause) activities that previously received the basic 552.238–88 GSA Advantage!®. document. In addition, the Contractor shall 552.238–89 Deliveries to the U.S. Postal 552.238–84 Discounts for Prompt submit two copies of each supplement to the Service. Payment. Contracting Officer and one copy to the FSS 552.238–90 Characteristics of Electric Schedule Information Center. As prescribed in 538.273(d)(8), insert Current. the following clause: (End of clause) 552.238–91 Marking and Documentation Requirements for Shipping. Discounts for Prompt Payment (May 2019) Alternate I (May 2019). As prescribed 552.238–92 Vendor Managed Inventory (a) Discounts for early payment (hereinafter in 538.273(d)(6)(i), add the following (VMI) Program. referred to as ‘‘discounts’’ or ‘‘the discount’’) paragraph (f) to the basic clause: 552.238–93 Order Acknowledgement. will be considered in evaluating the 552.238–94 Accelerated Delivery (f) Electronic submission of modification relationship of the Offeror’s concessions to requests is mandatory via eMod (http:// Requirements. the Government vis-a-vis the Offeror’s eOffer.gsa.gov), unless otherwise stated in the 552.238–95 Separate Charge for concessions to its commercial and Federal electronic submission standards and Performance Oriented Packaging (POP). non-schedule customers, but only to the requirements at the Vendor Support Center 552.238–96 Separate Charge for Delivery extent indicated in this clause. website (http://vsc.gsa.gov). If the electronic within Consignee’s Premises. (b) Discounts will not be considered to submissions standards and requirements 552.238–97 Parts and Service. determine the low Offeror in the situation information is updated at the Vendor 552.238–98 Clauses for Overseas Coverage. described in the ‘‘Offers on Identical Support Center website, Contractors will be 552.238–99 Delivery Prices Overseas. Products’’ provision of this solicitation. notified prior to the effective date of the 552.238–100 Transshipments. (c) Uneconomical discounts will not be change. 552.238–101 Foreign Taxes and Duties. considered as meeting the criteria for award Alternate II (May 2019). As prescribed 552.238–102 English Language and U.S. established by the Government. In this Dollar Requirements. connection, a discount will be considered in 538.273(d)(6)(ii), substitute the 552.238–103 Electronic Commerce. following paragraph (b) for paragraph uneconomical if the annualized rate of return 552.238–104 Dissemination of Information for earning the discount is lower than the (b) of the basic clause: by Contractor. ‘‘value of funds’’ rate established by the (b) Types of Modifications. 552.238–105 Deliveries Beyond the Department of the Treasury and published (1) Additional items/additional SINs. Contractual Period—Placing of Orders. quarterly in the Federal Register. The ‘‘value When requesting additions, the Contractor 552.238–106 Interpretation of Contract of funds’’ rate applied will be the rate in must submit the following information: Requirements. effect on the date specified for the receipt of (i) Information about the new item(s) or the 552.238–107 Export Traffic Release offers. item(s) under the new SIN(s) must be (Supplies). (d) Discounts for early payment may be submitted in accordance with the 552.238–108 Spare Parts Kit. offered either in the original offer or on instructions in the solicitation. 552.238–109 Authentication Supplies and individual invoices submitted under the (ii) Delivery time(s) for the new item(s) or Services. resulting contract. Discounts offered will be the item(s) under the new SIN(s) must be 552.238–110 Commercial Satellite taken by the ordering activity if payment is submitted in accordance with the request for Communication (COMSATCOM) made within the discount period specified. proposal. Services. (e) Discounts that are included in offers (iii) Production point(s) for the new item(s) 552.238–111 Environmental Protection become a part of the resulting contracts and or the item(s) under the new SIN(s) must be Agency Registration Requirement. are binding on the Contractor for all orders submitted if required by FAR 52.215–6, Place 552.238–112 Definition (Federal Supply placed under the contract. Discounts offered of Performance. Schedules)—Non-Federal Entity. only on individual invoices will be binding (iv) Hazardous Material information (if 552.238–113 Scope of Contract (Eligible on the Contractor only for the particular applicable) must be submitted as required by Ordering Activities). invoice on which the discount is offered. FAR 52.223–3 (Alternate I), Hazardous 552.238–114 Use of Federal Supply (f) In connection with any discount offered Material Identification and Material Safety Schedule Contracts by Non-Federal for prompt payment, time shall be computed Data. Entities. from the date of the invoice. For the purpose

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17047

of computing the discount earned, payment (1) Comply with the same terms and Delivery Schedule (May 2019) conditions as the Contractor for sales made shall be considered to have been made on the (a) Time of delivery. The Contractor shall date which appears on the payment check or under the contract; deliver to destination within the number of the date on which an electronic funds (2) Maintain a system of reporting sales transfer was made. under the contract to the manufacturer, calendar days after receipt of order (ARO) in which includes— the case of F.O.B. Destination prices; or to (End of clause) (i) The date of sale; place of shipment in transit in the case of (ii) The ordering activity to which the sale F.O.B. Origin prices, as set forth below. 552.238–85 Contractor’s Billing was made; Offerors shall insert in the ‘‘Time of Delivery Responsibilities. (iii) The service or supply/model sold; (days ARO)’’ column in the schedule of Items As prescribed in 538.273(d)(9) insert (iv) The quantity of each service or supply/ a definite number of calendar days within model sold; the following clause: which delivery will be made. In no case shall (v) The price at which it was sold, including discounts; and the offered delivery time exceed the Contractor’s Billing Responsibilities (May Contractor’s normal business practice. The 2019) (vi) All other significant sales data. (3) Be subject to audit by the Government, Government requires the Contractor’s normal (a) The Contractor is required to perform with respect to sales made under the delivery time, as long as it is less than the all billings made pursuant to this contract. contract; and ‘‘stated’’ delivery time(s) shown below. If the However, if the Contractor has dealers that (4) Place orders and accept payments in the Offeror does not insert a delivery time in the participate on the contract and the billing/ name of the Contractor in care of the dealer. schedule of items, the Offeror will be deemed payment process by the Contractor for sales (b) An agreement between a Contractor and to offer delivery in accordance with the made by the dealer is a significant its dealers pursuant to this procedure will Government’s stated delivery time, as stated administrative burden, the following not establish privity of contract between alternative procedures may be used. Where dealers and the Government. below [The contracting officer shall insert the dealers are allowed by the Contractor to bill solicited items or Special Item Numbers ordering activities and accept payment in the (End of clause)] (SIN) as well as a reasonable delivery time Contractor’s name, the Contractor agrees to that corresponds with each item or SIN, if 552.238–86 Delivery Schedule. obtain from all dealers participating in the known]: performance of the contract a written As prescribed in 538.273(d)(10) insert agreement, which will require dealers to— the following clause:

Items or group of items Government’s stated (special item no. delivery time Contractor’s or nomenclature) (days ARO) delivery time

*llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll* *llllllll*

(b) Expedited delivery times. For those Delivery Prices (May 2019) paragraph (b), above, the following items that can be delivered quicker than the (a) Prices offered must cover delivery as conditions will apply: delivery times in paragraph (a) of this clause, provided below to destinations located (1) Delivery will be f.o.b. inland carrier, point of exportation (FAR 52.247–38), with the Offeror is requested to insert below, a within the 48 contiguous States and the the transportation charges to be paid by the time (hours/days ARO) that delivery can be District of Columbia. made when expedited delivery is requested. Government from point of exportation to (1) Delivery to the door of the specified destination in Alaska, Hawaii, or the Government activity by freight or express Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as designated Items or group of common carriers on articles for which store- items Expedited by the ordering office. The Contractor shall (special item no. delivery time door delivery is provided, free or subject to add the actual cost of transportation to or nomenclature) (hours/days ARO) a charge, pursuant to regularly published destination from the point of exportation in tariffs duly filed with the Federal and/or the 48 contiguous States nearest to the *lllllll *lllllll State regulatory bodies governing such designated destination. Such costs will, in all l* l* carrier; or, at the option of the Contractor, by cases, be based upon the lowest regularly *lllllll parcel post on mailable articles, or by the established rates on file with the Interstate l* Contractor’s vehicle. Where store-door Commerce Commission, the U.S. Maritime *lllllll *lllllll delivery is subject to a charge, the Contractor Commission (if shipped by water), or any l* l* shall place the notation ‘‘Delivery Service State regulatory body, or those published by *lllllll Requested’’ on bills of lading covering such the U.S. Postal Service; and must be l* shipments, and pay such charge and add the supported by paid freight or express receipt actual cost thereof as a separate item to his or by a statement of parcel post charges (c) Overnight and 2-Day delivery times. invoice. including weight of shipment. Ordering activities may require overnight or (2) Delivery to siding at destinations when (2) The right is reserved to ordering 2-day delivery. The Offeror is requested to specified by the ordering office, if delivery is agencies to furnish Government bills of annotate its price list or by separate lading. attachment identify the items that can be not covered under paragraph (a)(1) of this delivered overnight or within 2 days. section. (End of clause) Contractors offering such delivery services (3) Delivery to the freight station nearest ® will be required to state in the cover sheet destination when delivery is not covered 552.238–88 GSA Advantage! . to its FSS price list details concerning this under paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section. As prescribed in 538.273(d)(12), insert service. (b) The Offeror shall indicate in the offer the following clause: whether or not prices submitted cover GSA Advantage!® (May 2019) (End of clause)] delivery f.o.b. destination in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (a) The Contractor shall participate in the 552.238–87 Delivery Prices. (c) When deliveries are made to GSA Advantage!® online shopping service. destinations outside the contiguous 48 States; Information and instructions regarding As prescribed in 538.273(d)(11), insert i.e., Alaska, Hawaii, and the Commonwealth Contractor participation are contained in the following clause: of Puerto Rico, and are not covered by clause 552.238–111, Electronic Commerce.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17048 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

(b) The Contractor shall refer to contract requiring transshipment via U.S. Government activity, any order(s) placed pursuant to the clauses 552.238–71, Submission and facilities without the prerequisites stated in agreed upon accelerated delivery time frame Distribution of Authorized FSS Price Lists paragraph (c) of this section. shall be delivered within this shorter (which provides for submission of price lists (c) Direct shipments. The Contractor shall delivery time and in accordance with all on a common-use electronic medium), and mark all items ordered against this contract other terms and conditions of the contract. 552.238–81, Modifications (which addresses with indelible ink, paint or fluid, as follows: electronic file updates). (1) Traffic Management or Transportation (End of clause) Officer at FINAL destination. (End of clause) 552.238–95 Separate Charge for (2) Ordering Supply Account Number. Performance Oriented Packaging (POP). (3) Account number. 552.238–89 Deliveries to the U.S. Postal (4) Delivery Order or Purchase Order As prescribed in 538.273(d)(19), insert Service. Number. the following clause: As prescribed in 538.273(d)(13), insert (5) National Stock Number, if applicable; Separate Charge for Performance Oriented the following clause: or Contractor’s item number. Packaging (POP) (May 2019) ll ll Deliveries to the U.S. Postal Service (May (6) Box of Boxes. (a) Offerors are requested to list the 2019) (7) Nomenclature (brief description of hazardous material item to which the items). (a) Applicability. This clause applies to separate charge applies in the spaces orders placed for the U.S. Postal Service (End of clause) provided in this paragraph or on a separate (USPS) and accepted by the Contractor for attachment. The final price shall be quoted the delivery of supplies to a USPS facility 552.238–92 Vendor Managed Inventory separately at the order level and, if (consignee). (VMI) Program. considered reasonable, will be accepted as (b) Mode/method of transportation. Unless As prescribed in 538.273(d)(16), insert part of the order. the Contracting Officer grants a waiver of this the following clause: requirement, any shipment that meets the ITEMS USPS requirements for mailability (i.e., 70 Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI) Program pounds or less, combined length and girth (May 2019) SINS or Descriptive Charge for Perform- not more than 108 inches, etc.) delivery shall (a) The term ‘‘Vendor Managed Inventory’’ Name of Articles ance Oriented be accomplished via the use of the USPS. describes a system in which the Contractor (as appropriate). Other commercial services shall not be used, monitors and maintains specified inventory but this does not preclude the Contractor levels for selected items at designated from making delivery by the use of the stocking points. VMI enables the Contractor Contractor’s own vehicles. to plan production and shipping more (c) Time of delivery. Notwithstanding the efficiently. Stocking points benefit from required time for delivery to destination as reduced inventory but steady stock levels. may be specified elsewhere in this contract, (b) Contractors that commercially provide if shipments under this clause are mailed not a VMI-type system may enter into similar (b) Ordering activities will not be obligated later than five (5) calendar days before the partnerships with ordering agencies under a to utilize the Contractor’s services for required delivery date, delivery shall be Blanket Purchase Agreement. Performance Oriented Packaging, and they deemed to have been made timely. may obtain such services elsewhere if (End of clause) desired. However, the Contractor shall (End of clause) provide items in Performance Oriented 552.238–93 Order Acknowledgement. Packaging when such packing is specified on 552.238–90 Characteristics of Electric As prescribed in 538.273(d)(17), insert the delivery order. The Contractor’s contract Current. the following clause: price and the charge for Performance Oriented Packaging will be shown as separate As prescribed in 538.273(d)(14), insert Order Acknowledgement (May 2019) the following clause: entries on the delivery order. Contractors shall acknowledge only those Characteristics of Electric Current (May 2019) orders which state ‘‘Order Acknowledgement (End of clause) Contractors supplying equipment which Required.’’ These orders shall be 552.238–96 Separate Charge for Delivery uses electrical current are required to supply acknowledged within 10 calendar days after within Consignee’s Premises. equipment suitable for the electrical system receipt. Such acknowledgement shall be sent at the location at which the equipment is to to the ordering activity placing the order and As prescribed in 538.273(d)(20), insert be used as specified on the order. contain information pertinent to the order, the following clause: including the anticipated delivery date. Separate Charge for Delivery within (End of clause) Consignee’s Premises (May 2019) (End of clause) 552.238–91 Marking and Documentation (a) Offerors are requested to insert, in the Requirements for Shipping. 552.238–94 Accelerated Delivery spaces provided below or by attachment As prescribed in 538.273(d)(15), insert Requirements. hereto, a separate charge for ‘‘Delivery the following clause: As prescribed in 538.273(d)(18), insert Within Consignee’s Premises’’ applicable to the following clause: each shipping container to be shipped. Marking and Documentation Requirements (Articles which are comparable in size and for Shipping (May 2019) Accelerated Delivery Requirements (May weight, and for which the same charge is (a) Responsibility. It shall be the 2019) applicable, should be grouped under an responsibility of the ordering activity to When the Federal Supply Schedule appropriate item description.) These determine the full marking and contract delivery period does not meet the additional charges will be accepted as part of documentation requirements necessary under bona fide urgent delivery requirements of an the award, if considered reasonable, and the various methods of shipment authorized ordering activity, the ordering activity is shall be included in the Contractor’s by the contract. encouraged, if time permits, to contact the published catalog and/or price list. (b) Documentation. In the event the Contractor for the purpose of obtaining (b) Ordering activities are not obligated to ordering activity fails to provide the essential accelerated delivery. The Contractor shall issue orders on the basis of ‘‘Delivery Within information and documentation, the reply to the inquiry within three (3) business Consignee’s Premises,’’ and Contractors may Contractor shall, within three days after days after receipt. (Telephonic replies shall refuse delivery on that basis provided such receipt of order, contact the ordering activity be confirmed by the Contractor in writing.) refusal is communicated in writing to the and advise them accordingly. The Contractor If the Contractor offers an accelerated ordering activity issuing such orders within shall not proceed with any shipment delivery time acceptable to the ordering 5 days of the receipt of such order by the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17049

Contractor and provided further, that (c) Contractors are requested to provide the delivered to the port Transportation Officer delivery is made in accordance with the Ordering Activity, the names and addresses for subsequent transshipment by the other delivery requirements of the contract. of all supply and service points maintained Government as otherwise provided for under Failure of the Contractor to submit this in the geographic area in which the the terms of this contract. notification within the time specified shall Contractor will perform. Please indicate (2) These forms will be attached to one end constitute acceptance to furnish ‘‘Delivery opposite each point whether or not a and one side, not on the top or bottom, of the Within Consignee’s Premises’’ at the complete stock of repair parts for items container. additional charge awarded. When an offered is carried at that point, and whether (3) The Contractor will complete the ordering activity issues an order on the basis or not mechanical service is available. bottom line of these forms, which pertains to of ‘‘Delivery Within Consignee’s Premises’’ at (End of clause) the number of pieces, weight and cube of the accepted additional charge awarded and each piece, using U.S. weight and cubic the Contractor accepts such orders on that 552.238–98 Clauses for Overseas measures. Weights will be rounded off to the basis, the Contractor will be obligated to Coverage. nearest pound. (One kg = 2.2 U.S. pounds; provide delivery ‘‘F.o.b. Destination, Within As prescribed in 538.273(d)(22), insert one cubic meter = 35.3156 cubic feet.) Consignee’s Premises’’ in accordance with (b) In addition, if the cargo consists of FAR 52.247–35, which is then incorporated the following clause: chemicals, or is dangerous, one copy of the by reference, with the exception that an Clauses for Overseas Coverage (May 2019) DD Form 1387–2 will be attached to the additional charge as provided herein is The following clauses apply to overseas container, and three copies will be furnished allowed for such services. Unless otherwise coverage. to the Transportation Officer with the Bill of stipulated by the Offeror, the additional (a) 52.214–34 Submission of Offers in the Lading. charges awarded hereunder may be applied (c) Dangerous cargo will not be to any delivery within the 48 contiguous English Language (b) 52.214–35 Submission of Offers in U.S. intermingled with non-dangerous cargo in States and the District of Columbia. the same container. (c) When exercising their option to issue Currency (c) 552.238–90 Characteristics of Electric (d) Copies of the above forms and orders on the basis of delivery service as preparation instructions will be obtained provided herein, ordering activities will Current (d) 552.238–91 Marking and Documentation from the ordering activity issuing the specify ‘‘Delivery Within Consignee’s Delivery Order. Reproduced copies of the Premises’’ on the order, and will indicate the Requirements Per Shipment (e) 552.238–97 Parts and Service forms are acceptable. exact location to which delivery is to be (e) Failure to include DD Form 1387, and made. The Contractor’s delivery price and (f) 552.238–99 Delivery Prices Overseas (g) 552.238–100 Transshipments DD Form 1387–2, if applicable, on each the additional charge(s) for ‘‘Delivery Within (h) 552.238–101 Foreign Taxes and Duties shipping container will result in rejection of Consignee’s Premises’’ will be shown as (i) 52.247–34 FOB Destination shipment by the port Transportation Officer. separate entries on the order. (j) 52.247–38 FOB Inland Carrier, Point of Exportation (End of clause) ITEMS (k) 52.247–39 FOB Inland Point, Country of 552.238–101 Foreign Taxes and Duties. Importation (NSNs or Special Additional Charge As prescribed in 538.273(d)(25), insert Item Numbers or (Per shipping con- (End of clause) the following clause: Descriptive Name tainer) FOR ‘‘DE- Foreign Taxes and Duties (May 2019) of Articles). LIVERY WITHIN 552.238–99 Delivery Prices Overseas. CONSIGNEE’S As prescribed in 538.273(d)(23), insert Prices offered must be net, delivered, f.o.b. PREMISES’’ the following clause: to the destinations accepted by the Government. Delivery Prices Overseas (May 2019) (a) The Contractor warrants that such (a) Prices offered must cover delivery to prices do not include any tax, duty, customs destinations as provided as follows: fees, or other foreign Governmental costs, (1) Direct delivery to consignee. F.O.B. assessments, or similar charges from which Inland Point, Country of Importation (FAR the U.S. Government is exempt. 52.247–39). (Offeror should indicate (b) Standard commercial export packaging, (End of clause) countries where direct delivery will be including containerization, if necessary, provided.) packaging, preservation, and/or marking are 552.238–97 Parts and Service. (2) Delivery to overseas assembly point for included in the pricing offered and accepted As prescribed in 538.273(d)(21), insert transshipment when specified by the by the Government. ordering activity, if delivery is not covered the following clause: under paragraph (1), above. (End of clause) Parts and Service (May 2019) (3) Delivery to the overseas port of entry 552.238–102 English Language and U.S. when delivery is not covered under (a) For equipment under items listed in the Dollar Requirements. schedule of items or services on which offers paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section. are submitted, the Contractor represents by (b) Geographic area(s)/countries/zones As prescribed in 538.273(d)(26), insert submission of this offer that parts and which are intended to be covered must be the following clause: services (including the performing of identified in the offer. English Language and U.S. Dollar warranty or guarantee service) are now (End of clause) Requirements (May 2019) available from dealers or distributors serving (a) All documents produced by the the areas of ultimate overseas destination or 552.238–100 Transshipments. Contractor to fulfill requirements of this that such facilities will be established and As prescribed in 538.273(d)(24), insert contract including, but not limited to, will be maintained throughout the contract the following clause: Federal Supply Schedule catalogs and price period. If a new servicing facility is to be lists, must reflect all terms and conditions in Transshipments (May 2019) established, the facility shall be established the English language. no later than the beginning of the contract (a) The Contractor shall complete two (2) (b) U.S. dollar equivalency, if applicable, period. DD Forms 1387, Military Shipment Labels will be based on the rates published in the (b) Each Contractor shall be fully and, if applicable, four copies of DD Form ‘‘Treasury Reporting Rates of Exchange’’ in responsible for the services to be performed 1387–2, Special Handling/Data effect as of the date of the agency’s purchase by the named servicing facilities, or by such Certification—used when shipping order or in effect during the time period facilities to be established, and fully chemicals, dangerous cargo, etc. specified elsewhere in this contract. guarantees performance of such services if (1) Two copies of the DD Form 1387 will the original service proves unsatisfactory. be attached to each shipping container (End of clause)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17050 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

552.238–103 Electronic Commerce. (iii) Use the credit card. Contractor shall forward completed copies of ® As prescribed in 538.273(d)(27), insert (2) GSA Advantage! may be accessed via GSA Form 1611, Application for Shipping the following clause: the GSA Home Page. The internet address is: Instructions and Notice of Availability, to the http://www.gsa.gov. GSA office designated on the purchase order Electronic Commerce (May 2019) at least 15 days prior to the anticipated (a) General background. The Federal (End of clause) shipping date. Copies of GSA Form 1611 will be furnished to the Contractor with the Acquisition Streamlining Act (FASA) of 1994 552.238–104 Dissemination of Information requires the Government to evolve its purchase order. Failure to comply with this by Contractor. acquisition process from one driven by paper requirement could result in nonacceptance of to an expedited process based on electronic As prescribed in 538.273(d)(28), insert the material by authorities at the port of commerce/electronic data interchange (EC/ the following clause: exportation. When supplies for export are EDI). EC/EDI encompasses more than merely Dissemination of Information by Contractor ordered by other Government agencies the automating manual processes and (May 2019) Contractor should obtain shipping eliminating paper transactions. EC/EDI instructions from the ordering agency. improves business processes (e.g. The Government will provide the procurement, finance, logistics) into a fully Contractor with a single copy of the resulting (End of clause) electronic environment and fundamentally Federal Supply Schedule contract award changes the way organizations operate. documents. However, it is the responsibility 552.238–108 Spare Parts Kit. (b) Trading partners and Value-Added of the Contractor to furnish all sales outlets As prescribed in 538.273(d)(32), insert Networks (VAN’s). authorized to participate in the performance the following clause: of the contract with the terms, conditions, (1) Within the electronic commerce Spare Parts Kit (May 2019) architecture, electronic documents (e.g., pricing schedule, and other appropriate orders, invoices, etc.) are carried between the information. (a) The Contractor will be required to offer a spare parts kit conforming, generally, to the Federal Government’s procuring office and (End of clause) Contractors (now known as ‘‘trading following requirements for each item awarded under this solicitation: [The partners’’). These transactions are carried by 552.238–105 Deliveries Beyond the Ordering Activity contracting officer should commercial telecommunications companies Contractual Period—Placing of Orders. called Value-Added Networks (VAN’s). insert the specifications for a spare parts kit (2) EDI can be performed using As prescribed in 538.273(d)(29), insert specific to the solicited items.] commercially available hardware, software, the following clause: (b) The Contractor shall furnish prices for and telecommunications. The selection of a Deliveries Beyond the Contractual Period— spare parts kits as follows: VAN is a business decision Contractors must Placing of Orders (May 2019) (i) Price of kit unpackaged. (ii) Price of kit in domestic pack. make. There are many different VAN’s which In accordance with Clause 552.238–78, (iii) Price of kit in wooden case, steel- provide a variety of electronic services and Scope of Contract (Eligible Ordering different pricing strategies. If the VAN only strapped. Activities), this contract covers all provides communications services, you may (c) The Contractor will be required to requirements that may be ordered, as also need a software translation package. furnish a complete description of spare parts distinguished from delivered during the (c) Registration instructions. To perform kit offered, a list of parts included, and the contract term. This is for the purpose of EDI with the Government, Contractors shall price of the kit delivered f.o.b. destination to providing continuity of supply or operations register as a trading partner. Contractors will any point within the conterminous United by permitting ordering activities to place provide regular business information, States within 15 days after receipt of a orders as requirements arise in the normal banking information, and EDI capabilities to request from the Ordering Activity course of operations. Accordingly, any order all agencies in this single registration. A Contracting Officer. If the kit offered is mailed (or received, if forwarded by other central repository of all trading partners is acceptable to the Ordering Activity, awards means than through the mail) to the the Systems for Award Management (SAM) covering requirements will be made by Contractor on or before the expiration date of http://www.sam.gov. Contractors shall follow supplemental agreement to this contract. the instructions on the SAM website the contract, and providing for delivery regarding how to register for EDI. within the number of days specified in the (End of clause) (d) Implementation conventions. All EDI contract, shall constitute a valid order. 552.238–109 Authentication Supplies and transactions must comply with the Federal (End of clause) Implementation Conventions (ICs). The ICs Services. are available on a registry maintained by the 552.238–106 Interpretation of Contract As prescribed in 538.273(d)(33), insert National Institute of Standards and Requirements. the following clause: Technology (NIST). It is accessible via the As prescribed in 538.273(d)(30), insert Authentication Supplies and Services (May INTERNET at http://www.nist.gov/itl. ICs are 2019) available for common business documents the following clause: such as Purchase Order, Price Sales Catalog, Interpretation of Contract Requirements (May (a) General background. (1) The General Invoice, Request for Quotes, etc. 2019) Services Administration (GSA) established the ‘‘Identity and Access Management (e) Additional information. GSA has No interpretation of any provision of this Services’’ (IAMS) Program to clearly define additional information available for contract, including applicable specifications, the kinds of digital certificates and PKI Contractors who are interested in using EC/ shall be binding on the Government unless services that meet the requirements for EDI on its website, www.gsa.gov. furnished or agreed to in writing by the ® ® service providers and supplies that support (f) GSA Advantage! . (1) GSA Advantage! Contracting Officer or his designated FISMA-compliant IAM systems deployed by uses electronic commerce to receive catalogs, representative. invoices and text messages; and to send Federal agencies. purchase orders, application advice, and (End of clause) (2) Homeland Security Presidential functional acknowledgments. GSA Directive 12 (HSPD–12), ‘‘Policy for a Advantage!® enables customers to: 552.238–107 Export Traffic Release Common Identification Standard for Federal (i) Perform database searches across all (Supplies). Employees and Contractors’’ establishes the contracts by manufacturer; manufacturer’s As prescribed in 538.273(d)(31), insert requirement for a mandatory Government- model/part number; Contractor; and generic the following clause: wide standard for secure and reliable forms supply categories. of identification issued by the Federal (ii) Generate EDI delivery orders to Export Traffic Release (Supplies) (May 2019) Government to its employees and Contractor Contractors, generate EDI delivery orders Supplies ordered by GSA for export will employees assigned to Government contracts from the Federal Supply Service to not be shipped by the Contractor until in order to enhance security, increase Contractors, or download files to create their shipping instructions are received from GSA. Government efficiency, reduce identity fraud, own delivery orders. To obtain shipping instructions, the and protect personal privacy. Further, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17051

Directive requires the Department of that SIN. Qualification Requirements and 552.238–110 Commercial Satellite Commerce to promulgate a Federal standard procedures for the evaluation of supplies and Communication (COMSATCOM) Services. for secure and reliable forms of identification services are posted at the URL: http:// As prescribed in 538.273(d)(34) insert within six months of the date of the www.idmanagement.gov. GSA will follow the following clause: Directive. As a result, the National Institute these procedures in qualifying offeror’s of Standards and Technology (NIST) released supplies and services against the Commercial Satellite Communication Federal Information Processing Standard Qualification Requirements for applicable to (COMSATCOM) Services (May 2019) (FIPS) 201–2: Personal Identity Verification SIN. Offerors must submit all documentation (a) General background. Special Item of Federal Employees and Contractors August certification letter(s) for Authentication Numbers (SINs) have been established for 2013. FIPS 201–2 requires that the digital Supplies and Services offerings at the same Commercial Satellite Communications certificates incorporated into the Personal time as submission of proposal. Award will (COMSATCOM) services, focused on Identity Verification (PIV) identity be dependent upon receipt of official transponded capacity (SIN 132–54) and fixed credentials comply with the X.509 Certificate documentation from the Acquisition Program and mobile subscription services (SIN 132– Policy for the U.S. Federal PKI Common Management Office (APMO) listed below 55), to make available common Policy Framework. In addition, FIPS 201–2 verifying satisfactory qualification against the COMSATCOM services to all Ordering requires that Federal identity badges referred Qualification Requirements of the proposed Activities. to as PIV credentials, issued to Federal SIN(s). (b) Information assurance. (1) The employees and Contractors comply with the (2) After award, Contractor agrees that Contractor shall demonstrate, to the Standard and associated NIST Special certified supplies and services will not be maximum extent practicable, the ability to Publications 800–73, 800–76, 800–78, and offered under any other SIN on any Federal meet: 800–79. Supply Schedule (i) The Committee on National Security (b) Special item numbers. GSA has (3)(i) If the Contractor changes the supplies Systems Policy (CNSSP) 12, ‘‘National established the e-Authentication Initiative or services previously qualified, GSA may Information Assurance Policy for Space (see URL: http://www.idmanagement.gov) to require the Contractor to resubmit the Systems used to Support National Security provide common infrastructure for the supplies or services for re-qualification. Missions,’’ or authentication of the public and internal (ii) If the Federal Government changes the (ii) Department of Defense Directive Federal users for logical access to Federal qualification requirements or standards, (DoDD) 8581.1, ‘‘Information Assurance (IA) e-Government applications and electronic Contractor must resubmit the supplies and Policy for Space Systems Used by the services. To support the government-wide services for re-qualification. Department of Defense.’’ implementation of HSPD–12 and the Federal (4) Immediately prior to making an award, (2) The Contractor shall demonstrate the e-Authentication Initiative, GSA has Contracting Officers MUST consult the ability to comply with the Federal established Special Item Numbers (SINs) following website to ensure that the supplies Information Security Management Act of pertaining to Authentication Products and and/or services recommended for award 2002 as implemented by Federal Information Services, including Electronic Credentials, under any Authentication Supplies and Processing Standards Publication 200 (FIPS Digital Certificates, eAuthentication, Identify Services SINs are in compliance with the 200), ‘‘Minimum Security Requirements for and Access Management, PKI Shared Service latest APL qualification standards: Federal Information and Information Providers, and HSPD–12 Product and Service www.idmanagement.gov. A dated copy of the Systems.’’ In response to ordering activity Components. applicable page should be made and requirements, at a minimum, all services (c) Qualification information. (1) All included with the award documents. shall meet the requirements assigned against: Authentication supplies and services must be (e) Demonstrating conformance. (1) The (i) A low-impact information system (per qualified as being compliant with Federal Government has established FIPS 200) that is described in the current Government-wide requirements before they Qualification Requirements for revision of National Institute of Standards will be included on a GSA Information demonstrating conformance with the and Technology (NIST) Special Publication Technology (IT) Schedule contract. The Standards. The following websites provide (SP) 800–53, ‘‘Recommended Security Qualification Requirements and associated additional information regarding the Controls for Federal Information Systems and evaluation procedures against the evaluation and qualification processes: Organizations,’’ or Qualification Requirements for each SIN and (i) For Identify and Access Management (ii) A Mission Assurance Category (MAC) the specific Qualification Requirements for Services (IAMS) and PKI Shared Service III system that is described in the current HSPD–12 implementation components are Provider (SSP) Qualification Requirements revision of DoD Instruction (DoDI) 8500.2, presented at the following URL: http:// and evaluation procedures: http:// ‘‘Information Assurance Implementation.’’ www.idmanagement.gov. www.idmanagement.gov; (3) The Contractor’s information assurance (2) In addition, the National Institute of (ii) For HSPD–12 Product and Service boundary is where the Contractor’s services Standards and Technology (NIST) has Components Qualification Requirements and connect to the user terminals/equipment (i.e., established the NIST Personal Identity evaluation procedures: http:// includes satellite command encryption Verification Program (NPIVP) to evaluate www.idmanagement.gov; (ground and space); systems used in the integrated circuit chip cards and supplies (iii) For FIPS 201 evaluation program Satellite Operations Centers (SOCs), Network against conformance requirements contained testing and certification procedures: https:// Operations Centers (NOCs) and teleport; and in FIPS 201. GSA has established the FIPS www.idmanagement.gov/fips201/. terrestrial infrastructure required for service 201Evaluation Program to evaluate other (f) Acquisition Program Management delivery). supplies needed for agency implementation Office (APMO). GSA has established the (c) Delivery schedule. The Contractor shall of HSPD–12 requirements where normative APMO to provide centralized technical deliver COMSATCOM services in accordance requirements are specified in FIPS 201 and oversight and management regarding the with 552.238–90. to perform card and reader interface testing qualification process to industry partners and (d) Portability. The Contractor shall have for interoperability. Products that are Federal agencies. Contact the following the capability to redeploy COMSATCOM approved as FIPS–201 compliant through APMO for information on the services, subject to availability. Portability these evaluation and testing programs may be eAuthentication Qualification process. shall be provided within the COMSATCOM offered directly through HSPD–12 Supplies Technical, APMO, FIPS 201, and HSPD–12 Contractor’s resources at any time as and Services Components SIN under the Points of Contact can be found below, or in requested by the ordering activity. When category ‘‘Approved FIPS 201-Compliant an additional attachment to the solicitation. portability is exercised, evidence of Products and services. [The contracting officer should insert the equivalent net present value (NPV) shall be (d) Qualification requirements. Offerors points of contact information below, unless provided by the Contractor. proposing Authentication supplies and otherwise included elsewhere in the (e) Flexibility/optimization. The Contractor services under the established SINs are solicitation.] shall have the capability to re-groom required to provide the following: *ll* resources for spectral, operational, or price (1) Proposed items must be determined to efficiencies. Flexibility/optimization shall be be compliant with Federal requirements for (End of clause) provided within the COMSATCOM

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17052 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Contractor’s resources at any time as equivalent clearances assigned by the approved by the U.S. National Institute for requested by the ordering activity. When National Security Authority of a NATO Standards and Technology and pre-arranged flexibility/optimization is exercised, Member State or Major Non-NATO Ally. access to National Security Agency-approved evidence of equivalent net present value (2) For incident resolution involving communications security equipment at an (NPV) shall be provided by the Contractor. classified matters, the Contractor shall agreed alternate facility is acceptable. The Contractor is encouraged to submit re- provide appropriately cleared staff who can (6) The Contractor shall have the capability grooming approaches for ordering activity affect COMSATCOM services operations to ‘‘mask’’ or ‘‘protect’’ users against consideration that may increase efficiencies (example: Satellite payload operations, unauthorized release of identifying for existing COMSATCOM services. network operations). The Contractor shall information to any entity that could (f) Net ready (interoperability). provide a minimum of one operations staff compromise operations security. Identifying COMSATCOM services shall be consistent member AND a minimum of one person with information includes but is not limited to with commercial standards and practices. the authority to commit the company if personal user and/or unit information Services shall have the capability to access resolution requires business impacting including tail numbers, unit names, unit and/or interoperate with Government or decisions (example: Chief Executive Officer, numbers, individual names, individual other Commercial teleports/gateways and Chief Operations Officer, etc.). contact numbers, street addresses, etc. provide enterprise service access to or among (3) When Communications Security or (j) Third party billing for COMSATCOM networks or enclaves. Interfaces may be Transmission Security equipment or keying subscription services. The Contractor shall identified as interoperable on the basis of material is placed in the equipment/terminal identify authorized network infrastructure for participation in a sponsored interoperability shelter, the Contractor shall ensure the ordering activity. In some cases, the user program. compliance with applicable physical security of the terminal may access network (g) Network monitoring (Net OPS). The directives/guidelines and that all deployed infrastructure owned or operated by a third Contractor shall have the capability to equipment/terminal operations and party. In the event a terminal is used on a electronically collect and deliver near real- maintenance personnel shall possess the third party’s network infrastructure, the time monitoring, fault/incident/outage appropriate clearances, equal to or higher Contractor shall provide to the ordering reporting, and information access to ensure than the classification level of the data being activity, invoices and documentation effective and efficient operations, transmitted. Where local regulations require reflecting actual usage amount and third performance, and availability, consistent use of foreign personnel for terminal party charges incurred. The ordering activity with commercial practices. Consistent with operations and maintenance, then the shall be billed the actual third party charges the Contractor’s standard management Contractor shall ensure compliance with incurred, or the contract third party billing practices, the Net Ops information will be applicable security directives/guidelines and price, whichever is less. provided on a frequency (example: Every 6 document to the U.S. Government’s hours, daily) and format (example: SNMP, satisfaction that protective measures are in (End of clause) XML) as defined in a requirement to a place and such individuals have equivalent location/entity/electronic interface defined clearances granted by the local host nation. 552.238–111 Environmental Protection by the ordering activity. Specific reporting (4) For classified operations security Agency Registration Requirement. requirements will be defined by the Ordering (OPSEC), the Contractor shall ensure that all As prescribed in 538.273(d)(35), insert Activity. personnel in direct contact with classified the following clause: (h) EMI/RFI identification, OPSEC indicators (example: The unit, characterization, and geo-location. The location, and time of operations) have U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contractor shall have the capability to collect SECRET or higher personnel security Registration Requirement (May 2019) and electronically report in near real-time clearances, or, as appropriate, equivalent (a) With respect to the products described Electro Magnetic Interference (EMI)/Radio clearances assigned by the National Security in this solicitation which require registration Frequency Interference (RFI) identification, Authority of a NATO Member State or Major with the Environmental Protection Agency characterization, and geo-location, including Non-NATO Ally, in accordance with (EPA), as required by the Federal Insecticide, the ability to identify and characterize sub- applicable security directives and guidelines. Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, Section 3, carrier EMI/RFI being transmitted (5) For classified requirements, cleared Registration of Pesticides, awards will be underneath an authorized carrier, and the satellite operator staff must have access to made only for such products that have been ability to geo-locate the source of any and all secure voice communications for emergency assigned an EPA registration number, prior to EMI/RFI. The Contractor shall establish and purposes. Communications security the time of bid opening. use with the ordering activity a mutually equipment certified by the National Security (b) The offeror shall insert in the spaces agreed upon media and voice Agency (NSA) to secure unclassified and up provided in this section, the manufacturer’s communications capability capable of to and including SECRET communication and/or distributor’s name and the ‘‘EPA protecting ‘‘Sensitive, but Unclassified’’ data. transmissions at all operations centers is Registration Number’’ for each item offered. (i) Security. (1) The Contractor may be preferred. If a Contractor is unable to have Any offer which does not specify a current required to obtain/possess varying levels of access to NSA-approved communications ‘‘EPA Registration Number’’ in effect for the personnel and facility security clearances up security equipment at its operations centers, duration of the contract period, and to U.S. Government TOP SECRET/Sensitive then a combination of a ‘‘Sensitive but including the manufacturer’s and/or Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) or Unclassified’’ (SBU) cryptographic module distributor’s name will be rejected.

Items Item numbers Name of manufacturer/distributor EPA registration number Date of expiration

(c) If, during the performance of a contract not arise out of causes beyond the control, Paragraph (contained in the clause 52.212–4, awarded as a result of this solicitation, the and with the fault or negligence of the Contract Terms and Conditions—Commercial EPA Registration Number for products being Contractor or subcontractor, the Government Items), whichever is applicable to the furnished is terminated, withdrawn, may terminate the contract pursuant to either resultant contract. canceled, or suspended, and such action does the Default Clause or Termination for Cause (End of clause)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 17053

552.238–112 Definition (Federal Supply b Contractor will provide domestic the time frames of this paragraph shall Schedules)—Non-Federal Entity. delivery only. constitute acceptance whereupon all As prescribed in 538.7004(a), insert (d) The following activities may place provisions of the contract shall apply. the following clause: orders against Schedule contracts: (g) The Government is obligated to (1) State and local government may place purchase under each resultant contract a Definition (Federal Supply Schedules)—Non- orders against Schedule 70 contracts, and guaranteed minimum of $2,500 (two Federal Entity (May 2019) Consolidated Schedule contracts containing thousand, five hundred dollars) during the Ordering activity (also called ‘‘ordering information technology Special Item contract term. agency’’ and ‘‘ordering office’’) means an Numbers, and Schedule 84 contracts, on an (h) All users of GSA’s Federal Supply eligible ordering activity (see 552.238–113), optional basis; PROVIDED, the Contractor Schedules, including non-Federal users, shall authorized to place orders under Federal accepts order(s) from such activities; use the schedules in accordance with the Supply Schedule contracts. (2) The American National Red Cross may ordering guidance provided by the place orders against Federal Supply Administrator of General Services. GSA (End of clause) Schedules for products and services in encourages non-Federal users to follow the furtherance of the purposes set forth in its Schedule Ordering Procedures set forth in 552.238–113 Scope of Contract (Eligible Federal charter (36 U.S.C. 300102); the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.4, Ordering Activities). PROVIDED, the Contractor accepts order(s) but they may use different established As prescribed in 538.7004 (b) insert from the American National Red Cross; and competitive ordering procedures if such the following clause: (3) Other qualified organizations, as procedures are needed to satisfy their state Scope of Contract (Eligible Ordering defined in section 309 of the Robert T. and local acquisition regulations and/or Activities) (May 2019) Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency organizational policies. Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5152), may place (a) This solicitation is issued to establish orders against Federal Supply Schedules for (End of clause) contracts which may be used on a products and services determined to be 552.238–114 Use of Federal Supply nonmandatory basis by the agencies and appropriate to facilitate emergency Schedule Contracts by Non-Federal activities named below, as a source of supply preparedness and disaster relief and set forth Entities. for the supplies or services described herein, in guidance by the Administrator of General for domestic and/or overseas delivery. For Services, in consultation with the As prescribed in 538.7004(c), insert Special Item Number 132–53, Wireless Administrator of the Federal Emergency the following clause: Services ONLY, limited geographic coverage Management Agency; PROVIDED, the (consistent with the Offeror’s commercial Use of Federal Supply Schedule Contracts by Contractor accepts order(s) from such practice) may be proposed. Non-Federal Entities (May 2019) activities. (1) Executive agencies (as defined in FAR (a) If an entity identified in paragraph (d) (4) State and local governments may place Subpart 2.1) including nonappropriated fund of the clause at 552.238–113, Scope of orders against Federal Supply Schedules for activities as prescribed in 41 CFR 101– Contract (Eligible Ordering Activities), elects good or services determined by the Secretary 26.000; to place an order under this contract, the of Homeland Security to facilitate recovery (2) Government contractors authorized in entity agrees that the order shall be subject from a major disaster declared by the writing by a Federal agency pursuant to FAR to the following conditions: President under the Robert T. Stafford 51.1; (1) When the Contractor accepts an order (3) Mixed ownership Government Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act from such an entity, a separate contract is corporations (as defined in the Government (42 U.S.C. 5121, et seq.) to facilitate disaster formed which incorporates by reference all Corporation Control Act); preparedness or response, or to facilitate the terms and conditions of the Schedule (4) Federal Agencies, including recovery from terrorism or nuclear, contract except the Disputes clause, the establishments in the legislative or judicial biological, chemical, or radiological attack; patent indemnity clause, and the portion of branch of government (except the Senate, the PROVIDED, the Contractor accepts order(s) the Commercial Item Contract Terms and House of Representatives and the Architect of from such activities. Conditions that specifies ‘‘Compliance with the Capitol and any activities under the (e) Articles or services may be ordered laws unique to Government contracts’’ direction of the Architect of the Capitol). from time to time in such quantities as may (which applies only to contracts with entities (5) The District of Columbia; be needed to fill any requirement, subject to of the Executive branch of the U.S. (6) Tribal governments when authorized the Order Limitations thresholds which will Government). The parties to this new under 25 U.S.C. 450j(k); be specified in resultant contracts. Overseas contract which incorporates the terms and (7) Tribes or tribally designated housing activities may place orders directly with conditions of the Schedule contract are the entities pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 4111(j); schedule contractors for delivery to CONUS individual ordering activity and the (8) Qualified Nonprofit Agencies as port or consolidation point. Contractor. The U.S. Government shall not be authorized under 40 U.S.C. 502(b); and (f)(1) The Contractor is obligated to accept liable for the performance or nonperformance (9) Organizations, other than those orders received from activities within the of the new contract. Disputes which cannot identified in paragraph (d) of this clause, Executive branch of the Federal Government. be resolved by the parties to the new contract authorized by GSA pursuant to statute or (2) The Contractor is not obligated to may be litigated in any State or Federal court regulation to use GSA as a source of supply. accept orders received from activities outside with jurisdiction over the parties, applying (b) Definitions. the Executive branch; however, the Federal procurement law, including statutes, Domestic delivery is delivery within the 48 Contractor is encouraged to accept such regulations and case law, and, if pertinent, contiguous states, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto orders. If the Contractor elects to accept such the Uniform Commercial Code. To the extent Rico, Washington, DC, and U.S. territories. orders, all provisions of the contract shall authorized by law, parties to this new Domestic delivery also includes a port or apply, including clause 52.232–36 Payment contract are encouraged to resolve disputes consolidation point, within the by Third Party. If the Contractor is unwilling through Alternative Dispute Resolution. aforementioned areas, for orders received to accept such orders, and the proposed Likewise, a Blanket Purchase Agreement from overseas activities. method of payment is not through the Credit (BPA), although not a contract, is an Overseas delivery is delivery to points Card, the Contractor shall return the order by agreement that may be entered into by the outside of the 48 contiguous states, mail or other means of delivery within 5 Contractor with such an entity and the Washington, DC, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto workdays from receipt. If the Contractor is Federal Government is not a party. Rico, and U.S. territories. unwilling to accept such orders, and the (2) Where contract clauses refer to action (c) Offerors are requested to check one of proposed method of payment is through the by a Contracting Officer or a Contracting the following boxes: Credit Card, the Contractor must so advise Officer of GSA, that shall mean the b Contractor will provide domestic and the ordering activity within 24 hours of individual responsible for placing the order overseas delivery. receipt of order. (Reference clause 52.232–36 for the ordering activity (e.g., FAR 52.212–4 b Contractor will provide overseas Payment by Third Party.) Failure to return an at paragraph (f) and FSS clause I–FSS–249 delivery only. order or advise the ordering activity within B.)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 17054 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

(3) As a condition of using this contract, (2) The dollar value for sales to entities (i) The contractor proposing order-level eligible ordering activities agree to abide by identified in paragraph (d) of clause 552.238– materials as part of a solution shall obtain a all terms and conditions of the Schedule 113 Scope of Contract (Eligible Ordering minimum of three quotes for each order-level contract, except for those deleted clauses or Activities). material above the simplified acquisition portions of clauses mentioned in paragraph threshold. (a)(1) of this clause. Ordering activities may (End of clause) (A) One of these three quotes may include include terms and conditions required by 552.238–115 Special Ordering Procedures materials furnished by the contractor under statute, ordinance, regulation, order, or as for the Acquisition of Order-Level Materials. FAR 52.212–4 Alt I (i)(1)(ii)(A). otherwise allowed by State and local As prescribed in 538.7204(b), insert (B) If the contractor cannot obtain three government entities as a part of a statement quotes, the contractor shall maintain its of work (SOW) or statement of objective the following clause: documentation of why three quotes could not (SOO) to the extent that these terms and Special Ordering Procedures for the be obtained to support their determination. conditions do not conflict with the terms and (C) A contractor with an approved conditions of the Schedule contract. The Acquisition of Order-Level Materials (May purchasing system per FAR 44.3 shall instead ordering activity and the Contractor 2019) follow its purchasing system requirement expressly acknowledge that, in entering into (a) Definition. and is exempt from the requirements in an agreement for the ordering activity to Order-level materials means supplies and/ paragraphs (d)(7)(i)(A)–(B) of this clause. purchase goods or services from the or services acquired in direct support of an Contractor, neither the ordering activity nor individual task or delivery order placed (ii) The Ordering Activity Contracting the Contractor will look to, primarily or in against a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Officer must make a determination that any secondary capacity, or file any claim contract or FSS blanket purchase agreement prices for all order-level materials are fair against the United States or any of its (BPA), when the supplies and/or services are and reasonable. The Ordering Activity agencies with respect to any failure of not known at the time of Schedule contract Contracting Officer may base this performance by the other party. or FSS BPA award. The prices of order-level determination on a comparison of the quotes (4) The ordering activity is responsible for materials are not established in the FSS received in response to the task or delivery all payments due the Contractor under the contract or FSS BPA. Order-level materials order solicitation or other relevant pricing contract formed by acceptance of the acquired following the procedures in information available. ordering activity’s order, without recourse to paragraph (d) of this section are done so (iii) If indirect costs are approved per FAR the agency of the U.S. Government, which under the authority of the FSS program, 52.212–4(i)(1)(ii)(D)(2) Alternate I), the awarded the Schedule contract. pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 152(3), and are not Ordering Activity Contracting Officer must (5) The Contractor is encouraged, but not open market items, which are discussed in make a determination that all indirect costs obligated, to accept orders from such entities. FAR 8.402(f). approved for payment are fair and The Contractor may, within 5 days of receipt (b) FAR 8.403(b) provides that GSA may reasonable. Supporting data shall be of the order, decline to accept any order, for establish special ordering procedures for a submitted in a form acceptable to the any reason. The Contractor shall fulfill orders particular FSS. Ordering Activity Contracting Officer. placed by such entities, which are not (c) The procedures in FAR subpart 8.4 (8) Prior to an increase in the ceiling price declined within the 5-day period. apply to this contract, with the exceptions of order-level materials, the Ordering (6) The supplies or services purchased will listed in this clause. If a requirement in this Activity Contracting Officer shall follow the be used for governmental purposes only and clause is inconsistent with FAR subpart 8.4, procedures at FAR 8.404(h)(3)(iv). will not be resold for personal use. Disposal this clause takes precedence pursuant to FAR (9) In accordance with GSAR clause of property acquired will be in accordance 8.403(b). 552.238–83, Examination of Records by GSA, with the established procedures of the (d) Procedures for including order-level GSA has the authority to examine the ordering activity for the disposal of personal materials when placing an individual task or Contractor’s records for compliance with the property. delivery order against an FSS contract or FSS pricing provisions in FAR clause 52.212–4 (b) If the Schedule Contractor accepts an BPA. Alternate I, to include examination of any order from an entity identified in paragraph (1) The procedures discussed in FAR books, documents, papers, and records (d) of the clause at 552.238–113, Scope of 8.402(f) do not apply when placing task and involving transactions related to the contract Contract (Eligible Ordering Activities), the delivery orders that include order-level Contractor agrees to the following conditions: materials. for overbillings, billing errors, and (1) The ordering activity is responsible for (2) Order-level materials are included in compliance with the IFF and the Sales all payments due the Contractor for the the definition of the term ‘‘material’’ in FAR Reporting clauses of the contract. contract formed by acceptance of the order, clause 52.212–4 Alternate I, and therefore all (10) OLMs are exempt from the following without recourse to the agency of the U.S. provisions of FAR clause 52.212–4 Alternate clauses: Government, which awarded the Schedule I that apply to ‘‘materials’’ also apply to (i) 552.216–70 Economic Price contract. order-level materials. The ordering activity Adjustment—FSS Multiple Award Schedule (2) The Contractor is encouraged, but not shall follow procedures under the Federal Contracts. obligated, to accept orders from such entities. Travel Regulation and FAR Part 31 when (ii) 552.238–77 Submission and The Contractor may, within 5 days of receipt order-level materials include travel. Distribution of Authorized FSS Schedule of the order, decline to accept any order, for (3) Order-level materials shall only be Pricelists. any reason. The Contractor shall decline the acquired in direct support of an individual (iii) 552.238–81 Price Reductions. order using the same means as those used to task or delivery order and not as the primary (11) Exceptions for travel. (i) Travel costs place the order. The Contractor shall fulfill basis or purpose of the order. are governed by FAR 31.205–46 and therefore orders placed by such entities, which are not (4) The value of order-level materials in a the requirements in paragraph (d)(7) do not declined within the 5-day period. task or delivery order, or the cumulative apply to travel costs. (c) In accordance with clause 552.238–80, value of order-level materials in orders (ii) Travel costs do not count towards the Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Reporting, against an FSS BPA awarded under a FSS 33.33% limitation described in paragraph the Contractor must report the quarterly contract shall not exceed 33.33%. (d)(4) of this section. dollar value of all sales under this contract. (5) All order-level materials shall be placed (iii) Travel costs are exempt from clause When submitting sales reports, the under the Order-Level Materials SIN. 552.238–80 Industrial Funding Fee and Sales Contractor must report two dollar values for (6) Prior to the placement of an order that Reporting. each Special Item Number: includes order-level materials, the Ordering (1) The dollar value for sales to entities Activity shall follow procedures in FAR (End of clause) identified in paragraph (a) of the clause at 8.404(h). 552.238–113, Scope of Contract (Eligible (7) To support the price reasonableness of [FR Doc. 2019–08012 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am] Ordering Activities), and order-level materials— BILLING CODE 6820–61–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:59 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23APR2.SGM 23APR2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES2 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 78 Tuesday, April 23, 2019

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING APRIL

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–741–6000 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 741–6000 the revision date of each title. 278...... 13555 Presidential Documents 2 CFR 929...... 16217 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 910...... 12047 966...... 15528 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 3 CFR 1206...... 14026 Other Services 1222...... 14891 Proclamations: 1423...... 13562 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 9853...... 13487 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6050 9854...... 13489 8 CFR 9855...... 13491 217...... 13795 9856...... 13493 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 270...... 13499 9857...... 13495 274a...... 13499 World Wide Web 9858...... 13793 280...... 13499 9859...... 14583 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 9860...... 14585 9 CFR is located at: www.govinfo.gov. 9861...... 15081 381...... 13516 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 9862...... 16187 Proposed Rules: Inspection List and electronic text are located at: 9863...... 16379 92...... 12955 www.federalregister.gov. Executive Orders: 310...... 14894 13856 (Superseded by 317...... 15989 E-mail EO 13866)...... 12853 327...... 14894 13866...... 12853 FEDREGTOC (Daily Federal Register Table of Contents Electronic 381...... 14894, 15989 13867...... 15491 Mailing List) is an open e-mail service that provides subscribers 424...... 14894 13868...... 15495 with a digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The 557...... 14894 digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes Administrative Orders: 590...... 14894 HTML and PDF links to the full text of each document. Notices: Notices of April 1, 10 CFR To join or leave, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/ 2019 ...... 12871 Ch. I ...... 12483 USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your email address, then Notice of April 10, 50...... 12876, 14845 follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your 2019 ...... 14838 72...... 16201 subscription. Memorandums: Proposed Rules: PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail Memorandum of March 71...... 14898 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 27, 2019 ...... 12479 430...... 12143, 12527 Memorandum of March 431 ...... 12527, 12528, 14027, To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 28, 2019 ...... 12867 17004 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Memorandum of April the instructions. 1, 2019 ...... 13497 12 CFR FEDREGTOC and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot Permit: March 29, Ch. II ...... 12049 respond to specific inquiries. 2019 ...... 13101 267...... 15502 327...... 15095 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 5 CFR Federal Register system to: [email protected] 337...... 15095 337...... 12873 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or Proposed Rules: 900...... 16381 3...... 13814 regulations. Proposed Rules: 217...... 13814 1630...... 12954 324...... 13814 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, APRIL 2635...... 15146 330...... 13143 360...... 16620 12047–12482...... 1 16767–17054...... 23 6 CFR 370...... 14814 12483–12872...... 2 27...... 13499 611...... 12959 12873–13104...... 3 615...... 12959 7 CFR 13105–13498...... 4 621...... 12959 13499–13794...... 5 52...... 16381 701...... 16796 13795–13998...... 8 225...... 15501 13 CFR 13999–14258...... 9 271...... 15083 14259–14586...... 10 272...... 15083 107...... 12059 273...... 15083 14587–14844...... 11 120...... 12059 301...... 16189 121...... 14587 14845–15082...... 12 905...... 16195 142...... 12059 15083–15500...... 15 944...... 16195 146...... 12059 15501–15948...... 16 956...... 13513 Proposed Rules: 15949–16186...... 17 1000...... 12483 120...... 15147 16187–16378...... 18 Proposed Rules: 16379–16600...... 19 271...... 13555 14 CFR 16601–16766...... 22 273...... 13814 25...... 16601

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:14 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\23APCU.LOC 23APCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Reader Aids

39 ...... 12484, 12486, 12877, 21 CFR 14260, 14261, 15953, 15954 37 CFR 53...... 14008 12880, 13105, 13108, 13110, 73...... 12081, 16205 6...... 16406 301...... 14009 13999, 14001, 14596, 14599, 112...... 12490 201...... 14242 14602, 14605, 14845, 15154, 117...... 12490 Proposed Rules: 202...... 16784 15160, 15162, 15949, 16202, 310...... 14847 1 ...... 12169, 14634, 14901, 16382, 16386, 16390, 16394, 507...... 12490 16415, 16799 38 CFR 16602, 16767 510...... 12491 27 CFR 1...... 12122, 14874 71...... 16205, 16396 520...... 12491 73...... 15952 16...... 14614 Proposed Rules: 522...... 12491 3...... 16421 91...... 12062, 14607 478...... 12093 524...... 12491 17...... 13576 95...... 12488 528...... 12491 479...... 12093 97 ...... 14003, 14005, 16605, 556...... 12491 555...... 12095, 13798 40 CFR 16606 558...... 12491 28 CFR 9...... 13531 120...... 16770 600...... 12505 16...... 16775 52 ...... 12508, 12511, 13543, Ch. II ...... 15920 806...... 12083 20...... 13520 13803, 13805, 14019, 14267, 401...... 15296 866...... 12083 22...... 13520 14268, 14270, 14272, 14308, 404...... 15296 868...... 15096 36...... 13520 14615, 14874, 14877, 14878, 413...... 15296 876...... 14865 414...... 15296 61...... 14011 14881, 15108, 16214, 16786 878...... 14865 68...... 13520 55...... 13132 415...... 15296 886...... 14865 417...... 15296 71...... 13520 60...... 15846 888...... 12088 76...... 13520 62...... 15961, 16406 420...... 15296 1308 ...... 13796, 15505, 16397 431...... 15296 85...... 13520 70...... 14878 Proposed Rules: 81 ...... 14883, 15108, 16214 433...... 15296 29 CFR 435...... 15296 15...... 12966, 12969 147...... 15119 437...... 15296 16...... 12740 1404...... 16205 180 ...... 12513, 12516, 12520, 440...... 15296 165...... 12975 1910...... 15102 13551, 13805, 14617, 14883, 450...... 15296 201...... 16220, 16222 2200...... 14554 16789 1264...... 13114, 14608 310...... 16222 4022...... 15107 271 ...... 12936, 12937, 16408 1271...... 13114, 14608 347...... 16222 Proposed Rules: 300...... 14312 352...... 16222 Proposed Rules: 791...... 14043 721...... 13531 610...... 12534 21...... 12529, 15992 Proposed Rules: 1000...... 12147 30 CFR 25 ...... 13565, 13838, 15531 52 ...... 13582, 14067, 14073, 1002...... 12147 39 ...... 12143, 12530, 12532, Proposed Rules: 14075, 14634, 14640, 14901, 1010...... 12147 13148, 13571, 13840, 13843, 935...... 12979 14903, 14906, 16226, 16426, 1020...... 12147 14038, 14041, 14626, 16628 938...... 12981, 12983 16799 1040...... 12147 71 ...... 12146, 13574, 13575, 948...... 12984, 13853 55...... 14078, 15549 1050...... 12147 13846, 16217 63...... 15046 1107...... 12740 31 CFR 147...... 15533 122...... 16810 1308...... 13848 27...... 15955 1206...... 14628 174...... 16430 34...... 12929 180...... 16430 15 CFR 22 CFR 50...... 15955 260...... 12539 744...... 14608 41...... 16610 42...... 16610 32 CFR 261...... 12539 16 CFR 126...... 16398 54...... 12932 266...... 12539 269...... 12098 710...... 16826 316...... 13115 24 CFR 721...... 16432 Proposed Rules: 310...... 14728, 16210 313...... 13150 Proposed Rules: 552...... 16402 42 CFR 314...... 13158 5...... 13177 Proposed Rules: 14...... 13177 199...... 13855 59...... 14312 1205...... 14043 84...... 16408 1610...... 16797 75...... 13177, 13199 775...... 12170 91...... 13177 414...... 16616, 16617 17 CFR 92...... 13177 33 CFR 422...... 15680 423...... 15680 Ch. I...... 12074, 12908 93...... 13177 27...... 13499 135...... 13177 100 ...... 12099, 13525, 13526, 438...... 15680 1...... 12450, 12882 447...... 12130 23...... 12065, 12894 266...... 13177 14262, 15956, 16402, 16777 498...... 15680 202...... 12906 570...... 13177 105...... 12102 229 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 576...... 13177 110...... 16778 Proposed Rules: 230 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 578...... 13177 117...... 15511, 16777 406...... 16834 232 ...... 12073, 12674, 13796, 905...... 13177 147...... 16777 407...... 16834 14448 964...... 13177 165 ...... 12120, 12933, 13528, 412...... 16948 239 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 983...... 13177 13530, 14017, 14264, 14870, 422...... 16834 240 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 1000...... 13177 14872, 15959, 16210, 16211, 423...... 16834 243...... 14448 16213, 16214, 16613, 16777, 431...... 16834 25 CFR 249 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 16781, 16782 438...... 16834 270 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 140...... 15098 Proposed Rules: 457...... 16834 274 ...... 12674, 13796, 14448 141...... 15098 100 ...... 12178, 14061, 16223 482...... 16834 275...... 12674, 13796 211...... 15098 165 ...... 12538, 14064, 14336, 485...... 16834 213...... 15098 15165, 16419, 16630 493...... 13857 18 CFR 225...... 15098 600...... 12552 34 CFR 381...... 14259 226...... 15098 227...... 15098 Ch. II ...... 13204 44 CFR 19 CFR 243...... 15098 Proposed Rules: 64...... 12938, 15122 4...... 13499 249...... 15098 Ch. II ...... 13122 67...... 13138 20 CFR 26 CFR 36 CFR 45 CFR 655...... 12380 1 ...... 13121, 13520, 14006, 1236...... 14265 5b...... 14622

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:46 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\23APCU.LOC 23APCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Reader Aids iii

670...... 16791 225...... 12140 952...... 16441 50 CFR 2105...... 15512 244...... 12140 970...... 16441 11...... 15525 252 ...... 12138, 12140, 12141 1603...... 12569 Proposed Rules: 17...... 13809 170...... 16834 501...... 17030 1652...... 12569 171...... 16834 511...... 14624 92...... 12946 49 CFR 1355...... 16572 515...... 17030 217...... 14314 516...... 14624 40...... 16770 218...... 15963 47 CFR 532...... 14624 199...... 16770 224...... 15446 1...... 16412 538...... 14624, 17030 210...... 15142 600...... 14886 25...... 13141 546...... 14624 238...... 16414 622...... 14021, 15986 52...... 14624 552...... 14624, 17030 655...... 16770 635...... 12524 64...... 14624, 15124 801...... 14625 1002...... 12940 648...... 15526 2402...... 15128 1012...... 12940 73 ...... 13809, 15125, 16413 679 ...... 12952, 13142, 14887, 2416...... 15128 1104...... 12940 Proposed Rules: 15987 1 ...... 12566, 12987, 14080, 2437...... 15128 1110...... 12940 14641, 15167 2442...... 15128 1111...... 12940 Proposed Rules: 2...... 12987, 14641 2452...... 15128 1113...... 12940 17 ...... 13223, 13237, 13587, 20 ...... 12987, 13211, 14641 Proposed Rules: 1130...... 12940 14909 22...... 14080 202...... 12179 1132...... 12940 18...... 13603 27...... 12987, 14641 204...... 12182 1150...... 12940 20...... 16152 32...... 14082 215...... 12182 1152...... 12940 216...... 13604, 15556 54...... 14082 216...... 12179 1155...... 12940 217...... 12330 65...... 14082 217...... 12179 1182...... 12940 223...... 16632 1244...... 12940 73...... 15167 219...... 12187 224...... 16632 225...... 12179 1312...... 12940 90...... 12987, 14641 300...... 15556 226...... 12182 1313...... 12940 48 CFR 234...... 12179 1503...... 13499 622...... 12573, 16233 202...... 12137 235...... 12179 Proposed Rules: 648...... 16414 204...... 12138 252...... 12182, 12187 571...... 13222 660...... 13858 216...... 12139 927...... 16441 1250...... 14907 679...... 15566

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:14 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\23APCU.LOC 23APCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Reader Aids

in today’s List of Public enacted public laws. To Laws. subscribe, go to http:// LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Public Laws Electronic listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ Last List April 18, 2019 Notification Service publaws-l.html (PENS) Note: No public bills which Note: This service is strictly have become law were for E-mail notification of new received by the Office of the PENS is a free electronic mail laws. The text of laws is not Federal Register for inclusion notification service of newly available through this service. PENS cannot respond to specific inquiries sent to this address.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:14 Apr 22, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\23APCU.LOC 23APCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU